Isn't she only a queen if she's coronated? Otherwise she's just the king's wife. I'm not sure what title she would receive, but I think a queen gets more rank and privilege, yadda yadda.
that's my thought as well. you're still "queen" but have no real power to rule or do anything AS the queen if something happens to the king. something to do with succession.
I think the first two only. Three wasn't around long, four was even less, five wasn't long, and six, well... He'd probably worn himself out over the whole danged thing by then.
okay... here's what Wikipecia has to say. apparently it's mostly ceremonial. rough translation, "sticking a crown on a person's head." you can rule without the coronation.
i read elsewhere that he couldn't AFFORD to throw Queen Jane a coronation. heh. and after that, well, he (and everyone else) probably felt "why even bother?"
Actually, IIRC Jane's coronation was delayed because she was pregnant then she died. It had been in the planning stages. Had any of the subsequent queens had a son, I think she would have been coronated.
I think the coronation is a symbolic transfer of sovreignty to the monarch. I recently read that Elizabeth I wasn't considered a ruling monarch until after the funeral of Mary was finished and her symbols of power (and those of her highest councilors) were broken and caste into the grave). Then as part of the coronation the new monarch is vested with the power of state ... or something like that.
As faireraven noted, the first two were coronated. I have it in my head that the coronation somehow empowers the queen (or king) as the god-chosen ruler of the land -- that there is religious significance to it. But that could just be the voices in my head.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-29 08:03 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-29 08:50 pm (UTC)out of curiosity, which two wives were coronated?
no subject
Date: 2009-09-29 09:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-09-29 09:22 pm (UTC)http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coronation
i read elsewhere that he couldn't AFFORD to throw Queen Jane a coronation. heh. and after that, well, he (and everyone else) probably felt "why even bother?"
no subject
Date: 2009-09-29 10:42 pm (UTC)I think the coronation is a symbolic transfer of sovreignty to the monarch. I recently read that Elizabeth I wasn't considered a ruling monarch until after the funeral of Mary was finished and her symbols of power (and those of her highest councilors) were broken and caste into the grave). Then as part of the coronation the new monarch is vested with the power of state ... or something like that.
no subject
Date: 2009-09-30 03:29 am (UTC)