The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #2441  
Old 05-16-2016, 05:49 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,190
There's always the chance isn't there of the pendulum swinging too far the other way. So that Charles the reasonable, the wise, was always ready to accommodate his wife's wishes, never cruel, never sarcastic, driven to the kindly and understanding Camilla by an unstable, immature and unintelligent wife. I'd say one lot of myth making about their relationship and marriage is as bad as the other.

As for denigration, I'd say that Charles's supporters have done a fair job of that on most Diana threads on this forum. Diana's been called manipulative, stupid, inherently unfaithful, a potential destroyer of the monarchy, a publicity seeker who wasn't really devoted to her charities and causes as she made out, and really, she didn't do much anyway to help AIDS, land mines or anything else did she?

I'm not sure that the general public have swallowed the line of much maligned Charles and erratic, mentally unstable Diana manipulating the press, making him miserable and driving him to adultery.

If they did, then Camilla would have been Princess of Wales these past ten years, her popularity (and his) would be sky high and there would be no questions about Camilla becoming Queen. We know their popularity isn't so great and this is at least partly because of Camilla's role in Charles's first marriage.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #2442  
Old 05-16-2016, 06:47 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Christmas Island
Posts: 5,920
I think that Camilla is pretty well-liked but that -when asked directly- it is "more socially desirable" to downplay this. At all cost the media will keep the framework intact. It remains Randy Andy, it remains Princess Pushy, it remains Rottweiler Camilla, it possibly remains Duchess Do-Little.

Note also that the technique of the question is almost telling the outcome. When the question is leaving only one option: "Who do you like the most in the royal family?" When then one answers: "Euh... Prince Harry" does that automatically mean that all other members are disliked? No. But tell that The Sun, The Mirror and especially The Daily Mail... pfffff
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #2443  
Old 05-16-2016, 07:36 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 1,784
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
I always love how people think Charles' reign will be short. Sure it won't be as long as his mother's but ... if her lives to the exact same age as his mother he will reign for over 20 years - hardly a short reign.

Given the longevity of his ancestors (sure both his grandfathers died young but neither of them took care of their health and they didn't have the health care we have today) he will have a decent length of reign.

I don't see William reigning for another 30 or so years.

In fact I think Britain is in for a series of 60+ kings at accession unless one decides to abdicate, or a tragedy strikes, or the country becomes a republic.
Twenty years, even if it comes to this, is a "short reign" by contemporary standards. Queen Margrethe II and King Carl Gustaf have been on the throne for over 40 years now and Queen Beatrix, when she abdicated, had reigned for 30 years or so.
Reply With Quote
  #2444  
Old 05-16-2016, 07:51 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
I think that Camilla is pretty well-liked but that -when asked directly- it is "more socially desirable" to downplay this. At all cost the media will keep the framework intact. It remains Randy Andy, it remains Princess Pushy, it remains Rottweiler Camilla, it possibly remains Duchess Do-Little.

Note also that the technique of the question is almost telling the outcome. When the question is leaving only one option: "Who do you like the most in the royal family?" When then one answers: "Euh... Prince Harry" does that automatically mean that all other members are disliked? No. But tell that The Sun, The Mirror and especially The Daily Mail... pfffff
YouGov, who conducts many of these polls is a well respected organisation, however. And if we accept, as so many do, that the Queen, Harry and the Cambridges lead the Royal pack as favourites, then surely those among senior royals who come towards the bottom in poll after poll do not appear to be as accepted by the public.
Reply With Quote
  #2445  
Old 05-16-2016, 08:13 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Christmas Island
Posts: 5,920
In no any engagement, public outing, Trooping, State Visit, State Opening of Parliament, Jubilee, Wedding, whatever may be, there has been visible resentment or negativeness towards the Duchess of Cornwall. Her assets seem her down-to-earth approach, her easy-accessibility for everyone, her generous laughter and her witz. Camilla has come from far and it is admirable how she has found her characteristic own role inside the royal family.
Reply With Quote
  #2446  
Old 05-16-2016, 08:29 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 10,193
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
Twenty years, even if it comes to this, is a "short reign" by contemporary standards. Queen Margrthe II and King Carl Gustaf have been in the throne for over 40 years now and Queen Beatrix, when she abdicated, had reigned for 30 years or so.
Given the longevity of these monarchs there is a very good chance that their heirs will all have short reigns by your definition unless the present monarch decides to abdicate - something that doesn't happen in the UK of course as they see it as a job for life (as does the Danish monarch - whose heir is already in his 40s).

The average length of reign since the Conquest in the UK for English/British monarchs is 23 years.

Very few monarchs have actually reached the 25 year reign mark with some going to 50 or 60 years upping the average. Take out the four the past 50 and the average reign drops to only 19 years. The 20th century had reigns of 9, 25, 1, 16 and 64. Most centuries have four or five monarchs. The way the 21st is shaping it is possible it will have four only and all quite old throughout the century. I don't see Charles being much under 80 when he succeeds but I also don't see William coming to the throne until he is in his 60s or even 70s as well. George could easily be in his 80s - given the health systems we have now.
Reply With Quote
  #2447  
Old 05-16-2016, 08:36 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: st. paul, United States
Posts: 965
We were talking about Camilla's close friend Jilly Cooper on another thread and it reminded me of a quote Jilly gave about the future court of King Charles and Queen/Princess Camilla-

"They have got masses of friends. They give the most lovely parties and are brilliant hosts. It could be the most glittering court," said Jilly Cooper
Reply With Quote
  #2448  
Old 05-16-2016, 08:46 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 1,878
Quote:
Originally Posted by miss whirley View Post
We were talking about Camilla's close friend Jilly Cooper on another thread and it reminded me of a quote Jilly gave about the future court of King Charles and Queen/Princess Camilla-



"They have got masses of friends. They give the most lovely parties and are brilliant hosts. It could be the most glittering court," said Jilly Cooper

I think their party days will be behind them if and when they become take over


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #2449  
Old 05-16-2016, 08:57 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: st. paul, United States
Posts: 965
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal rob View Post
I think their party days will be behind them if and when they become take over


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
I don't know. I think Charles is a bit fancier than HM. It reminds me of a story published by The London Times -

An indication of the future king’s style surfaced at the general assembly of the Church of Scotland in 2000. Charles was standing in for the Queen as lord high commissioner, effectively acting as monarch. On such occasions the Queen customarily gives dinner parties for between six and 12 people. Not Charles.

He hired jugglers and fire eaters to greet guests as they arrived for a dinner and invited up to 200 people at a time. "It was entertainment on a lavish scale and quite beyond anything we had ever seen," said one former moderator of the Church of Scotland.
-[London] Times Online ^ | February 13, 2005 | Nicholas Hellen, Christopher Morgan and Richard Woods
Reply With Quote
  #2450  
Old 05-17-2016, 08:37 AM
JessRulz's Avatar
Administrator
Blog Editor
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 6,771
Alright, considering we've all said our piece - once again an ad nauseam rehashing of two decades old scandal - let us get back to the topic at hand, the Monarchy under Charles.

Further posts on the matter of Charles, Diana, who is more saintly, adultery, etc will be removed by the moderators.
__________________
**TRF Rules and FAQ**
Reply With Quote
  #2451  
Old 05-29-2016, 07:20 AM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades, United States
Posts: 2,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by miss whirley View Post
We were talking about Camilla's close friend Jilly Cooper on another thread and it reminded me of a quote Jilly gave about the future court of King Charles and Queen/Princess Camilla-

"They have got masses of friends. They give the most lovely parties and are brilliant hosts. It could be the most glittering court," said Jilly Cooper
Quote:
Originally Posted by miss whirley View Post
I don't know. I think Charles is a bit fancier than HM. It reminds me of a story published by The London Times -

An indication of the future king’s style surfaced at the general assembly of the Church of Scotland in 2000. Charles was standing in for the Queen as lord high commissioner, effectively acting as monarch. On such occasions the Queen customarily gives dinner parties for between six and 12 people. Not Charles.

He hired jugglers and fire eaters to greet guests as they arrived for a dinner and invited up to 200 people at a time. "It was entertainment on a lavish scale and quite beyond anything we had ever seen," said one former moderator
of the Church of Scotland.
-[London] Times Online ^ | February 13, 2005 | Nicholas Hellen, Christopher Morgan and Richard Woods
Sounds like great fun! Charles will be fun. He's cosmopolitan. He will be missed.
__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
Reply With Quote
  #2452  
Old 06-02-2016, 02:08 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Alexandria, United States
Posts: 58
Titles for Minor Royals under Charles

IMO I think Charles should take a page from the Dutch. To streamline the Royal Family, which seems like will inevitably happen sadly, he should write a new LP stating that that those that have a more distant relationship with the monarch than first cousin should be automatically removed or excluded from being members of the Royal Family and those that are second cousins from the line of succession . Or he could just make the monarch and their spouse, the heir and his spouse, the spare and his spouse and any of their children, members of the Royal Family while the others are of the Royal House/King or Queen's Family. Also taking another page from the Dutch instead of Lord/Lady Windsor for those not in the main line I say you take the name of the house and make all the younger sons siblings HH Prince/Princess of Windsor. Yes there could be a problem with this, what about the titles. Well than you put that certain designation into the title like HH Princess Alicia of Windsor-HH Princess Alicia of Sussex. I know it has a lot of holes and things that wouldn't necessarily help but it is an alternative of making members of the R.F. seem like nobility.
Reply With Quote
  #2453  
Old 06-02-2016, 02:38 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 3,190
That's a very Continental way of formalising matters though. I think time and attrition will take care of most of this.

I don't believe, for example, that Princess Alexandra's children and grandchildren, or the Duke of Kent's, or Duke of Gloucester's, are regarded by the British public or the media, as members of the Royal family. In a generation or two all the Queen's cousins and their descendants will be just members of the nobility or without titles depending on their personal circumstances. If old titles like Kent and Gloucester drift away from the Crown because of it, well, that is very unfortunate, but the inevitable result of George V having a lot of sons.

After all, who regards the Harewood family as royalty today, even though Princess Mary was the daughter of King George V and Gerald and George Lascelles were first cousins to the Queen? Time marches on and with it will come the inevitable loosening of ties with the BRF of Andrew, Edward and Anne's grandchildren and great-grandchildren. It doesn't need to be formalised in any way, IMO.
Reply With Quote
  #2454  
Old 06-02-2016, 07:03 AM
padams2359's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New Orleans, United States
Posts: 524
I agree. Why formalize something that has happened many times in the past? It works itself out. Where are the non-succession line descendants of Queen Victory, there has to be hundreds by now, or Edward VII and George V? With George VI only having two children, and Princess Margaret only have two children herself, it will trim down substantially on its own, then trim down again when it comes to Anne, Andrew and Edward's grandchildren.
Reply With Quote
  #2455  
Old 06-02-2016, 08:43 AM
Nice Nofret's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Zürich, Switzerland
Posts: 514
Quote:
Originally Posted by RoyalHighness 2002 View Post
...and those that are second cousins from the line of succession ....

The succession is regulated by law and has nothing to do with letters patent.
Reply With Quote
  #2456  
Old 06-02-2016, 12:58 PM
Dman's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 11,419
George Hollingberry warns Queen's death could park anarchy | Royal | News | Daily Express
__________________
"THE REAL POWER OF A MAN IS IN THE SIZE OF THE SMILE OF THE WOMAN SITTING NEXT TO HIM."

GENTLEMAN'S ESSENTIALS
Reply With Quote
  #2457  
Old 06-02-2016, 01:18 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 6,634
Where's that bird when I need it? Ahhhh! Here he is!

This is really a non-story. As far as Charles being an "interventionist", I think we've seen recently with the hue and cry for the release of Charles' spider letters to the public domain that Charles is quite far away from intervening in political matters but has voiced his opinions and made suggestions as to what he sees would be best in matters relating to issues he feels strongly about.

It is true that HM, The Queen will be a tough act to follow and its very possible that in this day and age, both Australia and New Zealand may decide it time to stand on their own two feet independent from the British monarchy but I think that's been a possibility for quite some time now and actually has no direct bearing on Charles being King.

As I see it, when Charles does ascend the throne, there really is nothing that will point to a constitutional crisis at all. In fact, I'd wager that Charles will pretty much stick to following in his mother's footsteps. He's spent decades already doing it and knows very well what is expected of him as King. He may be a bit more vocal than his mother but knows very well to stay away from anything that would be deemed as meddling in politics. He'll have his weekly meetings with the current Prime Ministers of the day to do that.
__________________
“When I was 5 years old, my mother always told me that happiness was the key to life. When I went to school, they asked me what I wanted to be when I grew up. I wrote down ‘happy’. They told me I didn’t understand the assignment, and I told them they didn’t understand life.”
― John Lennon
Reply With Quote
  #2458  
Old 06-02-2016, 01:38 PM
ROYAL NORWAY's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: somewhere, United Kingdom, Norway
Posts: 1,875
Quote:
George Hollingberry, a Government whip, paid tribute to the 90-year-old monarch but said her death would be a dangerous time for the monarchy, as her eldest son's interventionist style might not be palatable.
If Charles chooses an interventionist style as king, then he must be stupid, and he's not.

Quote:
"Royal commentators and constitutional experts believe she will die with the monarchy safe here in the UK and Commonwealth, but I would like to add a note of caution to that assessment because I fear they have yet to fully address what will happen on her death, which I hope is many years away."
That's because they are right, and as I and others have said many times: if the public support for the monarchy weakens, then it will still take years to abolish it in the UK, and it will be very difficult. And William and Kate are likely to become very popular when they starts doing royal duties full-time.

And when it comes to the other realms: That hasn't somthing to do with the monarchy. It's has to do with that they don't want a foreigner as head of state.
__________________
The Queen is the most wonderful, forgiving, non judgmental person I know. Sarah Ferguson speaking in 2011.
Reply With Quote
  #2459  
Old 06-02-2016, 02:03 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Torrance, United States
Posts: 2,955
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
That's a very Continental way of formalising matters though. I think time and attrition will take care of most of this.

I don't believe, for example, that Princess Alexandra's children and grandchildren, or the Duke of Kent's, or Duke of Gloucester's, are regarded by the British public or the media, as members of the Royal family. In a generation or two all the Queen's cousins and their descendants will be just members of the nobility or without titles depending on their personal circumstances. If old titles like Kent and Gloucester drift away from the Crown because of it, well, that is very unfortunate, but the inevitable result of George V having a lot of sons.

After all, who regards the Harewood family as royalty today, even though Princess Mary was the daughter of King George V and Gerald and George Lascelles were first cousins to the Queen? Time marches on and with it will come the inevitable loosening of ties with the BRF of Andrew, Edward and Anne's grandchildren and great-grandchildren. It doesn't need to be formalised in any way, IMO.
I agree that the children of QEII's cousins are not considered to be members of the royal family, though complaints from some quarters seem to start up ever June at the annual balcony appearance!
Reply With Quote
  #2460  
Old 06-02-2016, 11:22 PM
CyrilVladisla's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Conneaut, United States
Posts: 2,884
Do you think Charles will do away with the sightseeing tours of Buckingham Palace?
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british, camilla, charles iii, charles of wales, coronation, crown jewels, duchess of cornwall, legacy, prince charles, prince of wales, queen camilla, titles, william v


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
The Monarchy in Greece Fireweaver The Royal Family of Greece 309 10-31-2016 06:54 PM
Monarchy vs Republic marian Royalty Past, Present, and Future 392 10-16-2016 10:14 AM
The Monarchy after Elizabeth II ysbel British Royals 311 12-29-2012 04:36 PM
The Monarchy And The Media Alexandria Royal House of Norway 12 04-08-2004 05:06 PM




Popular Tags
ascot 2016 best gown best gown september 2016 best hat best outfit british catherine middleton style chris o'neill coup d'etat crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mary eveningwear crown princess mary fashion crown princess mette-marit current events denmark duchess of cambridge e-mail fashion poll grand duke jean greece kate middleton king abdullah ii king felipe king felipe vi king willem-alexander member introduction monarchy new zealand nobel gala norway november 2016 october 2016 opening of parliament picture of the week prince bernhard prince charles prince nikolaos princess madeleine princess marie princess marie daytime outfit princess mary princess mary daytime fashion princess mary fashion princess mary hats queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen letizia style queen mathilde queen mathildes outfits queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania royal fashion september 2016 state visit state visit to denmark succession sweden the duchess of cambridge the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats


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

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- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 01:07 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2016
Jelsoft Enterprises