King Felipe II of Spain’s Role as King of England and Ireland

Tags

Carlos I of Spain, Emperor Charles V, jure uxoris, King Consort, King Philip II of Spain, King Regnant, Queen Consort, Queen Mary I of England, Queen Mary’s Marriage Act, Queen Regnant, The Act for the Marriage of Queen Mary to Philip of Spain

I was recently in a discussion about the title of “King Consort” and how rare of a position it is. Generally, I have considered King Felipe II of Spain as the only King Consort of England and Ireland but upon further reflection I have begun to rethink his position as King of England.

If Felipe II wasn’t a King Consort then what type of King was he? What was his position?

First let’s define what a King Consort is. We know a Queen Consort is the wife of a reigning King, a King Regnant if you will. Regnant is an adjective meaning to reign or to rule. A Consort is the spouse of a reigning monarch.

Therefore, a King Consort, is a rarely used title to describe the husband of a Queen Regnant.

Whether a Queen Consort or a King Consort the role implies that the holder of such position is not the sovereign, the reigning monarch, and therefore holds no political power.

That’s why it is difficult to label King Felipe II simply as a King Consort because he did have some limited political power.

William III of England is the only other example of a monarch to rule with his wife in English history. Scotland is another topic all together.

After King James II-VII of England, Scotland and Ireland was considered to have abdicated after his flight to France Prince William of Orange summoned a Convention Parliament in England, which met on January 22, 1689, to discuss the appropriate course of action to fill the vacant English throne. William felt insecure about his position; though his wife preceded him in the line of succession to the throne, he wished to reign as king in his own right, rather than as a mere consort.

The Crown was not offered to James’s infant son, who would have been the heir apparent under normal circumstances, but to William and Mary as joint sovereigns. It was, however, provided that “the sole and full exercise of the regal power be only in and executed by the said Prince of Orange in the names of the said Prince and Princess during their joint lives”.

King Felipe II of Spain was not a joint sovereign as King William III would be. However, he wasn’t a politically powerless King Consort either.

It also must be stated that while King William III ruled in his own right, King Felipe II did not. King Felipe II’s right to the throne came through the concept of Jure uxoris (a Latin phrase meaning “by right of (his) wife”) which describes a title of nobility used by a man because his wife holds the office or title suo jure (“in her own right”).

King Felipe II’s role in his wife’s reign was defined by an Act of Parliament.

The Act for the Marriage of Queen Mary to Philip of Spain (1 Mar. Sess. 3 c. 2), or Queen Mary’s Marriage Act, was an Act of the Parliament of England, which was passed in April 1554, to regulate the future marriage and joint reign of Queen Mary I and Felipe of Spain, son and heir apparent of the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V (Carlos I of Spain).

In reality, the Act seems to have served as a business contract between England and Spain; it specifies what Spain could expect from the union, while at the same time assuring the English that England would not become a satellite of Spain.

The Act

Under the terms of the marriage treaty, Felipe was to enjoy his wife’s titles and honours as King of England and Ireland for as long as their marriage should last. All official documents, including Acts of Parliament, were to be dated with both their names (with Felipe’s preceding Mary’s as deemed proper for husband and wife), and the Parliament of England was to be called under the joint authority of the couple.

The Act stated that King Felipe would take part in governing Mary’s realms while reserving most authority for Mary herself. Formally, King Felipe was to co-reign with his wife according to the Act, which nevertheless ensured that the new king would not become too powerful; the Act prohibited him from appointing foreigners to any offices, from taking his wife or any child that might be born to them outside her realm, or from claiming the crown for himself should he outlive his wife.

The Act presumed that Mary would have children with Felipe and allowed full personal union between England and Ireland and all the realms Felipe was to inherit from his father or from his grandmother, Queen Joanna, should Infante Carlos, Felipe’s son by a prior marriage, die childless.

When Queen Mary I died in 1558 and was succeeded by her half sister as Queen Elizabeth I, Felipe ceased to be King of England and Ireland.

This was one of the motivations for Felipe seeking the hand of Elizabeth so he could retain the title and authority of a King of England and Ireland.

When reading in a book, almanac or a list of the Kings and Queens of England, King William III is listed as a reigning monarch, while King Felipe is not generally counted as one of the Kings of England.

I think there is an important distinction between William III as a Joint Sovereign and King Felipe II as a Co-sovereign. I don’t think it’s just an argument of semantics.

William was a sovereign in his own right for life with the ability to exercise his power and authority as sovereign. Felipe II, on the other hand, came by his sovereignty by the right of his wife (Jure uxoris) and his sovereignty was restricted and was only to last the duration of his wife’s reign.

So in that essence King Felipe II, as King of England and Ireland, was not a King in his own right but he was also more than just a Consort without political power and authority.

Another interesting question is that since Parliament did grant him co-sovereignty some historians think it is plausible that if there were to be a future King Philip of the United Kingdom he could be called King Philip II.

Oh, and a bit of interesting trivia is that the Queen Mary’s Marriage Act was finally repealed by the Statute Law Revision Act 1863.

Titles of Royalty and Nobility within the British Monarchy: King

Tags

Head of State, King, King Consort, King Regnant, Monarchy, Nobility, Personal Union, queen, Queen Consort, Queen Regnant, Royalty, Sovereign

Today begins a new series examining the titles of Royalty and Nobility within the British Monarchy.

I will begin by defining what a monarchy is and also the role of the sovereign King or Queen. Although this definition of monarchy can also fit that of an Emperor, reigning Grand Duke or Prince, in this instance it defines a King or Queen Regnant.

King is the title given to a male monarch. The English term king is derived from the Anglo-Saxon cyning, which in turn is derived from the Common Germanic *kuningaz. The Common Germanic term was borrowed into Estonian and Finnish at an early time, surviving in these languages as kuningas.

King George VI of the United Kingdom

A monarch is a head of state for life or until abdication, and therefore the head of state of a monarchy. A monarch may exercise the highest authority and power in the state, or others may wield that power on behalf of the monarch.

Usually a monarch either personally inherits the lawful right to exercise the state’s sovereign rights (often referred to as the throne or the crown) or is selected by an established process from a family or cohort eligible to provide the nation’s monarch. Alternatively, an individual may proclaim themself monarch, which may be backed and legitimated through acclamation, right of conquest or a combination of means.

If a young child is crowned the monarch, then a regent is often appointed to govern until the monarch reaches the requisite adult age to rule. Monarchs’ actual powers vary from one monarchy to another and in different eras; on one extreme, they may be autocrats (absolute monarchy) wielding genuine sovereignty; on the other they may be ceremonial heads of state who exercise little or no direct power or only reserve powers, with actual authority vested in a parliament or other body (constitutional monarchy).

King Edward VII and Queen Alexandra of the United Kingdom

A monarch can reign in multiple monarchies simultaneously. For example, between 1603 and 1707 the monarch ruled England and Wales, Scotland and Ireland. Although the monarch was the sovereign of these states they were not politically united and they continued as separate states, they shared the same monarch through personal union.

There are two types of Kings. A King Regnant and a King Consort. Regnant is a term that means reigning and holding sovereign power. In a Constitutional Monarchy sovereign power is vested in the reigning monarch even if that power is executed by other governmental figures such as a Prime Minister.

In British history there has been only one instance of a King Consort in England; that was King Felipe II of Spain the husband of Queen Mary I of England.

In Scotland King François II of France and Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley, were King Consorts to Mary I of Scotland.

When Queen Mary I of England came to the throne as the first Queen Regnant of England, under the English common law the doctrine of jure uxoris, the property and titles belonging to a woman became her husband’s upon marriage, and it was feared that any man she married would thereby become King of England in fact and in name.

That is what happened. Felipe II of Spain was technically a “King Consort” but under the terms of Queen Mary’s Marriage Act, Felipe II was in practice a joint sovereign to be styled “King of England” in all official documents (including Acts of Parliament) were to be dated with both their names, and Parliament was to be called under the joint authority of the couple, for Mary’s lifetime only.

Queen Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom

That’s one of the reasons Elizabeth I never married, she did not want to share power with her husband. William III was a joint sovereign with his wife Mary II. George of Denmark, not an ambitious man, didn’t push to be made King Consort.

This was challenged with Queen Victoria who wanted to make Albert her King Consort but Parliament squashed that idea. In 1858 Queen Victoria created the title Prince Consort for Prince Albert and this is the only time so that this title was used for the husband of a Queen Regnant.

That brings us to Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh. Jure uxoris had long ceased to being a factor and tradition had evolved to where a Consort of a Queen Regnant wasn’t made a King Consort. Philip was created Duke of Edinburgh on the eve of his marriage to Princess Elizabeth and, as Queen, created him a Prince of the United Kingdom in his own right, making the title Prince Consort unnecessary.

When it comes to addressing either a King Regnant or a King Consort there is absolutely no difference, no distinction, whatsoever and both are simply refered to as “His Majesty the King” despite the differences.

As there are two types of Kings there are also two types of Queens.* The first type of Queen is called a Queen Regnant. A Queen Regnant is a female monarch who rules in her own right and usually becomes queen by inheriting the throne upon the death of the previous monarch.

Some examples of Queen Regnants are: Queen Elizabeth II (1952 – 2022), Queen Victoria (1837 – 1991) and Queen Mary II (1689 – 1694).

The next type of Queen is a Queen Consort. Simply, A Queen Consort is the wife of a reigning king. Let me state further, all wives of reigning Kings in British history have been a Queen Consort.

King Felipe II of Spain and England

A Queen Consort usually shares her spouse’s social rank and status. She holds the feminine equivalent of the king’s monarchical titles and may be crowned and anointed, but historically she does not formally share the regnant’s political and military powers, unless on occasion acting as regent.

When it comes to addressing either a Queen Regnant or a Queen Consort there is absolutely no difference, no distinction whatsoever, and both are simply refered to as “Her Majesty the Queen” despite the differences.

* There is also a Dowager Queen and a Queen Mother. A Queen Dowager is a former Queen Consort who is the widow of a king, and a queen mother is a former Queen Consort who is the mother of the current monarch. Queen Elizabeth II’s mother was a former Queen Consort who didn’t care for the title Queen Dowager and instead took the title of Queen Elizabeth, the Queen Mother.

His Majesty the King

Queen Adelaide, wife of King William IV and was known as a Dowager Queen (or Queen Dowager) after his death in 1837. Queen Alexandra and Queen Mary were the wives of King Edward VII had King George V respectively and despite being Queen Mothers neither formally took that title.

Just to restate when addressing a monarch of the United Kingdom whether they are a King Regnant, King Consort or a Queen Regnant or a Queen Consort they are addressed as His/Her Majesty the King or Queen and no distinction is made between a Regnant or a Consort.

History of Male British Consorts Part XI

Tags

Ernest III of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld, King Consort, Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha, Prince of Orange, Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom, Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld

Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (Francis Albert Augustus Charles Emmanuel; August 26, 1819 – December 14, 1861) was the consort of Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom from their marriage on February 10, 1840 until his death in 1861.

Albert was born on August 26, 1819 at Schloss Rosenau, near Coburg, Germany, in the Saxon duchy of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld to a family connected to many of Europe’s ruling monarchs. Prince Albert was the second son of Ernst III, Duke of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld, and his first wife, Louise of Saxe-Gotha-Altenburg. His first cousin and future wife, Victoria, was born earlier in the same year with the assistance of the same midwife, Charlotte von Siebold.

In 1825, Albert’s great-uncle, Friedrich IV, Duke of Saxe-Gotha-Altenburg, died without an heir. His death led to a realignment of the Saxon duchies the following year and Albert’s father became the first reigning duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.

Albert and his elder brother, Ernst, spent their youth in a close companionship marred by their parents’ turbulent marriage and eventual separation and divorce. After their mother was exiled from court in 1824, she married her lover, Alexander von Hanstein, Count of Pölzig and Beiersdorf. She presumably never saw her children again, and died of cancer at the age of 30 in 1831. The following year, their father married his niece, his sons’ cousin, Princess Marie of Württemberg; their marriage was not close, however, and Marie had little—if any—impact on her stepchildren’s lives.

The brothers were educated privately at home by Christoph Florschütz and later studied in Brussels, where Adolphe Quetelet was one of their tutors. Like many other German princes, Albert attended the University of Bonn, where he studied law, political economy, philosophy and the history of art. He played music and excelled at sport, especially fencing and riding. His tutors at Bonn included the philosopher Fichte and the poet Schlegel.

Marriage

The idea of marriage between Albert and his cousin, Victoria, was first documented in an 1821 letter from his paternal grandmother, the Dowager Duchess of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld, who said that he was “the pendant to the pretty cousin”. By 1836, this idea had also arisen in the mind of their ambitious uncle Leopold, who had been King of the Belgians since 1831.

At this time, Victoria was the heir presumptive to the British throne. Her father, Prince Edward, Duke of Kent and Strathearn, the fourth son of King George III, had died in 1820 when she was a baby, and her elderly uncle, King William IV, had no legitimate children. Her mother, the Duchess of Kent, was the sister of both Albert’s father—the Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha—and King Leopold I of the Belgians. Leopold arranged for his sister, Victoria’s mother, to invite the Duke of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha and his two sons to visit her in May 1836, with the purpose of meeting Victoria. William IV, however, disapproved of any match with the Coburgs, and instead favoured the suit of Prince Alexander of the Netherlands, second son of the Willem, Prince of Orange, future King Willem II.

Victoria came to the throne aged eighteen on June 20, 1837. Although she resisted attempts to rush her into marriage, her letters of the time show interest in Albert’s education for the role he would have to play. In the winter of 1838–39, the prince visited Italy, accompanied by the Coburg family’s confidential adviser, Baron Stockmar.

Albert returned to the United Kingdom with Ernst in October 1839 to visit the Queen, with the objective of settling the marriage. Albert and Victoria felt mutual affection and the Queen proposed to him on October 15, 1839. Victoria’s intention to marry was declared formally to the Privy Council on November 23, and the couple married on February 10, 1840 at the Chapel Royal, St James’s Palace. Just before the marriage, Albert was naturalised by Act of Parliament, and granted the style of Royal Highness by an Order in Council.

Initially Albert was not popular with the British public; he was perceived to be from an impoverished and undistinguished minor state, barely larger than a small English county. The British Prime Minister, Lord Melbourne, advised the Queen against granting her husband the title of “King Consort”; Parliament also objected to Albert being created a peer—partly because of anti-German sentiment and a desire to exclude Albert from any political role.

Albert’s religious views provided a small amount of controversy when the marriage was debated in Parliament: although as a member of the Lutheran Evangelical Church Albert was a Protestant, the non-Episcopal nature of his church was considered worrisome. Of greater concern, however, was that some of Albert’s family were Roman Catholic.

Lord Melbourne led a minority government and the opposition took advantage of the marriage to weaken his position further. They opposed the ennoblement of Albert and granted him a smaller annuity than previous consorts, £30,000 instead of the usual £50,000. Albert claimed that he had no need of a British peerage, writing: “It would almost be a step downwards, for as a Duke of Saxony, I feel myself much higher than a Duke of York or Kent.” For the next seventeen years, Albert was formally titled “HRH Prince Albert” until, on June 25, 1857, Victoria formally granted him the title Prince Consort.

For the second time a husband of a Queen Regnant was denied the title of King Consort. The concept of Jure uxoris (a Latin phrase meaning “by right of (his) wife”), became out of date. This term describes a title of nobility used by a man because his wife holds the office or title suo jure (“in her own right”). This practice slowly replaced as customs and laws changed and the sharing of Royal authority by foreigners was not welcome.

In the next entry I will examine Prince Albert’s political role as husband of Queen Victoria.

Joint sovereigns of England: Differences between Felipe II of Spain and William III of Orange.

Tags

Consort, Convention Parliament, Glorious Revolution, King Consort, King James II-VII of England and Scotland, Mary I of England, Mary II of England, Philip II of Spain, Queen Consort, Queen Mary’s Marriage Act, William III and Mary II, William of Orange

On April 11, 1689 William III and Mary II were crowned as joint sovereigns of England, Scotland and Ireland, the only time in British history when two sovereigns sat upon these thrones.

Generally when a Queen Regnant mounts the British throne her husband will not share her royal title. Elizabeth I never married and the husbands of sovereign queens Anne, Victoria and the current reigning monarch, Elizabeth II, were never made King Consorts. Although Scotland is different where Henry Stuart, Lord Darnley, was made King Consort of Scotland upon his marriage to Queen Mary I of Scotland.

Mary I, Queen of England and Ireland

However, twice in English history the husbands of a reigning Queen Regnant were granted the title “King of England” but there were differences. One was a full sovereign and the other was a consort. Ironically, these were the spouses of Queen Mary I of England and Ireland and Queen Mary II of England, Scotland and Ireland.

Let me explain further….

In 1554, Mary married the future King Felipe II of Spain, becoming queen consort of Habsburg Spain on his accession in 1556.

Under the English common law doctrine of the day, jure uxoris, the property and titles belonging to a woman became her husband’s upon marriage, and it was feared that any man she married would thereby become King of England in fact and not just in name. An Act of Parliament was passed to address this issue. The Act that was passed was the Queen Mary’s Marriage Act and it was given Royal Assent in April of 1554.

While Mary’s grandparents, Fernando II-V and Isabella I of Castile and Aragon (Spain) had retained sovereignty of their own realms during their marriage, there was no precedent to follow in England. Under the terms of Queen Mary’s Marriage Act, Felipe was to be styled “King of England” on all official documents (including Acts of Parliament) and all such Acts of Parliament were to be dated with both their names, and Parliament was to be called under the joint authority of the couple. However, Felipe was not granted the title of King of England for his lifetime, it was for Queen Mary’s lifetime only.

Further stated in the Act, England would not be obliged to provide military support to Felipe in any war, and Felipe could not act without his wife’s consent or appoint foreigners to office in England. Felipe was unhappy at the conditions imposed, but he was ready to agree for the sake of securing the marriage. He had no amorous feelings toward Mary and sought the marriage for its political and strategic gains; Felipe’s aide Ruy Gómez de Silva wrote to a correspondent in Brussels, “the marriage was concluded for no fleshly consideration, but in order to remedy the disorders of this kingdom and to preserve the Low Countries.”

Felipe II, King of Spain, Portugal, Naples and Sicily, Archduke of Austria and Duke of Milan. King Consort of England and Ireland.

In reality, Queen Mary’s Marriage Act seems to have served as a business contract between England and Spain; it specifies what Spain could expect from the union, while at the same time assuring the English that England would not become a satellite of Spain.

Although Felipe was a King Consort of England and Queen Mary was the sovereign, his position was not the same as other husbands of reigning queens. The arrangement under Queen Mary’s Marriage Act did give Felipe some limited power and authority.

The Act stated that King Felipe (Philip) would take part in governing Mary’s realms while reserving most authority for Mary herself. Formally, King Philip was to co-reign with his wife according to the Act, which nevertheless ensured that the new king would not become too powerful by prohibiting him from appointing foreigners to any offices, taking his wife or any child that might be born to them outside her realm and claiming the crown for himself should he outlive his wife. (Montrose 2006, p. 46).

William III and Mary II.

James II-VII inherited the thrones of England, Ireland and Scotland from his elder brother Charles II with widespread support in all three countries, largely based on the principle of divine right or birth. In June 1688, two events turned dissent toward the Catholic king into a crisis; the first on June 10 was the birth of James’s son and heir James Francis Edward, threatening to create a Catholic dynasty and excluding his Protestant daughter Mary and her husband Willem III of Orange.

The second was the prosecution of the Seven Bishops for seditious libel; this was viewed as an assault on the Church of England and their acquittal on June 30, destroyed James’s political authority in England. Anti-Catholic riots in England and Scotland now made it seem that only his removal as monarch could prevent a civil war.

William III, King of England, Scotland and Ireland. Prince of Orange, Stadholder of the Netherlands

Representatives of the English political elite invited Willem III of Orange to assume the English throne; after he landed in Brixham on November 5, 1688, James’s army deserted and he went into exile in France on December 23. In February 1689, Parliament held James II-VII had ‘vacated’ the English throne.

Willem (William) summoned a Convention Parliament in England, which met on January 22, 1689, to discuss the appropriate course of action following James’s flight. William desired the throne but felt insecure about his position; though his wife preceded him in the line of succession to the throne, William wished to reign as king in his own right, rather than as a mere consort. William further demanded that he remain as king even if his wife were to die. As mentioned above, the only precedent for a joint monarchy in England dated from when Queen Mary I married Felipe II of Spain. Felipe II remained king only during his wife’s lifetime, and restrictions were placed on his power.

The English Convention Parliament was very divided on the issue. The radical Whigs in the Lower House proposed to elect William as a king (meaning that his power would be derived from the people); the moderates wanted an acclamation of William and Mary together; the Tories wanted to make him regent or only acclaim Mary as queen. Furthermore, Mary, remaining loyal to her husband, refused to reign on her own without her husband.

Mary II, Queen of England, Scotland and Ireland.

The House of Commons, with a Whig majority, believed that the throne was safer if the ruler were Protestant. The Commons made William accept a Bill of Rights, and, on February 13, 1689, Parliament passed the Declaration of Right and the Crown was offered to William III and Mary II as joint sovereigns. It was, however, provided that “the sole and full exercise of the regal power be only in and executed by the said Prince of Orange in the names of the said Prince and Princess during their joint lives.” In other words, even though both monarchs were sovereigns (and neither a consort of the other) William was given the majority of executive power.

William III and Mary II were crowned together at Westminster Abbey on April 11, 1689 by the Bishop of London, Henry Compton. Normally, the coronation is performed by the Archbishop of Canterbury, but the Archbishop at the time, William Sancroft, refused to recognise James’s removal.

William also summoned a Convention of the Estates of Scotland, which met on March 14, 1689 and sent a conciliatory letter, while James sent haughty uncompromising orders, swaying a majority in favour of William. On April 11 the day of the English coronation, the Convention finally declared that James was no longer King of Scotland. William II and Mary II were offered the Scottish Crown; they accepted on May 11.

February 10, 1840: A Royal Wedding

Tags

1840, Act of Parliament, February 10, King Consort, King Leopold I of the Belgians, King William IV of the United Kingdom, Lord Melbourne, Prince Albert, Queen Victoria

On this date in history: February 10, 1840. Her Majesty Queen Victoria of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Ireland married her maternal first cousin, Prince Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha.

Victoria once complained to her Prime Minister, Lord Melbourne, that her mother’s close proximity promised “torment for many years”, Melbourne sympathized but said it could be avoided by marriage, which Victoria called a “schocking alternative”. Although a marriage between Victoria and her cousin Prince Albert had been encouraged by the Coburg family, specifically King Leopold I of the Belgians since 1936, Victoria was ambivalent at best toward the arrangement. She did however, show interest in Albert’s education for the future role he would have to play as her husband, but she resisted attempts to rush her into wedlock. King William IV of the United Kingdom preferred that Victoria marry her paternal first cousin, Prince George of Cambridge.

Victoria continued to praise Albert following his second visit in October 1839 and it was during this visit that genuine romantic feelings began to stir for Victoria. Albert and Victoria felt mutual affection and the Queen proposed to him on 15 October 1839, just five days after he had arrived at Windsor. They were married on 10 February 1840, in the Chapel Royal of St James’s Palace, London. Victoria was besotted. She spent the evening after their wedding lying down with a headache, but wrote ecstatically in her diary:

I NEVER, NEVER spent such an evening!!! MY DEAREST DEAREST DEAR Albert … his excessive love & affection gave me feelings of heavenly love & happiness I never could have hoped to have felt before! He clasped me in his arms, & we kissed each other again & again! His beauty, his sweetness & gentleness – really how can I ever be thankful enough to have such a Husband! … to be called by names of tenderness, I have never yet heard used to me before – was bliss beyond belief! Oh! This was the happiest day of my life!

Just before the marriage, Albert was naturalized by Act of Parliament  and granted the style of Royal Highness by an Order in Council. This style was only legal in Britain and under the German system of styles and titles Prince Albert remained His Serene Highness. Lord Melbourne advised against the Queen’s strong desire to grant her husband the title of “King Consort”. Parliament even refused to make Prince Albert a peer of the realm—(granting him a title of nobility) partly because of anti-German sentiment and a desire to exclude Albert from any political role.

Initially Albert was not popular with the British public; he was perceived to be from an impoverished and undistinguished minor state, barely larger than a small English county.  In time Albert became an important political adviser as well as the Queen’s companion, replacing Lord Melbourne as the dominant, influential figure in the first half of her life.