The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #381  
Old 02-23-2013, 02:21 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425

He doesn't need to declare Camilla The Princess of Wales - she already is one.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #382  
Old 02-23-2013, 02:25 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ipswich, United Kingdom
Posts: 663
Quote:
Originally Posted by Artemisia View Post

He doesn't need to declare Camilla The Princess of Wales - she already is one.
I know she is! He has been Married to her for almost 8 years.

Time to end this nonsense. None of this Princess Consort business.

It's time for Diana fans to accept reality!
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #383  
Old 02-23-2013, 02:44 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,086
Quote:
Originally Posted by royalistbert View Post
How embarrassing Camilla the only Princess Consort in Europe. For Gods sake Charles man up and declare Camilla Princess of Wales.
She won't be the only Princess Consort on Europe, Charlene is a Princess Consort. Although she'll be Queen.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #384  
Old 02-23-2013, 02:49 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Ipswich, United Kingdom
Posts: 663
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
She won't be the only Princess Consort on Europe, Charlene is a Princess Consort. Although she'll be Queen.
Yes of course Charlene is a Princess Consort in a Principality. I should of said the only Princess Consort in a Kingdom.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #385  
Old 02-23-2013, 02:49 PM
vkrish's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 840
I think Charles went a bit too low in the bargain.
There was actually no need of not using the conventional PssOW and the real Queen Consort title.
It was like giving too much leverage to Diana fanatics (not fans).
Because those who loathed her then, still do so.
And thos who gradually accepted her in the long run, would have anyway done so..
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #386  
Old 02-23-2013, 03:28 PM
EarlOfDawleyMagna's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Telford, United Kingdom
Posts: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post

Exactly why should he 'adhere' to words that probably weren't even his?
The press release was from Clarence House, it surely must have been cleared with him first.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #387  
Old 02-23-2013, 03:39 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlOfDawleyMagna View Post
Yes technically that is true! I for one want Camilla to be Queen and fully agree that by law the wife of a King is Queen, however upon the announcement of their marriage it was made very clear that Camilla would be styled Princess Consort when Charles accedes. Much in the same way Camilla is legally Princess Of Wales but styled Duchess Of Cambridge. I feel this was said at the time to make the public more accepting of the marriage. But to go against it now Charles would lose face. That is the tricky issue he has placed himself in.
It was announced it was intended that Camilla would be known as The Princess Consort when her husband became King. When this was questioned by members of Parliament, Tony Blair confirmed this was not a morganatic marriage and Camilla was entitled to the style, rank and titles held by Charles.

At present, Camilla is legally "HRH The Princess Charles" as the wife of a son of The Sovereign. Because Charles holds many titles as the eldest son and heir to The Sovereign, she also holds the female equivalent of those titles as his wife. She can choose to use any of them as her primary style, but remains HRH regardless of which title she is known by.

Once Charles is The Sovereign, Camilla is automatically HM The Queen and remains HM Queen Camilla in her own right. To be known as something else, legislation is necessary to remove her current title and rank, allowing The Sovereign to issue Letters Patent creating her something else in her own right.

The likelihood of that happening is zero in my opinion. She will be Queen and there will be no objections.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #388  
Old 02-23-2013, 03:49 PM
EarlOfDawleyMagna's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Telford, United Kingdom
Posts: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by branchg View Post

It was announced it was intended that Camilla would be known as The Princess Consort when her husband became King. When this was questioned by members of Parliament, Tony Blair confirmed this was not a morganatic marriage and Camilla was entitled to the style, rank and titles held by Charles.

At present, Camilla is legally "HRH The Princess Charles" as the wife of a son of The Sovereign. Because Charles holds many titles as the eldest son and heir to The Sovereign, she also holds the female equivalent of those titles as his wife. She can choose to use any of them as her primary style, but remains HRH regardless of which title she is known by.

Once Charles is The Sovereign, Camilla is automatically HM The Queen and remains HM Queen Camilla in her own right. To be known as something else, legislation is necessary to remove her current title and rank, allowing The Sovereign to issue Letters Patent creating her something else in her own right.

The likelihood of that happening is zero in my opinion. She will be Queen and there will be no objections.
The point very much is one of style not title. We all know Camilla is Princess of Wales but chooses Duchess of Cornwall. That is her style, what we on the ground know her by and call her. It is the intention as stated by Clarence House for her to be styled Princess Consort. I don't think Charles really wants this. I think he will do whatever he can to avoid it. We know technically she will be Queen but will Charles go against what was stated Camilla would be styled? That is the question.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #389  
Old 02-23-2013, 03:55 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 17,086
Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlOfDawleyMagna View Post
The press release was from Clarence House, it surely must have been cleared with him first.
Charles was pragmatic, he and Camilla knew the situation in 2005 and his press released a statement to calm things down. Nothing was ever made official, no laws were passed. She's the wife of The King, she will be The Queen. I see no backlash except from the Diana-fans that appear every now and again.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #390  
Old 02-23-2013, 04:08 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,350
At the time the PM, in parliament made it clear that it would take legislation to strip her of the title Queen Consort. That was only days before the wedding.

The CH website still has 'it is the 'intention' that she will be known as Princess Consort'.

The situation will be resolved on the day of Charles' accession as either nothing will happen and she will be Queen Consort or parliament will met to strip her of the title Qeen Consort within hours of her gaining that title allowing Charles to announce that she is Princess Consort at his accession council.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #391  
Old 02-23-2013, 04:13 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 2,604
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post
Charles was pragmatic, he and Camilla knew the situation in 2005 and his press released a statement to calm things down. Nothing was ever made official, no laws were passed. She's the wife of The King, she will be The Queen. I see no backlash except from the Diana-fans that appear every now and again.
Yep. I reckon it was done with a "suck it and see" attitude and to placate the haters at the time. Surely the idea was to get them married and give the public a chance to get to know Camilla and to get used to her by Charles' side, and to allow the lady to work her quiet charm and prove how good she is for Charles and in her own right, and to gain popularity as an individual. If there was continuing flack from the public generally rather than just the Diana fanatics/Camilla haters they could pursue the Princess Consort idea, but if the opposition died down they could downplay that statement of "intention".
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #392  
Old 02-23-2013, 04:14 PM
EarlOfDawleyMagna's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Telford, United Kingdom
Posts: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumutqueen View Post

Charles was pragmatic, he and Camilla knew the situation in 2005 and his press released a statement to calm things down. Nothing was ever made official, no laws were passed. She's the wife of The King, she will be The Queen. I see no backlash except from the Diana-fans that appear every now and again.
I dearly hope you are right, I just have a feeling that statement will come back to bite him on the bottom :-)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #393  
Old 02-23-2013, 04:50 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,317
The press release stated that that it was intended Camilla be Princess Consort. I've read so many posts on here that state, very clearly, she cannot be Princess Consort without parliamentary intrervention.

The moment Charles is King, she is Queen and IMO parliament will not bring in legislation to change her title because it will change titles for all time. They cannot introduce legislation aimed at one specific individual. And also IMO, William will have a say as he will not want Catherine to be a Princess Consort - he will want her to be Queen.

It will cause a bit of a moan from a minority but CH can say that they made an error etc etc. There isnt going to be a revolution or the end of the Monarchy - the vocal minority can live with it.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #394  
Old 02-23-2013, 05:01 PM
EarlOfDawleyMagna's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Telford, United Kingdom
Posts: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by cepe View Post
The press release stated that that it was intended Camilla be Princess Consort. I've read so many posts on here that state, very clearly, she cannot be Princess Consort without parliamentary intrervention.

The moment Charles is King, she is Queen and IMO parliament will not bring in legislation to change her title because it will change titles for all time. They cannot introduce legislation aimed at one specific individual. And also IMO, William will have a say as he will not want Catherine to be a Princess Consort - he will want her to be Queen.

It will cause a bit of a moan from a minority but CH can say that they made an error etc etc. There isnt going to be a revolution or the end of the Monarchy - the vocal minority can live with it.

I agree it would surely break discrimination laws to do that against one individual for no good reason other than a minority of public opinion.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #395  
Old 02-23-2013, 05:44 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
Why does a discussion about the possible abdication/retirement of HM have to devolve into a discussion of Camilla's future titles? Hasn't that subject been done to death on other threads including the styles and titles thread?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #396  
Old 02-23-2013, 05:47 PM
cepe's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,317
sorry - you're right - mea culpa was following discussion

__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #397  
Old 02-24-2013, 02:17 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is online now
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 2,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
Why does a discussion about the possible abdication/retirement of HM have to devolve into a discussion of Camilla's future titles? Hasn't that subject been done to death on other threads including the styles and titles thread?
Because any discussion regarding Charles becoming King must devolve into the Camilla as Queen vs Princess Consort issue.

Back on topic: HM already has Charles do a lot, and involves him in the managing of the red boxes. She is, at this point, largely of sound mind and health and thus has no apparent need for a regency or co-monarch. There is no real precedent for establishing a regency simply because the monarch is old (George III was not of sound mind), while there is precedent of not doing so (Victoria was 81 when she died and never had a regent). There is no real precedent for abdication - only 4 monarchs in nearly 1,000 years have done so, and only 1 did so willingly - and any precedent associated with abdication in the UK is a negative one. There is also no precedent for a co-monarchy, at least not of the nature that would happen here. William and Mary did have one, but it was under very different circumstances. You would have to go back, I believe, to Henry the Young King and his father Henry II for an example of a parent/child co-monarchy, although that wasn't a particularly effective example and Henry the Young King doesn't often make it into the list of Monarchs of England (as it was at the time).

Where HM infirm or in some way unable to do her job I would see the point in s regency. Had she made some indication that she wished to abdicate, I would see a point there. But she isn't, and she hasn't. Furthermore, she has given a lot over to Charles and shown confidence in his ability to take on her position. The whole debate of she can't fill the role anymore/it's not fair to Charles/she needs to show confidence in the future of the monarchy seems, to me, to more be the product of media attempts to stir up rumours and general trouble.

HM is doing a fine job, and has been for the past 61 years. There is no sign that she is incapable of continuing to do it or does not wish to continue to do so. She has also shown great confidence in her son's ability to fill her shoes, and he has shown that he is capable of filling in for her and taking on responsibilities when she is unable to do them. There is no indication that there is any need for an abdication, regency, or co-monarchy at this point. There is also no indication that there is any reason to believe that a regency wouldn't be established were HM to be unable to perform her duties, not that Charles will be unfit as a King (regardless of the titling and styling of his wife) when his mother passes. Simply "because she's old" is not a good reason for, really, abdication or regency.

Also, worries about a 100 year old Queen who can't do her job are a bit unfounded too. Yes, HM may live to 100, but if the precedent set by her mother is any indication she'll still be able to perform engagements. The Queen Mother's last public engagement was November 22, 2001. She suffered from poor health for the remainder of 2001 and the start of 2002, preventing her from further engagements, although she did attend the funeral of Princess Margaret in February, and died at the end of March 2002. There is no reason to believe that HM, if she lives to be 100, will be unable to continue doing her duties.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #398  
Old 02-24-2013, 03:06 PM
scooter's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: katonah, United States
Posts: 2,281
Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlOfDawleyMagna View Post

Yes technically that is true! I for one want Camilla to be Queen and fully agree that by law the wife of a King is Queen, however upon the announcement of their marriage it was made very clear that Camilla would be styled Princess Consort when Charles accedes. Much in the same way Camilla is legally Princess Of Wales but styled Duchess Of Cambridge. I feel this was said at the time to make the public more accepting of the marriage. But to go against it now Charles would lose face. That is the tricky issue he has placed himself in.
I don't think so. If its what she wants and what he announced at the time of engagement, I don't see what the problem is.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #399  
Old 02-24-2013, 06:44 PM
HereditaryPrincess's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Greater London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,803
I've been reading some of the earlier posts in this thread, and some members said that when she was 21, HM said in a speech: ''I declare before you all that my whole life, whether it be long or short, shall be devoted to your service and the service of our great imperial family to which we all belong.'' (It also happens to be the quote in my signature ). And by this, I think she means that she will carry on reigning until she dies. Also, am I right in thinking that Edward VIII is the only one of our monarchs who has abdicated? Most of our Kings and Queens have reigned until their death, and I think HM will be just the same. Another reason as to why she won't abdicate is that at the moment, she is perfectly healthy (IMO) and she is able to go on tours, the State Opening of Parliament, etc. You never know, HM could live up to 101 like her mother did! If that does happen, Charles would become King aged 79, but even then, I still don't really see her abdicating in favor of him. So to conclude, 98% of me thinks that HM won't abdicate, whilst the other 2% of me thinks that she will only abdicate if she really has too. I just wanted to have my say in this thread.
__________________
"She is a little angel and like her name, she brings sunshine even on cloudy days. From the bottom of our hearts, we would like to thank each and every one of you for your lovely best wishes for our daughter. She feels very loved". HRH Princess Madeleine, Duchess of Hälsingland and Gästrikland on her daughter, HRH Princess Leonore, Duchess of Gotland.
Reply With Quote
  #400  
Old 02-24-2013, 07:15 PM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by HereditaryPrincess View Post
Also, am I right in thinking that Edward VIII is the only one of our monarchs who has abdicated? Most of our Kings and Queens have reigned until their death...
Not to go too off-topic but while Edward VIII was the first Monarch to voluntarily abdicate (and certainly the only British one), there have been a number of English, Scottish, Welsh and Irish Monarchs who didn't reign until their deaths (most often, because they were deposed). Also, Edward II of England abdicated in favour of of his son, Edward III, although it was anything but voluntary act. The following English, Scottish, Irish and British Monarchs were forced to abdicate or were deposed. The list includes Kings who reigns in separate Kingdoms that would later form England (Mercia, Wessex, Northumbria...). Those who abdicated, whether voluntarily or not, are in bold.

England and Scotland (during Union of Crowns), Great Britain and United Kingdom:
- James II and VII of England and Scotland (deposed during the Glorious Revolution: his fleeing the country was regarded as an abdication by the Parliament)
- Charles I of England and Scotland (deposed during the Civil War, executed in 1649)
- James II, King of England (deposed in 1689 in the Glorious Revolution)
- Edward VIII (abdicated in 1936 as King of the United Kingdom and of the Commonwealth Realms)

England (and its predecessor Kingdoms):
- Ceawlin, King of Wessex (deposed in 592)
- Cenwalh, King of Wessex (deposed)
- Hlothhere, King of Kent (exiled in 685)
- Centwine, King of Wessex (abdicated in 686)
- Caedwalla, King of Wessex (abdicated in 688)
- Saebbi, King of Essex (abdicated in 694)
- Aethelred, King of Mercia (abdicated in 704)
- Eadwulf I, King of Northumbria (deposed in 705)
- Coenred, King of Mercia (abdicated in 709)
- Offa, King of Essex (abdicated in 709)
- Ceolwulf, King of Northumbria (first deposed, then abdicated in 739)
- Ine, King of Wessex (abdicated in 726)
- Beornred, King of Mercia (deposed and flead in 757)
- Sigeberht of Wessex (deposed in 757)
- Wiglaf, King of Mercia (deposed)
- Aethelwaldm King of Northumbria (deposed in 765)
- Eadberht, King of Northumbria (abdicated in died 768)
- Sigeric, King of Essex (abdicated in 798)
- Sigered, King of Essex (abdicated by ceding his Kingdom to Wessex)
- Alhred, King of Northumbria (deposed and went into exile)
- Aethelred I, King of Northumbria (deposed)
- Osred II, King of Northumbria (deposed and went into exile)
- Osbald, King of Northumbria (went into exile)
- Eardwulf, King of Northumbria (deposed in 806)
- Eadberht III, King of Kent (deposed Coenwulf of Mercia)
- Ceolwulf I of Mercia, King of Kent and Mercia (deposed in 823)
- Baldred, King of Kent (expelled in 825 by Aethelwulf of Wessex)
- Burgred, King of Mercia (deposed in 874)
- Aelfwynn, Lady (Queen) of the Mercians (deposed in 918)
- Aethelred II, King of Northumbria (deposed)
- Amlaib Cuaran, King of Northumbria (deposed, later regained his Throne)
- Eric Bloodaxe, King of Northumbria (deposed)
- Aethelwulf, King of Wessex (gave up his power in favour of his son, Aethelbald)
- Edward II, King of England (forced to abdicate in 1327)
- Richard II, King of England (deposed 1399)
- Henry VI, King of England (deposed in 1461, reinstated in 1470, deposed again in 1471)
- Edward IV, King of England (deposed in 1470, reinstated in 1471)
- Edward V, King of England (deposed in 1483 by being proclaimed illegitimate)

Scotland:
- Duncan II, King of Scots (deposed in 1094)
- Donald III, King of Scots (deposed in 1097)
- John, King of Scots (deposed in 1296)
- Mary, Queen of Scots (deposed in 1567)

Ireland:
- Blacaire mac Gofrith, King of Dublin (deposed)
- Amlaib Cuaran, King of Dublin (deposed at least twice)
- Godred Crovan King of Dublin (driven out of Dublin)
- Domnall mac Muirchertaig, King of Dublin (deposed at least twice)
- Hasculf Thorgillsson, King of Dublin (deposed)
- Mael Seachlainn II, High King of Ireland (deposed in 1002, restored in 1014)
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
abdication, elizabeth ii, queen elizabeth ii, regency, retirement


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
ABBA singing "Dancing Queen" for the Swedish King and Queen allison513 Royal House of Sweden 34 11-19-2011 01:24 AM
Queen Fawzia and Queen Soraya were they involved in their country's development ? FarahJoy The Imperial Family of Iran 15 12-15-2009 07:53 PM
Valdemar II the Victorious, Queen Dagmar and Queen Berengária norwegianne Danish Royal History 2 11-10-2007 04:54 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events dutch royal history fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta cristina infanta elena infanta leonor infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg ottoman pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince joachim prince laurent prince pieter-christiaan princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess claire princess elisabeth princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marie princess mary princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia spain state visit wedding william


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

RV & Travel Trailer Communities

Our RV & Travel Trailer sites encompasses virtually all types of Recreational Vehicles, from brand-specific to general RV communities.

» More about our RV Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:12 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]