Why is Queen Elizabeth of the UK "Elizabeth II" in other Commonwealth realms?

Short answer - history, tradition and law. Her Majesty is Queen Elizabeth II of Canada for the same reason she is Queen Elizabeth II in Scotland and Ireland - despite the fact neither had a Queen Elizabeth I in the first place (Elizabeth I was Queen of England only). For a more elaborate answer, read on. When James VI of Scotland became King of England, he reigned (in England) as James I. That, of course, created a lot of headache and very careful name-choosing process for the Heirs Apparent, since the whole business of different numerals for Scotland and England was rather troublesome and pointless. Nevertheless, while the Kingdoms remained separate, sovereign states (in personal union of Crowns), nothing was done: - Charles I was "I" in both England and Scotland because neither had had a previous Monarch with the name. His son, obviously, succeeded him as Charles II - James was James II of England and VII of Scotland - Mary II was "II" in both England and Scotland since both countries had had a previous Monarch with that name (Mary, Queen of Scots and Mary I) - William was William III of England and II of Scotland - Anne was "I" in both countries because neither had had a previous Monarch with the name The situation changed in 1707, when Kingdoms of England and Scotland stopped existing and the Kingdom of Great Britain was created. At the time, a provision of the Act of Union stipulated that the future Monarchs will take the HIGHEST ORDINAL NUMBER that has existed in either England (starting from 1066) or Scotland. That means, for example, that if in future the United Kingdom has a King named Robert, he will Reign as Robert IV (NOT Robert I), since Scotland had had 3 Kings with that name, or if there is a Queen Regnant named Margaret, she'll Reign as Margaret II (again, since Scotland had a Queen Margaret before - Margaret, the Maid of Norway). Because the Kingdoms of Canada, Australia, New Zealand and other countries of the Realm have Personal Unions of the Crowns, they have also agreed that their Monarch shall take the highest ordinal number that has existed in any of the Kingdoms; since the Monarchies of Canada, Australia and all other countries but the UK are relatively, it essentially means the Monarch takes the highest ordinal number that has existed in England or Scotland (which are obviously much older). Hence the current Queen is Elizabeth II in all countries of the Realm. @ Lord Lucan Alas, we can never be truly off duty, my Lord! ;) @ Hohenzollern Thank you for the kind words. I'm not a Royalty expert, however I am greatly interested in its historical and cultural aspects. @ Dear Troll As I explained, each of the Commonwealth Realms AGREED, in order to avoid unnecessary confusion, to follow the precedence set by the Act of Union - the Monarch takes the highest ordinal number that has existed. Which is why, Prince Charles will be Charles III in all of the Commonwealth Realms, and William will be William V, Harry (assuming he ascends to the Throne), would be Henry IX, etc.

She is so due to the fact that she is separate, distinct, independent etc,etc oh all powerful one. Out of the hundreds of millions of her citizens YOU are the one capable of making her "the last" oh all powerful one. No, I don't think the Queen is one little bit worried. There are lots of mouthy nutters in the world, not saying that you are one, just saying, that's all.

It is very important to take your medication on time to avoid these outbursts. You may hurt yourself or other people. That said, If the people of the Commonwealth want to call her Elizabeth II - they are free to do so. Edit: I plan to visit them this Christmas. My sister lives in Boston and I am flying to meet her. I love visiting America. Thank you for the suggestion.

Diana is correct: it's simple history, tradition, and frankly, sheer, pragmatic simplicity. It would be ridiculous and impractical to number and style her differently in several different countries. If that makes no sense to you, then there's no point trying to argue it out with you. Waste of time and space.

When James VI of Scotland became James I of England, this confused a lot of people. It was decided then that the monarch would have whatever the highest number in whatever of the countries he/she is monarch of. So, Elizabeth is II, as there was a Queen of England called Elizabeth before. Had their been 2 Elizabeths in say Wales, she would have been Elizabeth IV (2 from Wales, one from England). The Scots don't much like her being EIIR there - she tends to go by ER in Scotland only.

Now, it is dear Diana T's well-deserved day off, dear boy, so as chairman of the Order of Top Contributors, one feels it incumbent upon oneself to give a comprehensive answer to this query. You see, we pandered to the Scots by giving them special dispensation to allow them to refer to King James as "James VI" but never ever again, dear boy!

Don't know, it's always been like that...since I was born.

Obvious troll is obvious.

Its has already been established in a court case that how she is styled is the express prerogative of the Monarch so she could style her self Elizabeth XIII is she so wished. The Precedent however has been that they Monarch would take the highest numeral available from any of their realms and use it as their style in all to avoid confusion with former Monarchs.