aljharem:


Since the election I no longer consider binis. A lot of them no get sense

naptu2:


At last you asked a question. Now I can educate you. Go and find out about Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon.

I have made a screenshot of your original post so that you can't change it.

A Queen consort is not the same as
a queen sovereign. She not a ruler, but
just has the ceremonial title strictly as an
accident of marriage to a ruling king. So,
you should stop equating her with the
status of queen Lizzy, her daughter.


Know this & have
peace.

adecz:




A Queen consort is not the same as
a queen sovereign. She not a ruler, but
just has the ceremonial title strictly as an
accident of marriage to a ruling king. So,
you should stop equating her with the
status of queen Lizzy, her daughter.


Know this & have
peace.

That is the exact reason I made a screenshot of your post.

I know what a Queen regnant (I have taught you a new word ) and a Queen consort is, but there was absolutely no mention of the words regnant or consort (neither did anybody equate anybody with anybody else). You wrote (and I quote)

"There was no queen in England in 1950".

You are completely wrong, there was.

I am happy that you've learnt something new today.

(I will not read or respond to any of your replies anymore, because the point is clear and has been made. There was a Queen in England in 1950 and you are wrong).

Goodbye.

nisai:

It is obvious now.