Camilla and The Public


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
"the highest rank and dignity in the realm after her husband assigned to her by law"

So in Britain this is a Queen with the style of Majesty. The title of HRH The Princess Consort doesn't exist in common law. Even if Camilla were created a princess in her own right that doesn't make her Princess Consort. It makes her Princess Camilla. She will still be Queen

She can be created Princess-Consort, like was done earlier:

CHARLES THE THIRD by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland King and Defender of the Faith,
To all to whom these Presents shall come Greeting:

Whereas We are desirous that Our most dearly beloved consort, the honourable lady Camilla Rosemary Mountbatten-Windsor née Shand should have and enjoy a distinctive title indicating her rank and station in Our United Kingdom by which she may in all places and on all occasions be designated and known.

Now therefore in testimony of the great affection which We bear towards Our said consort and in order to manifest the same to all other persons whomsoever We do by these Presents grant unto the said lady Camilla Rosemary Mountbatten-Windsor née Shand the Title and Dignity of Princess Consort to be held and enjoyed by her during Our joint lives in all places and on all occasions as her proper Title and Dignity And We do further of Our Royal favor and affection grant unto her, Our said Royal Consort, that by the said title of Princess Consort she shall have and enjoy the Rank, Place, Pre-eminence and Precedence directly after Us.

In Witness &c Witness &c

:flowers:
 
Well, if that happens, I don't want any commoner wife of any future king to be queen. Seems only fair, doesn't it?
 
What I don't like is the seemingly cavalier attitude towards Camilla being Queen. When William decides to spend Christmas with the Middletons people pull their hair out as if the future of the monarchy depends on him being at Sandringham and yet here we have C&C thumbing their noses at hundreds of years of tradition and common law because of some PR stunt. I just don't get it

Ah HA!!!! The root emerges...

It's not about Charles and Camilla's possible title at all. It's about William and Catherine.
 
Duc_et_Pair - Under Common Law every wife of a British King has been a Queen. No exceptions in history.

The Constitution doesn't give Charles a choice in the matter
 
I am sure if George IV had had the ability to deny the title of Queen Consort to his wife he would have done so. He was able to lock her out of Westminster Abbey on his coronation day but he couldn't do anything to deny her the title of Queen and so she was from his accession until her death - HM The Queen.

If a simple set of LPs would have changed that he would have done so but he knew that it wasn't possible to deny her the title. He could deny her the privileges etc but not the title.

That was because then, as now, every wife in the UK has the right to take any and all of her husband's titles and styles in the female form. The UK doesn't recognise morganatic marriages and to deny Camilla the title of Queen - or even to create for her a title other than Queen that isn't also one of Charles' - would be to say that the marriage is morganatic.
 
Prince Philip is merely an HRH and not an HM, and he does not curtsy to other monarchs or consorts, so I doubt if Camilla (should she be Princess Consort) will.


Philip mightn't 'curtsy' to the other monarchs and consorts but he most definitely does 'bow' to them as seen as recently as the events in London overnight where he clearly bowed to King Philip of the Belgians at the opening of the new memorial to WWI.

He has regularly been seen to bow to foreign monarchs and their spouses and when the consort is female he usually bows while also kissing their hand.
 
The monarchy is pretty fluïd these days: the ban on marrying Catholics has been lifted, the succession becomes gender neutral, royals can remarry with a divorcee, commoners are very welcome, etc. The monarchy anno 2014 is incomparable with the times of Victoria or George V...

;-)

With other words: anything is possible
 
I really do not know how many permutations of words reiterating the SAME FACTS need to be made by Iluvbertie, Rudolph, myself and others before it is accepted Camilla will legally be Queen !
 
“It is intended that The Duchess will be known as HRH The Princess Consort when The Prince of Wales accedes to The Throne.”

Then why was this statement released by Clarence House (and presumably authorized by the PoW)? They either don't know what they are talking about, or else it was a deliberate falsehood in order to keep the common folk calm.
 
From 2007. Constitutional Affairs minister Christopher Leslie says the marriage is not morganatic

Camilla WILL be Queen | UK | News | Daily Express
Government. Constitutional Affairs minister Christopher Leslie said the marriage was not “morganatic”, implying the monarch’s titles could be passed on to the wife and any children from the union.

Legal sources said at the time that only an Act of Parliament could be used to prevent Camilla becoming Queen if she was married to Charles when he became King.

The precedent was set during the abdication crisis of 1936 when Edward VIII wanted to marry his divorced, American lover Wallis Simpson. Advised that the sovereign’s wife would become Queen, that only new laws could change the situation and that the public would not accept it, he chose to quit the throne.
 
Intentions can change. I intend to lose 5 lbs of weigh -doesn't mean it will happen. A 1000 years of common law says a wife takes the rank of a husband. There is no written constitution in the UK. Charles can add titles but parliament is the only power to remove them.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
“It is intended that The Duchess will be known as HRH The Princess Consort when The Prince of Wales accedes to The Throne.”

Then why was this statement released by Clarence House (and presumably authorized by the PoW)? They either don't know what they are talking about, or else it was a deliberate falsehood in order to keep the common folk calm.
Exactly so.
 
“It is intended that The Duchess will be known as HRH The Princess Consort when The Prince of Wales accedes to The Throne.”

Then why was this statement released by Clarence House (and presumably authorized by the PoW)? They either don't know what they are talking about, or else it was a deliberate falsehood in order to keep the common folk calm.

I will never understand why this statement was made. The royal family - and Charles in particular - have ridden many storms, which have always blown over. The common folk have put up with a lot over the years, but have always rallied in the end and much has been forgiven and/or forgotten. In any event, the common folk were hardly in uproar when the marriage was announced, there was no revolution, many people apart from the 1000 or so folk in polls probably were not bothered one way or the other.
Surely any controversy that did exist back in 2005 was more to do with the marriage itself and not some event to happen 20 years away?
Even if they had said nothing and just mentioned the Cornwall title, there would have been no more uproar, no more debate than this princess consort business would create.
 
Last edited:
Jacknch (sp?):
Well, as I remember it, the "only Diana will do" contingent was still very strong when POW and Camilla married. Not everyone in the COE was sanguine about the divorced lady issue. The POW's popularity was not at an all time high. There was a real sense of unease about the marriage. Hope-fullness but still, unease. I always thought the statement was intended to placate the opposition and I NEVER thought Camilla cared. She's just a trooper and an old time style friend of the royals. And I always thought this was a consensus decision with the COE, Queen, POW and staff all weighing in on what would work best.
That and (and this is my opinion) no one foresaw what marrying Camilla would do for the POW's attitude toward life in general over 5, 10 years and beyond.
Clearly, when you look at those jubilant pictures of him this week in Columbia and Mexico - this is a man transformed. How can anyone look at these pictures and still think he needs to do reparations for the mess created by the life and death of his first wife.
And by that, I am not saying that Diana was that a mess - rather that the handling of their obvious unease with one another, the divorce and her death had messy PR elements.
You have to critique the decision over what Cams is called in light of the time that the decision was made. To make the decision today - I think it would be quite different.
Given the happiness and ease she has helped the future monarch find, I hope the Duchess, upon Charles' elevation the the Throne, is called whatever she wants to be called. But again, I don't think that matters much to her. She is clearly happy in her role of supporting Charles and making a difference with her patronages. IMHO.
 
:previous: I think everyone has an agenda and, with the thoroughly undeserved avalanche of hate the BRF endured with the death of Diana, I think it left them vulnerable to poor advice.

Perhaps it is time to revisit the website with a new eye.
 
Prince Charles is not computer savvy and a decade ago he was less tech savvy.

It might be a simple case of someone working on his website wrote Princess Consort because the idea had been tossed around privately prior to the engagement of C&C as title for Camilla rather than Princess of Wales before they settled on Duchess of Cornwall.

The 'Princess Consort' could be nothing more than a 'typo' on the POW website by a staff writer.

Prince Charles became aware of the 'error' but as of yet has not been able to rectify the error without a small group of people becoming ballistic.
 
Prince Charles is not computer savvy and a decade ago he was less tech savvy.

It might be a simple case of someone working on his website wrote Princess Consort because the idea had been tossed around privately prior to the engagement of C&C as title for Camilla rather than Princess of Wales before they settled on Duchess of Cornwall.

The 'Princess Consort' could be nothing more than a 'typo' on the POW website by a staff writer.

Prince Charles became aware of the 'error' but as of yet has not been able to rectify the error without a small group of people becoming ballistic.

An interesting suggestion, but what kind of a King will he make if he has allowed a staff error to smoulder for years, and if he is afraid to be straightforward about his real intentions?

It makes him look weak, if this is the explanation. Or, if the "it is intended" statement was never really intended, it makes him look like a liar. Did he just say that to suit his mother, thinking he would do what he wanted to when he is King?

I like Camilla, and I'm happy Charles 'made an honest woman' of her by marrying her (even though I think what happened to the Wales' marriage was unforgivable). It's obviously made him very happy.

But if he begins his reign (in some far off time!) by going back on his word, then he will be thought of as a man whose word is not his bond. That would be far worse for the future of the Monarchy than any quibbling about what Camilla's title could be.

He needs to 'man up' in advance and say exactly what he intends. Of course, that's what the original 'it is intended' statement was meant to be.
There is no easy out for him in this situation.

IMO
 
Prince Charles is not computer savvy and a decade ago he was less tech savvy.

It might be a simple case of someone working on his website wrote Princess Consort because the idea had been tossed around privately prior to the engagement of C&C as title for Camilla rather than Princess of Wales before they settled on Duchess of Cornwall.

The 'Princess Consort' could be nothing more than a 'typo' on the POW website by a staff writer.

Prince Charles became aware of the 'error' but as of yet has not been able to rectify the error without a small group of people becoming ballistic.

I am not arguing one way or another. But a typo with princess and queen is impossible and silly. It was not a typo.
 
Prince Charles is not computer savvy and a decade ago he was less tech savvy.

It might be a simple case of someone working on his website wrote Princess Consort because the idea had been tossed around privately prior to the engagement of C&C as title for Camilla rather than Princess of Wales before they settled on Duchess of Cornwall.

The 'Princess Consort' could be nothing more than a 'typo' on the POW website by a staff writer.

Prince Charles became aware of the 'error' but as of yet has not been able to rectify the error without a small group of people becoming ballistic.

Charles may not be savvy, but he has an army of attendants who are. There were also an army of advisors to package/market the marriage in order to make it possible for Charles to marry Camilla and still stay in the succession.
 
Camilla is not a Roman Catholic so the Act of Settlement is not in play and the Queen gave approval for the wedding so the Royal Marriage Act was taken care of. Charles wasn't in danger of losing his place in the succession.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
"Upon the marriage of Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles, the Queen intends to make Camilla a princess in her own right. It is intended she will be know as Princess Camilla The Princess Consort."

When it was decided she would known as Duchess of Cornwall an editing of the above statement could have resulted in the error.
 
Last edited:
To be honest, I don't think Camilla is the type to insist on anything like a title. Should it be deemed that she is to be called Queen Consort, that's what she'll go as. Should it be Princess Consort that would be fine with her too. Camilla just doesn't go about making waves anywhere. At the time all of this would be going on, it would be at the time of HM's passing and she would know that rocking the boat would only add more stress and troubles for Charles.

I see it the same way. :flowers:

Whatever jiggery-pokery (gamesmanship) was a-foot with the Princess Consort business, we can likely be assured that the tabloids will make hay of it all when the time comes, however it falls out. :sad:
 
Prince Charles is not computer savvy and a decade ago he was less tech savvy.

It might be a simple case of someone working on his website wrote Princess Consort because the idea had been tossed around privately prior to the engagement of C&C as title for Camilla rather than Princess of Wales before they settled on Duchess of Cornwall.

The 'Princess Consort' could be nothing more than a 'typo' on the POW website by a staff writer.

Prince Charles became aware of the 'error' but as of yet has not been able to rectify the error without a small group of people becoming ballistic.
[my bolding]

Does the Clarence House hire illiterate and stupid people? Is it impossible to hire a professional? Courtiers and royal advisers in Europe are clumsy. Hopefully the Clarence House will come up with a more elegant resolution of the "Princess Consort" situation. At the same time, Prince Charles should ascend the throne first.
 
Last edited:
Clarence House said it was intended that the Duchess of Cornwall would be Princess Consort, and I believe intended is the key-word of this issue.

If the Queen lives as much as the Queen Mother, by the time the Prince of Wales becomes King (13 years from now, 22 years after his second marriage), Buckingham Palace can simply say that, although it was intended, back in 2005, that the Duchess of Cornwall would be Princess Consort, it was decided that the wife of the King must always be Queen.

"Princess Consort" was never a given, just an intention. And intentions can change.
 
Last edited:
:previous: That's my reading of the situation as well. It's hard to believe but they have been married nine and a half years. Wherever did all that time go.

As to questions of right or wrong, this title or that? L.P. Hartley's almost prescient quote, "The past is a foreign country; they do things differently there", hits the nail squarely on the head.
 
Intended! Yes, Skippyboo picked up on that yesterday, but it has only just clicked that the use of this word gives a hint of ambiguity to the statement. It is certainly different than saying "...she WILL be princess consort..." but not quite as good as saying nothing at all!
 
....He needs to 'man up' in advance and say exactly what he intends. Of course, that's what the original 'it is intended' statement was meant to be.
There is no easy out for him in this situation.

IMO

When the time comes, Charles won't have to "man up" to anything. Camilla will be crowned queen and all will be well.
 
When the time comes, Charles won't have to "man up" to anything. Camilla will be crowned queen and all will be well.


I think if that's what Charles is hoping to do (and I hope it is) then he would be smart to have the Princess Consort stuff removed from the Royal and PoW websites. Let the idea fade away, especially as (according to the June yougov survey, if not the DM) the idea is becoming more popular.
 
I think if that's what Charles is hoping to do (and I hope it is) then he would be smart to have the Princess Consort stuff removed from the Royal and PoW websites. Let the idea fade away, especially as (according to the June yougov survey, if not the DM) the idea is becoming more popular.

I think Prince Charles might be wise to do that, because he is certainly not going to be popular if it people believe he lied when he said that Camilla would be Princess Consort.
 
Back
Top Bottom