Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

Anonymous
Anonymous asked in Society & CultureRoyalty · 9 years ago

Does that mean Q.Elizabeth II was a commoner from the moment of her birth until she married Prince Philip?

Because according to this paragraph from wikipedia....

In British law, a commoner is someone who is neither the Sovereign nor a peer. Therefore, any member of the Royal Family who is not a peer, such as Prince Harry of Wales or Anne, Princess Royal, is (technically) a commoner, as is any member of a peer's family, including someone who holds only a courtesy title, such as the Earl of Arundel and Surrey (eldest son of the Duke of Norfolk) or Lady Victoria Hervey (a daughter of the 6th Marquess of Bristol).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commoners_in_the_Unit...

15 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    No. Queen Elizabeth II was the daughter of King George VI (a Prince at the time of her birth, with a proven lineage going back to King Alfred in the 9th Century) and Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon (daughter of an Earl and descended from the Royal House of Scotland); that makes their offspring 'royal' from birth.

    Don't forget that Wikipedia is always being amended and corrected - or changed with inaccurate information?! Always double-check your 'facts' with information on various other sites - like www.britroyals.com.

  • ?
    Lv 6
    9 years ago

    The Queen was never a commoner.

    She was daughter of the King and first in line to the throne, and was a Royal Princess-until she became Queen- hardly a commoner!

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    Well, since it is not entirely clear that the wives of peers are really peers themselves (there is some disagreement about this), it could be argued that she was a commoner until the moment her father died.

    Because yes, anyone who is not the monarch and who is not a peer is a commoner, even if that person is a princess, prince, or holder of a courtesy title.

    Most people do regard peeresses, wives of peers, as sharing in their husbands' status, but there have been situations suggesting that they are not actually peers. For example, when Nancy Astor's husband had to cease serving in the House of Commons because he had succeeded to his peerage, his wife was able to run for and hold a seat in the Commons, indicating that technically, she was still a commoner.

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    From the same article: "In popular usage, a commoner is a person who does not belong to royalty or aristocracy", so as she was "Princess Elizabeth" since birth due to being a male-line granddaughter of the monarch.

    It was likely that she would be Queen one day as her uncle, the then Prince of Wales showed no signs of settling down, this was confirmed in 1936 when he abdicated.

  • Paco
    Lv 7
    9 years ago

    Yes, you are correct, but no one refers to princes and princesses as commoners.

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    British law is and was written by the monarchs in the past for the sustaining of the monarchy in this world,let us be quite clear there is no biological difference between the ordinary man or woman in the country,their blood is not royal and they bleed to death if wounded,the royals are not very well educated as they do not need to be as they have everything done for them by the more intelligent members of this country,but it must be said thy can and do employ the best brains in the country to keep themselves in the position they have made law,money can be found at the drop of a hat for anything the royals wish for,such as millions to refurbish Kensington flat that Prince William and The Duchess of Cambridge will inhabit,but money cannot be found to build houses for the homeless in this country,millions sp[ent on security for the royal wedding,now millions on sending the royals abroad on junkets for the jubillee,somehow I cannot see how this is allowed if we are as we are told suffering for money as we are nearly bankrupt?..

  • ?
    Lv 6
    9 years ago

    Correct

  • ?
    Lv 5
    9 years ago

    no, god no a peer is just a person with a title, a lord is a peer a duke is a peer ofc they are not commoners, if she was a commoner from birth then prince philip would be too as hes only ever been a prince in greece and hes only duke of edinbourgh over here

  • 9 years ago

    To keep his grandchildren from being commoner's (Charles, Anne, etc.), King George VI invested the newly married couple with a title. Read your history.

  • Anonymous
    9 years ago

    No.

    See, from the moment of her birth, she was a peer. A princess.

    and she was the heiress presumptive when she married Prince Philip. HE moved up in rank when he married her.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.