Camilla and The Public

[DukeofMontpelier]

As a Diana fan it may surprise people I am a Camilla fan as well. I think the only two people who matter in this is William and Harry and I belive they get along well. I think she should be Charles' s Queen when the day comes.

 

[Curryong]

There are all chances that Camilla will reach the same level of affection and popularity, as the Nation's granny. We have no idea. In the Netherlands, Belgium, Spain and in the Vatican there are new monarchs and new consorts. It is surprising how quick the old guard seems "forgotten": Beatrix, Albert II and Paola, Juan Carlos and Sofía, Benedictus XVI... all still around, all part of history.

It already feels "natural" to see the new monarchs and their consorts. All of them enjoy popularity, bigger than in their days as heirs. It is impossible to tell if the British will like King Charles and Queen Camilla. I think there is every chance that they will like them indeed.

No one of us has a crystal ball but I think when the Nation rallies around the King whom leads the mourning and then so many accents will change at the Court, the King and Queen are able to become dear to the Britons. Who knows. Since Victoria all Kings and Queens enjoyed popularity. Their Consorts likewise. Even Edward VIII enjoyed huge popularity until the abdication. We will see.

Felipe of Spain, Phillipe of Belgium, willem-Alexander etc did not come to the thrones of their respective countries in their seventies, which is what Charles may well be when he succeeds the Queen, a monarch who has been on the throne longer than most of her subjects have been alive.

None of them have been divorced, let alone divorced under circumstances in which they were mired in controversy played out in the media. Nor do they have a second wife who more than played a part in the ending of that marriage.

Charles and Camilla don't enjoy great popularity now. Are people's memories of the past going to be wiped in another four or five years or so when Charles and Camilla might become King and Queen Consort? They may but then again they may not and that's a possibility too, isn't it?

 

[wyevale]

I agree with Osipi that a more selfless attitude than that of Camilla would be hard to find..
A woman [a private family oriented Countrywoman at that] thrust into the deeply unsympathetic GLARE of public life, by marriage to the man she loves, [at a age most others are retiring] she has done more than well.

Unrelenting in her support for her husband [with all that that entails], she has cheerfully accepted the life that comes with him.
I think she cares not a fig what Title she holds or may hold, just as long as she can 'do right by him', and 'the Firm'.

But I think Charles DOES care, and [imo rightly] expects his wife to enjoy the recognition she deserves, and just as her role in his life was 'not negotiable', so her rank and title as his Queen Consort will prove to be equally 'not negotiable' when the time comes for him to reign.

 

[Osipi]

expects his wife to enjoy the recognition she deserves, and just as her role in his life was 'not negotiable', so her rank and title as his Queen Consort will prove to be equally 'not negotiable' when the time comes for him to reign.

I think you may have hit it right on the nose here. Most likely, the only person on this planet that could possibly change his mind if he's got the "non-negotiable" in his head about Camilla being Queen Consort would be Camilla herself.

 

[wyevale]

And as a proven supportive wife, I think she will 'step up to the plate' when he asks it of her..

He more than anyone knows what she has endured to take her place beside him , [as his wife] just as she knows what battles he has fought to get her there.

What man wants his wife to be branded 'second best'? To permit such a thing would reflect on him, as much as her.

 

[Osipi]

I totally agree with you here and if Charles deems that Camilla should be his Queen Consort and the way it does happen that as soon as he does become King, Camilla becomes Queen, that'll be the way it is. Public opinion in this situation really does not matter one iota. The last thing Camilla will want to do is start a furor with someone she loves when he has just lost his mother.

I was just stating that perhaps Camilla would be the only person on the planet that could talk him out of it if she felt really strongly about not being Queen Consort but being the Camilla she is, she'd adapt and put on her "Queen Hat" if that's what Charles really wanted and needed.

 

[wyevale]

Certainly I agree that ONLY she could change his view, not William.not Harry,not the PM,certainly not the Courtiers...or 'men in grey suits'.

 

[Roslyn]

Osipi and wyevale, I agree that Camilla is the only person who could change Charles' mind about her being known as Queen Consort, but, Osipi, you make a good point about her caring enough about him that she is unlikely to want to burden him with such a discussion at the time he is grieving the loss of his mother. So, for that reason, she might agree if it hasn't been settled between them by then. But I suspect they have already discussed it at length and have settled on what is to happen.

 

[MARG]

Well as of this moment and the foreseeable future, Camilla will become Queen when Charles becomes King. There are no acts of parliament in train to change this and there are no particular MP's (except Republicans) agitating for change. Any change would need to be well under way so, short of Camilla actually being Queen but being "styled" Princess Consort, she will be Queen.

On a strictly political level, I can see that such an arrangement would bring the BRF and the monarchy itself into disrepute, showing a laughable pettiness and meanness of spirit that presents the United Kingdom as ridiculous and mired in the past at a time when they want to show the world that the United Kingdom, both monarchy and government, is a force to be reckoned with, post-Brexit.

 

[Roslyn]

On the other hand, it could also be seen as a move to bring the British Royal Family into the 21st century. Coverture has not been part of the common law - and it was only ever common law, never statute law, so no Act of Parliament is needed to change it - and it is now only tradition that sees married women being known according to their husband's styles and titles. Yes, the rules have always been a little different for the peerage and Royals but nothing that cannot be managed by a determined Charles. It could be spun as a progressive action on his part.

 

[MARG]

It doesn't matter which way you slice or dice it if Camilla is not Queen everyone will know why and all the spinning in the world will not make a difference as to how it is perceived.

There is no precedent for her to not be Queen and the public, regardless of their personal opinions, will not like the way the news of the world spins it and the UK itself because it will be true.

 

[Roslyn]

Time to set a new precedent, perhaps? Nothing changes if someone doesn't take a step forward.

 

[Skippyboo]

How is giving Camilla or using a lesser title a step forward? Do you want woman not to use their husband's titles so it's HM King Charles III and Ms Camilla Shand and HRH The Prince of Wales and Ms. Catherine Middleton? Or do you want the removal of the inherited titles and the monarchy?

Ever other wife of a King has been a Queen, but because some people don't like you, you must not use the title. We are going to punish only you not your husband who is guilty of the same crimes that we are judging you by. Wow, to me that isn't a step forward for women.



Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[SLV]

While I don't think it is nesseccary, in the Netherlands they have done something like that.
After Willem-Alexander became king, it was announced that Maxima would hold the title of Princess of the Netherlands, like the male consorts before here were named. But it was also noted that everyone was free to refer to her as Queen. And everyone does, though technically she is not a queen, only a princess.

 

[Mbruno]

While I don't think it is nesseccary, in the Netherlands they have done something like that.
After Willem-Alexander became king, it was announced that Maxima would hold the title of Princess of the Netherlands, like the male consorts before here were named. But it was also noted that everyone was free to refer to her as Queen. And everyone does, though technically she is not a queen, only a princess.

As I understand it, Maxima already had the title of Princess of the Netherlands (and Princess of Orange-Nassau ?), which she will hold by law as long as she is a member of the Royal House. The novelty was that, after W-A's accession, she was given a courtesy title of "Queen" with the style "Her Majesty", even though she is not "Queen Maxima of the Netherlands" (like some of her counterparts are "Queen xxx of their respective countries"), but only Queen Maxima, Princess of the Netherlands, Princess of Orange-Nassau.

 

[wyevale]

As stated above EVERY wife of a King has been Queen in our History, and to change that [over an incredibly petty issue applicable to ONE marriage] would set an undesirable precedent IMO.
In our law a wife 'takes the style and rank of her husband/, and I cannot detect any groundswell of opinion desirous of changing that long established position.

 

[Rudolph]

Numbers ticking up

When the couple married in 2005 only 7% surveyed said that Camilla should become Queen when her husband accedes to the throne.

Today that figure stands at 39%.

But the Mirror poll of 2,000 people found that 40% still do not want her to be called Queen.

Read more: Queen Camilla? Survey finds more people are warming to the idea - ITV News

 

[Bamboleio]

61 % votes for Diana as the Queen? It looks strange.

 

[Al_bina]

Numbers ticking up

When the couple married in 2005 only 7% surveyed said that Camilla should become Queen when her husband accedes to the throne.

Today that figure stands at 39%.

But the Mirror poll of 2,000 people found that 40% still do not want her to be called Queen.

Read more: Queen Camilla? Survey finds more people are warming to the idea - ITV News

Like frogs, the subjects are slowly boiled to accept Camilla,The Duchess of Cornwall, as a Queen.

 

[Osipi]

The fact is that when Charles becomes King, Camilla instantly becomes Queen. The public can have an opinion on it but at the end of the day, their opinion really doesn't matter. What does matter is that the more the people get to know her, the more they realize that she's a warm hearted, down to earth person that makes Charles very happy.

Camilla hasn't put a foot wrong since joining the BRF in 2005 and is a true asset to the "Firm".

 

[Hendrik-Jan77]

The fact is that when Charles becomes King, Camilla instantly becomes Queen. The public can have an opinion on it but at the end of the day, their opinion really doesn't matter. What does matter is that the more the people get to know her, the more they realize that she's a warm hearted, down to earth person that makes Charles very happy.



Camilla hasn't put a foot wrong since joining the BRF in 2005 and is a true asset to the "Firm".

Yes, you are right that Camilla automatically becomes Queen when Charles becomes King. But would it not be a possibility that, although she is Queen, she will called Princess Consort? This is already the case with her title Princess of Wales. Although she technically is Princess of Wales, she is called Duchess of Cornwall.

 

[Osipi]

Yes, you are right that Camilla automatically becomes Queen when Charles becomes King. But would it not be a possibility that, although she is Queen, she will called Princess Consort? This is already the case with her title Princess of Wales. Although she technically is Princess of Wales, she is called Duchess of Cornwall.

There is an entire thread devoted to discussing this issue (somewhere in the recesses of the archives). One stickler would be that when Camilla chose to be styled as the Duchess of Cornwall, she had that option because Charles is the Duke of Cornwall. With Charles being King, there is no title that Charles would have that Camilla could use the feminine version of "Princess". The feminine version of Charles' "king" would be "queen".

 

[Mbruno]

The fact is that when Charles becomes King, Camilla instantly becomes Queen. The public can have an opinion on it but at the end of the day, their opinion really doesn't matter. What does matter is that the more the people get to know her, the more they realize that she's a warm hearted, down to earth person that makes Charles very happy.

Camilla hasn't put a foot wrong since joining the BRF in 2005 and is a true asset to the "Firm".

This topic has been discussed over and over again. Even if she "automatically becomes queen", it doesn't mean that the Court will call her "queen", just as Louise and James are not referred to as princess/prince, even though legally they are.

I doubt Charles will go back on the promise he himself made of making Camilla only "the Princess Consort" when 40 % of the public still don't want her to be called queen and 20 %, I suppose, don't know.

 

[Winnie]

Camilla will be Queen. It will be her proper title. The media can call her what ever they want, she will still be Queen. The media still calls Catherine "Kate Middelton" for heaven sake, which is a disgrace. In my mind, it is just the media's way of trying to belittle people when they purposely don't correctly give proper titles when mentioning a person.

 

[Iluvbertie]

There is a difference between what the public and media calls someone and the official name/title of a person however.

Sure people still call Kate - Kate Middleton (which technically is still a possible legal name as it was her birth/maiden name) - but officially she is called HRH The Duchess of Cambridge.

With Camilla being called Queen/Princess Consort we are talking about the official title she will hold.

Mr Blair made it clear in 2005, when asked, that she would be Queen and that legislation would be needed to remove that title. The reason being that to call her anything less than Queen would be to declare the marriage morganatic and that opens an entire new set of problems.

The situation with Camilla using Duchess of Cornwall isn't the same as Louise and James not using Prince or Princess as the Queen's Will was made known that they wouldn't be a Prince or Princess (I wrote to BP and they confirmed that they are not and never will be a Prince or Princess). I assume because at some time in the future the intention is to issue LPs to declare that only the children of the heir apparent will be HRHs and with the current LPs already saying Charlotte's children won't be HRH there is a ready made time to do that assuming Harry does what I expect him to do and follow Edward's precedent and have his children styled as the children of a Duke (assuming he gains such a peerage on his marriage and assuming he has children anyway).

 

[Al_bina]

... [snipped]I doubt Charles will go back on the promise he himself made of making Camilla only "the Princess Consort" when 40 % of the public still don't want her to be called queen and 20 %, I suppose, don't know.

Promises of the British and Anglo-Saxon elites mean nothing. They tend to easily go back on their promises citing obscure legalities. I do not expect Prince Charles to be an exception to this tradition.

 

[Osipi]

Promises of the British and Anglo-Saxon elites mean nothing. They tend to easily go back on their promises citing obscure legalities. I do not expect Prince Charles to be an exception to this tradition.

One thing you may not be aware of is that when it comes to certain things that affect the monarchy, it isn't solely up to Charles and the "obscure" legalities you claim they tend to cite but have to not only adhere to previous letters patent that have been issued declaring how things should be but also, under a constitutional monarchy, pass muster with the government of the day.

The British monarchy is not run by autocrats as you seem to imply.

 

[Denville]

Promises of the British and Anglo-Saxon elites mean nothing. They tend to easily go back on their promises citing obscure legalities. I do not expect Prince Charles to be an exception to this tradition.

that's a nice big generaliseation.

 

[Al_bina]

One thing you may not be aware of is that when it comes to certain things that affect the monarchy, it isn't solely up to Charles and the "obscure" legalities you claim they tend to cite but have to not only adhere to previous letters patent that have been issued declaring how things should be but also, under a constitutional monarchy, pass muster with the government of the day.

The British monarchy is not run by autocrats as you seem to imply.

One can believe in what he/she pleases. If the Clarence House decides to go back on the promise in question, necessary documents will "pass muster with the government of the day".

The British monarchy, like USA, is run by local financiers and industrialists that fund democracy.

 

[Osipi]

Actually there never was a promise. At the time of the marriage it was stated that "it is the intention... " about the Princess Consort title.

Personally, I think Camilla will be Queen. Both Charles and Camilla have been asked about that and they've never given any kind of answer except that "we'll have to see". Camilla has been warmly accepted into the BRF, has supported her husband and the "Firm" brilliantly and has been awarded Grand Dame Cross of the Royal Victorian Order which is recognition for personal service to the Queen. She also has recently has been appointed by HM to the Privy Council. Interesting fact is that Camilla is the first British princess by marriage to be appointed to that position.

She has all the earmarks of a Queen Consort in my book.