The Monarchy under Charles

[muriel]

And long term, Charles and Camilla will be gone, Sophie and Edward will be aged. Just don't see any other outcome than William calling on the help of his cousins Beatrice and Eugenie. Perhaps not now or for a very long time, but seems he will definitely have to.

I think if, in the fullness of time, the York girls are required to help the monarch of the day (be it Charles, William or George) and they have not, in any way, blotted their copy with the great British public, I am sure they would be happy to do so. In the interim, I think they should be allowed to live their lives as they desire, go forth and achieve their personal objectives, free of royal protocol and duty.

 

[USAPolitics]

I think if, in the fullness of time, the York girls are required to help the monarch of the day (be it Charles, William or George) and they have not, in any way, blotted their copy with the great British public, I am sure they would be happy to do so. In the interim, I think they should be allowed to live their lives as they desire, go forth and achieve their personal objectives, free of royal protocol and duty.

Agreed. I see them living their lives now, fulfilling royal duty later in life once needed.

 

[Molly2101]

There is a glaring error in the article where it talks about Edward wanting to be Duke of Edinburgh and Sophie wanting to be made a Royal Duchess like Camilla and Kate before the Queen passes so she would be on equal footing.

In order for Edward to get his father's Dukedom both his parents have to pass. Since Charles will inherit the title when Philip dies and it merges with the Crown when his mother dies then it can be reissued.

I am also quite sure that Edward is fully aware of how Dukedom's work so why on Earth would he be "hoping Sophie is made a royal Duchess" before Charles is King to be equal to Camilla and Kate. Sophie and Edward both know that Sophie will never be equal to the other women, as their role in the Monarchy is hugely different from Sophie's, and much more important.

As for Sophie and Camilla not getting on well - that may be true but they have at least got the decency and maturity to be friendly in public with one another and not let others see their apparent disliking toward one another. At Trooping the Colour Camilla has been seen chatting to young James like a normal aunt (she was seen chatting to him and pointing out the planes in 2013), and she is seen talking to Sophie at the Garter Service etc. They are adults who may not see eye to eye but in public they can act in a cordial way.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

No one can ever say what lies ahead. The best laid plans can be changed because of circumstances or just a whim. But I would be absolutely flabbergasted if Charles did not confer the title of Duke of Edinburgh on Edward. The promise was publicly announced at the time of Edward's wedding and I can think of absolutely no reason for Charles not to follow through.

 

[Dman]

I am also quite sure that Edward is fully aware of how Dukedom's work so why on Earth would he be "hoping Sophie is made a royal Duchess" before Charles is King to be equal to Camilla and Kate. Sophie and Edward both know that Sophie will never be equal to the other women, as their role in the Monarchy is hugely different from Sophie's, and much more important.

As for Sophie and Camilla not getting on well - that may be true but they have at least got the decency and maturity to be friendly in public with one another and not let others see their apparent disliking toward one another. At Trooping the Colour Camilla has been seen chatting to young James like a normal aunt (she was seen chatting to him and pointing out the planes in 2013), and she is seen talking to Sophie at the Garter Service etc. They are adults who may not see eye to eye but in public they can act in a cordial way.

I think the Royal Women of Windsor get a long just fine. One must remember that Camilla is much older than Sophie and don't appear to run in the same crowd. Everyone knows their place within the "Firm" and no one is out to outdo one another in position and titles. The media have a way of trying to put members of the royal family against each other. This happened to Diana and Anne and Diana and Sarah. Someone tried to start it up between Diana and Sophie.

 

[muriel]

I think the Royal Women of Windsor get a long just fine. One must remember that Camilla is much older than Sophie and don't appear to run in the same crowd. Everyone knows their place within the "Firm" and no one is out to outdo one another in position and titles. The media have a way of trying to put members of the royal family against each other. This happened to Diana and Anne and Diana and Sarah. Someone tried to start it up between Diana and Sophie.

I think that is right, I think they get on just fine. I doubt Sophie and Camilla are particularly close, but they have a comfortable relationship. There is little to disagree on, their relative positions established by the order of the births of their respective husband.

It is clear that the Queen and Sophie meet regularly and have a good relationship that has been developing from at least 1999. Camilla, on the other hand, had a lot more baggage to deal with, but appears to have progressed well, and gets on with the Queen and Prince Philip. A lot of her interests are not dissimilar to those of HM (horses, dogs, gardening), and I am sure HM sees how much more relaxed Charles is when Camilla is around. So I guess there is peace in the House of Windsor, despite what Richard Kay and the Daily Mail might like to suggest.

I am also quite sure that Edward is fully aware of how Dukedom's work so why on Earth would he be "hoping Sophie is made a royal Duchess" before Charles is King to be equal to Camilla and Kate. Sophie and Edward both know that Sophie will never be equal to the other women, as their role in the Monarchy is hugely different from Sophie's, and much more important.

I think that is pure BS. The position was publicly set out when Edward and Sophie got married in 1999, and was probably agreed within the family some time before that. There are no surprises that Camilla and Catherine, as future Queens, would enjoy a greater title and precedence than Sophie.

 

[hernameispekka]

I think that is right, I think they get on just fine. I doubt Sophie and Camilla are particularly close, but they have a comfortable relationship. There is little to disagree on, their relative positions established by the order of the births of their respective husband.

It is clear that the Queen and Sophie meet regularly and have a good relationship that has been developing from at least 1999. Camilla, on the other hand, had a lot more baggage to deal with, but appears to have progressed well, and gets on with the Queen and Prince Philip. A lot of her interests are not dissimilar to those of HM (horses, dogs, gardening), and I am sure HM sees how much more relaxed Charles is when Camilla is around. So I guess there is peace in the House of Windsor, despite what Richard Kay and the Daily Mail might like to suggest.

I think this is very true. That it is peace. And the media is longing back to the time when copy after copy was almost written for them with stories. They are just throwing mud around hoping to see if something sticks....

 

[muriel]

I think this is very true. That it is peace. And the media is longing back to the time when copy after copy was almost written for them with stories. They are just throwing mud around hoping to see if something sticks....

I don't think it is the media at large, it is just Richard Kay.

 

[Lady Marmalade]

I just do not think he will make a great king. In my gut, Charles, while not wanting to see his parents pass on, cannot WAIT to get to that throne and place Camilla beside himself. I am sorry, I do not care what anyone says, it was very sad and to me VERY telling, the 2012 balcony appearance.

I think in many ways his selfish and spoiled view of himself has not changed much over the years.... I can see him jealous of the easy way William gets on with his in-laws. Let us remember, they ARE IN FACT HUMAN. More so now in this generation of royals. If I had lived in the house like William did and then saw the woman who in fact helped break apart my parents' marriage...I would look and yearn for a sense of normalcy at all costs. He is truly happy with the Catherine. You can see it. He seems to get along great with his in-laws. Good for him.

Given Charles's own words from his mouth, he feels everything we have read about his version of his childhood, etc, jealousy/envy about Diana's popularity. I am sure his staff since has established his own household do everything like we have read but wipe his backside for him.

Now, to appease the the ones who will attack me on here, he has done many, many, many great things for charities, the Prince's Trust, for architecture, the environment, etc...but I do not trust him an inch as king. How I truly in my heart wish the throne could go to William and Catherine. I will tell you one thing, you can tell, NO ONE TELLS WILLIAM WHAT TO DO. And good for him. I would be tired of all this if I were him and grew up exactly the way he did.

So go ahead and rip me apart.

 

[KittyAtlanta]

Once again, you've gone off topic...turned it from Charles to William.

 

[Lumutqueen]

I just do not think he will make a great king. In my gut, Charles, while not wanting to see his parents pass on, cannot WAIT to get to that throne and place Camilla beside himself. I am sorry, I do not care what anyone says, it was very sad and to me VERY telling, the 2012 balcony appearance.

The 2012 balcony appearance was at the request of The Queen.

Out of curiosity can you explain you're idea of "a great king?" Because Charles can do very little just like his mother, so I'm not sure what you think will drastically change when Charles inherits the throne. In regards to Camilla, the law states she will become Queen when Charles is King. Parliament would have to create a whole new law to strip specifically Camilla of her title, and then allow Catherine to use the title when she is Queen.

I think in many ways his selfish and spoiled view of himself has not changed much over the years.... I can see him jealous of the easy way William gets on with his in-laws.

Charles is 66, I think he has better things to do then be jealous of his son. Plus whose to say Charles didn't get on with his in-laws?
Could you tell me where this "selfish and spoiled" view comes from? Because if I'm honest my view of Charles is the complete opposite.

If I had lived in the house like William did and then saw the woman who in fact helped break apart my parents' marriage...I would look and yearn for a sense of normalcy at all costs. He is truly happy with the Catherine. You can see it. He seems to get along great with his in-laws. Good for him.

Oh purrlease! William respects his father and that is one thing that is incredibly evident. Charles' devotion to his two sons is also incredibly clear so this BS about watching Camilla come into their lives is utter nonsense.
It's great that William's found love, has a son and gets along with his in laws. What's your point for this thread exactly?

Given Charles's own words from his mouth, he feels everything we have read about his version of his childhood, etc, jealousy/envy about Diana's popularity. I am sure his staff since has established his own household do everything like we have read but wipe his backside for him.

Charles' own words? Please elaborate. You've been reading too much of the DailyFail by the looks of it, those comments are warped!

Now, to appease the the ones who will attack me on here, he has done many, many, many great things for charities, the Prince's Trust, for architecture, the environment, etc...but I do not trust him an inch as king. How I truly in my heart wish the throne could go to William and Catherine. I will tell you one thing, you can tell, NO ONE TELLS WILLIAM WHAT TO DO. And good for him. I would be tired of all this if I were him and grew up exactly the way he did.

Exactly why should you trust him? He cannot do a single thing to affect any part of anybodies life except his own. I've never met the man so I cannot trust a person I have never met. But he's never outwardly given anything that if I knew the man would make me not trust him.

Why should the throne go to William and Catherine? What exactly can they do better than Charles? Plus William would never ever insult his father in such a way even if there was an option for his father to be skipped.
What is evident is William's respect for his father, and he wouldn't do anything to hurt the man who raised him.

I'm not sure what relevance it has you shouting that nobody tells William what to do, when from his own mouth during the jubilee video he admitted several times that several people tell him what to do? At the end of the day whilst being 33 this year, he is still a son, a grandson, a husband and a prince I imagine a lot of people tell William what to do and if he has any sense he'd listen. That's the way it is for pretty much every single person everywhere.

William's parents divorced and then his mother sadly passed away. Whilst both events are tragic, they are by no means uncommon in everyday life. Whilst most if not all are not paraded in front of the media, this is a life William was born into and something he has to make the best of and appears to be doing so. You can clearly see from numerous pictures, interviews and videos see that Charles, William and Henry have an incredible familial bond and attempting to tarnish it with hearsay just ruins it.

 

[CyrilVladisla]

What is the reason for the 'sudden' interest in Charles?

Three new books, a TV program and no known anniversary except the Queen overtaking Victoria but that should have produced books about the Queen and not Charles.

Has there not always been an interest in Prince Charles?
Anthony Holden, the English writer, wrote:
Charles: Prince of Wales (1979)
Charles: A Biography (1988) Here in the United States, it was titled King Charles III.
​

 

[MARG]

I fear you are wasting your breath yelling at the wind in this case. Someone raised on a steady diet of Daily Fail and, totally unaware of how a monarchy works let alone the succession and a distinct determination not to learn is not easily reasoned with.

Quite frankly, the notion of William ascending the throne any time soon bothers me as he is ill prepared to step into his father's shoes let alone is grandmother's which must be a great worry to his father.

As to the mythical "slimming down" policy, I thought we had discovered that that was merely a throwaway comment from someone with more mouth than sense.

 

[Rudolph]

PA Royal Reporters @PARoyal · 25 mins 25 minutes ago
@ClarenceHouse also published the letter on its website Our view

PA Royal Reporters @PARoyal · 28 mins 28 minutes ago
Charles will inspired by #Queen and grandfather George VI if called to the throne, as well as drawing on his own experience, Nye said

PA Royal Reporters @PARoyal · 30 mins 30 minutes ago
In rare move by a royal aide, Nye said #PrinceCharles understands "the necessary and proper limitations" on role of a constitutional monarch

PA Royal Reporters @PARoyal · 31 mins 31 minutes ago
Senior courtier Nye hit back at "ill-informed speculation" about the Prince's attitude to the role of sovereign #PrinceCharles

PA Royal Reporters @PARoyal · 32 mins 32 minutes ago
The Prince of Wales’s top aide William Nye has come to Charles's defence by writing a letter to The Times in wake of @catherine_mayer book

 

[US Royal Watcher]

Thanks Rudolph. The letter really doesn't resolve the controversy. Although I have no doubt that Charles will at least tone down his public statements when he ascends the throne, we all know his personal beliefs on many issues.


Most of the Queen's personal views are not known so people of all sides can imagine that she is in agreement with their views. If there is a controversy over genetically modified foods, for example, people will know what King Charles is telling the PM during their weekly meetings.


The issue will be rare though. Charles is not overtly political and we really don't know his personal views on the most important issues, such as monetary policies, social spending, healthcare access, etc... In the end, the monarch only advises the Prime Minister. The Prime Minister and the parliament actually set policy.

 

[Skippyboo]

The topics of the weekly PM meeting aren't known so if a topic is brought up where we know what Charles's view is we aren't going to know it.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[US Royal Watcher]

The topics of the weekly PM meeting aren't known so if a topic is brought up where we know what Charles's view is we aren't going to know it.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

I understand your point. But if there is a major news story in the media, people will assume that the PM and Charles discussed it.

 

[Skippyboo]

And in the end the PM will do what he or she wants and the monarch has no power to stop it.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[US Royal Watcher]

And in the end the PM will do what he or she wants and the monarch has no power to stop it.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

I agree. The monarch's role is mainly ceremonial and Charles will do well. He has the gravitas to credibly represent the UK around the world.

 

[TLLK]

I am also quite sure that Edward is fully aware of how Dukedom's work so why on Earth would he be "hoping Sophie is made a royal Duchess" before Charles is King to be equal to Camilla and Kate. Sophie and Edward both know that Sophie will never be equal to the other women, as their role in the Monarchy is hugely different from Sophie's, and much more important.

As for Sophie and Camilla not getting on well - that may be true but they have at least got the decency and maturity to be friendly in public with one another and not let others see their apparent disliking toward one another. At Trooping the Colour Camilla has been seen chatting to young James like a normal aunt (she was seen chatting to him and pointing out the planes in 2013), and she is seen talking to Sophie at the Garter Service etc. They are adults who may not see eye to eye but in public they can act in a cordial way.

I have to agree Molly. Besides Edward/Sophie are at a very different stage in life than Charles/Camilla so I can understand why they might have very different interests as well.

 

[Rudolph]

Its one thing for a tabloid to criticise Charles but when The Times goes on the attack it almost necessitated a response from William Nye.

 

[Dman]

This quote pretty much sums up Charles's future position:

"After half a century in public life, few could be better placed than His Royal Highness to understand the necessary and proper limitations on the role of a constitutional monarch. Should he be called to the Throne, The Prince of Wales will be inspired by the examples of his mother and grandfather, while drawing also on his own experience of a lifetime of service. He will seek to continue his service to this country and the other Realms, to the Commonwealth and to the wider world."
Our view

 

[Princess of Durham]

However could Ms Mayer comment on what "the Queen" believes about how Charles will be King? I truly doubt that she sat down and had a personal conversation with HM. Methinks there is lots of speculation in that book. She is certainly getting enough free publicity.

 

[Dman]

However could Ms Mayer comment on what "the Queen" believes about how Charles will be King? I truly doubt that she sat down and had a personal conversation with HM. Methinks there is lots of speculation in that book. She is certainly getting enough free publicity.

I think it's based on what her sources said to her about Her Majesty's thoughts on Charles's future role. No one really know the Queen's real thoughts, unless she tells them.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

Prince Charles hits back over 'ill informed speculation' about his plans for kingship - Telegraph

The Prince of Wales has hit out at “ill-informed speculation” over his plans for kingship and insists he will know where to draw the line when it comes to expressing his views.

In a highly unusual move his most senior courtier, Sir William Nye, wrote to The Times newspaper, which has serialised a controversial biography of the Prince, to say he knows the “limitations” that will be placed on him “should he” become king by outliving the Queen.

The letter, which would undoubtedly have been signed off by the Prince before it was sent to the newspaper, shows the extent to which the heir to the throne has been stung by days of criticism arising from the book.

Miss Mayer, a journalist for Time magazine, wrote that the Queen had concerns about the direction in which her son would take the monarchy when she dies, and that Her Majesty feared Britain might not be ready for the “shock of the new”.

 

[USAPolitics]

Prince Charles hits back over 'ill informed speculation' about his plans for kingship - Telegraph

The royals are really hitting back these days. First Prince Andrew. Then just a few days ago, Princess Beatrice hit back on claims that she was workshy. Now this.

Good for them.

 

[EllieCat]

The royals are really hitting back these days. First Prince Andrew. Then just a few days ago, Princess Beatrice hit back on claims that she was workshy. Now this.

Good for them.

I agree. For too long they've had to sit back and just take whatever is thrown at them (via the tabloid press). So much of it is unfair, like that Daily Mail article of a couple of days ago, which made me quite depressed – and I didn't even dare read the public comments.

The truth as I see it: Prince Charles appears to be a happily married man, with a marriage style that works well for them both. He loves his children, daughter-in-law and grandchildren, and has an easy relationship with them. Perhaps not quite as close to his parents and siblings with various factors coming into play. He cares about his 'job', the future, people, and the earth, which is shown by what he does and his charities...

Not much there to write an article about...

So what happens? An article is written with mostly unnamed sources, hearsay, and innuendo, slanted towards getting a reaction out of people – after all, sensation is the thing! Good news just does not sell.

Reminds me of a favourite movie I saw some time ago, which goes along these lines (I've had to paraphrase, as I can't quite remember the wording).

Two men stand staring out to sea.
The older man is an experienced journalist, telling the new guy how it works.
Oldtimer to newbie: "What do you see?"
Newbie, staring out to sea. "Nothing."
Oldtimer: "Look more carefully."
Newbie, perplexed: "I don't see anything."
Oldtimer: "Look at that cloud over there."
Newbie: "So?"
Oldtimer: "Headline could read, 'Advancing Storm Bears Down upon Village!' "
Newbie, nonplussed: "But what if it doesn't happen?"
Oldtimer: " 'Village Spared from Approaching Disaster!' "

 

[cepe]

Much as I honour the Queen, I have to disagree with you. The Queen is 80, she comes from an era that is derided and long gone. Her views can hardly be considered modern, that's why she has so many advisors to her advisors. She is still doing a brilliant job but, Charles seems to be far more relevant to the people of Britain.

Charles is doing a briliiant job as Prince of Wales and every person I have spoken to, without fail, backs him. He has done and has tried to do more for the common man and woman than the entire government.

Most pubs you go in to and at most social gatherings, (if you mention the diaries), people call all journalists a host of unprintable names and then toast 'Good old Charlie'.

It is only the media who are trying to make out that Charles is interferring in politics, everyone else realises that like anyone, he is just offering his opinion on various situations and that is one of the jobs of any Prince of Wales!

A post after my own heart, even tho it harks back. It is no different now in the "local"

Charles has actively done more for this country than the Queen who (drilled by her Victorian g/mother and Edwardian mother) has never put forward an opinion on anything apart from Christianity.

The furore over the past week (I know it feels longer) has progressed the the debate on hos monarchy by ZILCH. We know now what we knew then. He understands the role and will procede as a constitutional monarch.

He might miss his opportunities to intercede and help but that is the price he is prepared to pay.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

Queen has total confidence in Prince Charles, say aides over writer's claim she 'fears' her son's reign - London - News - London Evening Standard

The Queen has complete confidence in Prince Charles’s ability to reign despite claims in an “unhelpful” biography that questions his suitability as king, sources have told the Standard.

They say reports that Her Majesty and palace aides “fear” Britain is not ready for Charles's radical new style of monarchy are “wide of the mark”.

The Prince’s lawyers are preparing to scrutinise claims made in Catherine Mayer’s new book Charles: The Heart Of A King, published this Thursday and serialised in The Times.

Ms Mayer — a journalist whose claims of close access to the Prince have been forthrightly rejected by his spokeswoman Kristina Kyriacou — writes that the heir to the throne intends to be a campaigning monarch.

She says the Queen, who will be 89 in April, and her courtiers feel that the UK is not ready for “shock of the new”. Ms Mayer, a writer for Time magazine, claims Prince Philip is one of his son’s harshest critics and thinks him guilty of “selfish behaviour”.

But a senior aide said: “This is simply not the case. Her Majesty and the Prince know the position. He has talked to the Queen about what sort of king he should be.

“These reports are wide of the mark. As Prince of Wales, His Royal Highness has served Her Majesty and the institution of the monarchy all his life.

“He is a serious-thinking man and he more than anyone knows what is expected of him as king.

“Of course when and if the time comes he will have his own style, but he understands and appreciates the importance of continuity and tradition more than anyone.

“A lot of the so called new revelations in this book are frankly rehashed. I feel I have read most of it before. In other areas it appears to be very creative.”

'Prince Charles has the loneliest existence I’ve ever witnessed': Catherine Mayer on her new biography of the future king - London Life - Life & Style - London Evening Standard

“Everybody knows that monarchy is a ridiculous idea — such a silly idea — and the only way it works is by people not questioning its existence and letting it run on as it has. They would not do anything that called into question the notion of the next in line inheriting.”

This says a lot about her, and about her book.

She is, she tells me, “a republican who’s reluctantly come to think that the monarchy’s quite useful — and, more to the point, that people talk about the unwinding process far too blithely. At a point when there is extraordinary weakness in the political classes… I don’t know maybe this is me getting old, but it also scares me — I used to like the idea of throwing a pack of cards up in the air and seeing how they fell. These days, if you look at the populist political movements that are emerging, you think: ‘I don’t know if I really want to do that’.”

She is still a republican, but she thinks the monarchy’s quite useful. Don't make me laugh.

 

[MARG]

She is still a republican, but she thinks the monarchy’s quite useful. Don't make me laugh.

Oh, I don't know, I don't think they'd pay her for a book about the US Presidency. But, the British Monarchy is money for jam!

The only thing that really interests me about Ms Mayer is how adroitly she conned Random House, a seriously reputable international publishing house, into (presumeably) paying an advance for her epic tome and then actually publishing it as a Biography instead of a Fictional Novel?

Here's a brief clip from their publicity blurb:

Gripping, at times astonishing, often laugh-out-loud, this is a royal biography unlike any other.

"Unlike any other", hmmmm, if it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck and, more to the point, out for a duck!

Cricket anyone?