The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #161  
Old 09-30-2007, 06:40 PM
CasiraghiTrio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Burbank, United States
Posts: 6,402
Tom & Laura are close to Prince Charles, but Tom said recently that he doesn't interact much with the other royals, least of all The Queen, whom he described as being, well, to put it as he did, "she is The Queen."
I think he meant that while he and Laura can never be said to be on intimate terms with The Queen, they are nevertheless awed by "the Presence" (my words) and they respect her of course. Tom & Laura have been to Birkhall many times as guests of their stepfather. About Sandringham, I don't know.
I imagine that Tom & Laura know Princess Anne fairly well because she is such a close friend of their father since the 1970s.
__________________

__________________
Chewsteraghi on Tumblr. Schmichaelira on Twitter. Tumblr aka obsessivechewsteraghidisorder. Be warned: I'm weird.
  #162  
Old 09-30-2007, 08:39 PM
scooter's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: katonah, United States
Posts: 2,330
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamondBrg View Post
I would be very interested in finding out how the rest of the Royal Family feels about it's newest member. I think the Queen was quite kind in giving Camilla an engagement ring that was four times more valuable than the one Diana chose and perhaps there are several reasons for that? I have never heard how the siblings feel about Camilla or Prince Philip? Are Camilla's children from her first marriage included in any of the Royal Family gatherings? I was thinking specifically about their Summer holiday at Balmoral and then at Christmas?
I was under the impression that Camilla's engagement ring belonged to QEQM, and was left to PoW at her death, no?
__________________

__________________
  #163  
Old 09-30-2007, 09:01 PM
CasiraghiTrio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Burbank, United States
Posts: 6,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooter View Post
I was under the impression that Camilla's engagement ring belonged to QEQM, and was left to PoW at her death, no?
Oh yeah, I think you are right, scooter. It's discussed in Camilla's jewels thread: see here, in particular post 13, and 14.
__________________
Chewsteraghi on Tumblr. Schmichaelira on Twitter. Tumblr aka obsessivechewsteraghidisorder. Be warned: I'm weird.
  #164  
Old 09-30-2007, 09:17 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 802
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooter View Post
I was under the impression that Camilla's engagement ring belonged to QEQM, and was left to PoW at her death, no?

Camilla's engagement ring had belonged to the Queen Mother Queen Elizabeth, this was announced at Charles and Camilla's engagement. But to avoid paying huge inheritance taxes, the Queen inherited all her mother's jewellery. ( From monarch to monarch there's no inheritance tax) Charles didn't inherit anything from his grandmother ( the Castle of Mey he received as a gift, long before she died. There's a 7 year rule in the UK if something is gifted 7 or more years from when the owner dies then there's no inheritance tax to be paid) So it could be that Charles received some of his grandmother's jewellery as gifts long before she died. Or more likely all the jewellery was inherited by the Queen and she passed on pieces to Charles, including the ring that is now Camilla's engagement ring.
__________________
  #165  
Old 09-30-2007, 09:18 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dallas Fort Worth, United States
Posts: 211
I could easily be wrong, I thought I read somewhere that HM gave Camilla that ring? I will certainly defer to others who are more knowledgeable about the situation.
__________________
  #166  
Old 10-01-2007, 05:06 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by CasiraghiTrio View Post
But maybe after they had tom and Laura, their marriage hit a bump and she found a willing companion in Charles. He adored her and treated her like a queen and it must have felt very nice to be the object of that kind of adoration again.
Perhaps they were just very good friends and over the years it grew into the strong and steady love we see now.

Most young men back in the 70's were not that interested in marriage at 23, especially if young attractive women were throwing themselves at them. Women on the other hand seemed to believe they were 'old maids' if they were not married by the time they were 23+.
__________________
  #167  
Old 10-01-2007, 12:26 PM
CasiraghiTrio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Burbank, United States
Posts: 6,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamondBrg View Post
I could easily be wrong, I thought I read somewhere that HM gave Camilla that ring? I will certainly defer to others who are more knowledgeable about the situation.
It can easily be misconveyed, as a report can say something like "from Her Majesty's collection" and you can take this to mean that The Queen "gave" the ring to Camilla. But of course, closer inspection would reveal that "Her Majesty" referred to "HM Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother". But see on the above link to Camilla's jewels. You will learn more for the jewelry experts. They know their jewelry, believe me, and I can hardly tell the difference between a diamond and a kunzite.
__________________
Chewsteraghi on Tumblr. Schmichaelira on Twitter. Tumblr aka obsessivechewsteraghidisorder. Be warned: I'm weird.
  #168  
Old 10-01-2007, 03:43 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Merseyside, United Kingdom
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth View Post
According to her post, it was because of reports that Charles discovered about the engagement when reading The Times. Maybe BellaFay will be able to tell us where she found that information, but it does sound as though she's based her statement on something concrete.
According to Jonathan Dimbleby Prince Charles "had just learned that" (p.191) Camilla had got engaged to APB whilst he was on shore leave in Antigua. Dimbleby does not footnote any letter for the Prince's discovery. The story about reading it in the Times came I think from an interview with either Dimbleby or Nigel Dempster at the time that Dimbleby's book was published. Certainly Charles discovered about the engagement sometime between 22/23 April, when his Naval Journal makes no mention of it and the 27 April when he writes a letter quoted by Dimbleby in which he comments that the most "blissful, peaceful and mutually happy relationship" with Camilla had only lasted 6 months and that he has "no-one" to go back to. As according to the Times Court Circular Charles left England on his naval tour on 1st December 1972 this suggests that his relationship with Camilla started in May/June 1972 when he was on a course at the Navy's Communications School, HMS Mercury in Petersfield, Hampshire only 5 miles from Camilla's grandmother's house, where according to Christopher Wilson they used to meet, and not far from Midhurst pologround in Sussex.

According to an entry in Woodrow Wyatt's final diary (published 1998?) there is even a suggestion that Camilla was not expecting APB's proposal. Wyatt (a horseracing friend of the Queen Mother's) was told by a male member of the Bowes-Lyon family that the announcement of Camilla's engagement in the Times was made without her foreknowledge. I know this sounds bizarre, but I can't see why Wyatt would have made it up. As for the 'understanding' between Camilla and APB being based on her supposedly having an affair with the Prince from the beginning of her marriage, this would seem unlikely as Charles did not leave the Navy until the autumn of 1976 and it's very difficult to keep up a physical relationship if one party is off the coast of Japan and the other is in mid Gloucestershire.

As for Mountbatten's desire to marry Charles to his grandaughter that was a much later project. In 1972/3 she was only about 16 I think.
__________________
  #169  
Old 10-01-2007, 09:00 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by BellaFay View Post
According to an entry in Woodrow Wyatt's final diary (published 1998?) there is even a suggestion that Camilla was not expecting APB's proposal. Wyatt (a horseracing friend of the Queen Mother's) was told by a male member of the Bowes-Lyon family that the announcement of Camilla's engagement in the Times was made without her foreknowledge. I know this sounds bizarre, but I can't see why Wyatt would have made it up. As for the 'understanding' between Camilla and APB being based on her supposedly having an affair with the Prince from the beginning of her marriage, this would seem unlikely as Charles did not leave the Navy until the autumn of 1976 and it's very difficult to keep up a physical relationship if one party is off the coast of Japan and the other is in mid Gloucestershire.
thanks for listing the original source about "Camilla's bizarre engagment news on the Times" from Tina Brown's book about Diana: she wrote that Andrew PB told John Bowes-Lyon that Camilla's parents published the announcement and Johh Bowes-Lyon observed that Andrew PB was not that interested in marrying Camilla.I think this was an act out of love by Camilla's parents to force Andrew to commit himself to Camilla and gave him no time of wasting Camilla's life for waiting for him. I believe that Camilla loved Andrew at that time but she had feelings for Charles at the same time, but since forming a family was more important for her and she would accept Andrew's hand without any doubt once he made up his mind to marry her. It was quite dramatic, isn't ? It was said that Major Shand talked to Prince Charles several months befor he proposed to Camilla formally to tell him his position on that matter, he think Charles should make a honest woman of Camilla. It is really interesting to see how Major Shand act as a loving father but using steelful and effective strategy to ensure Camilla's happiness.

I think Lord Mountbatten's granddaughter was 15 in 1973. After receiving the famous letter of "marrying a sweet-character girl letter" on Valentine Day of 1974, Charles wrote to Amanda's parents to ask the permission to court their daughter but they asked Charles to wait until Amanda to grow up more and let herself make the choice. I think the problem for Charles would never marry without Lord Mountbatten's permission, QEQM's permission and Queen's approval, but they wanted Charles's happiness but they wanted their own favourite candiates to succeed. There were reports said that Charles's friends said that it was Lord Mountbatten who played an important role to change the event in 1972. It could be very true because Charles listend to him about love and marriage then he delayed to propose to Camilla and on the other hand Lord Mountbatten invited Camilla to broadland twice at before the christmas of 1972. It is only Camilla who knew what really happened during the weekened and what can happen afterwards. Charles- Camilla- Andrew - Anne is a much interesting love triangle for me. I often wonder what if Andrew PB were not a roman Cathelic and how it turned out? Probably Andrew married Anne at the first place and gave Charles some longer time to make up his own mind about Camilla at least he may fight for his feeling before he had no choice but to accept the fact" the groom is not me""

Charles and Camilla are soulmates and I think it is exactly the nature why their love have caused so many pains.In perfect world they should have get married straight ahead but in an imperfect world, their love needs to overcome great obstacles to succeed. It is the way of their twist of fates driven to unknown.
__________________
  #170  
Old 10-02-2007, 01:40 AM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by love_cc View Post
I believe that Camilla loved Andrew at that time but she had feelings for Charles at the same time, but since forming a family was more important for her and she would accept Andrew's hand without any doubt once he made up his mind to marry her.
I wonder if Andrew Parker Bowles and Camilla Shand would have been considered suitable for the heir of the throne and his sister? Was there really a choice form the POV of the people involved?
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
  #171  
Old 10-02-2007, 07:10 AM
CasiraghiTrio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Burbank, United States
Posts: 6,402
The consensus always seems to imply there was some kind of social prejudice or snobbery involved, that Camilla was "just not high-born enough" or that Andrew was just not suitable being Roman Catholic. I've never been sure if I completely buy these arguments, though. While I'm sure the Roman Catholic thing was always a barrier to APB marrying Anne, I don't know that I believe the "Camilla was just good mistress material" argument. It just doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but I consider that my POV is limited by not fully understanding the rationale of these matters in the time period. The modern POV must be different from the POV of the early 70s because the common argument implies Camilla "was not good enough" then, yet she is "good enough" now to be royal.
__________________
Chewsteraghi on Tumblr. Schmichaelira on Twitter. Tumblr aka obsessivechewsteraghidisorder. Be warned: I'm weird.
  #172  
Old 10-02-2007, 02:09 PM
Duchess's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: xx, Canada
Posts: 1,648
Quote:
Originally Posted by BellaFay View Post
As for Mountbatten's desire to marry Charles to his grandaughter that was a much later project. In 1972/3 she was only about 16 I think.
she was young but mountbatten had a strong desire to see charles marry his granddaughter. i believe he did propose at one point but she declined because she knew what that life would be like.
__________________
Duchess
  #173  
Old 10-02-2007, 02:33 PM
milla Ca's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hannover, Germany
Posts: 1,515
Quote:
Originally Posted by CasiraghiTrio View Post
I don't know that I believe the "Camilla was just good mistress material" argument. It just doesn't make a lot of sense to me, but I consider that my POV is limited by not fully understanding the rationale of these matters in the time period. The modern POV must be different from the POV of the early 70s because the common argument implies Camilla "was not good enough" then, yet she is "good enough" now to be royal.
I think you underrate the change of times. I believe that its fact that 30 years ago the heir to the throne couldnt marry a woman who wasnt a virgin. So i think Camilla Shand was not accepted to be more than mistress material for the people who were close to the young Prince.
__________________
We will all have to account for our actions to our children and grand-children, and if we dont get this right, how will they ever forgive us?
Prince Charles in a speech, 6th December 2006
  #174  
Old 10-02-2007, 02:36 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by CasiraghiTrio View Post
but I consider that my POV is limited by not fully understanding the rationale of these matters in the time period. The modern POV must be different from the POV of the early 70s because the common argument implies Camilla "was not good enough" then, yet she is "good enough" now to be royal.
Times really have changed, back then parents and even grandparents went to a great deal of trouble to ensure that friends of either sex were suitable. Those that may have been considered suitable friends were not always considered suitable spouses, many times it was to advance or strengthen one or other of the families, (whether the couple got on or not). It would have taken an exceptionally strong character to marry a suitable as a friend person, set against someone the parents/grandparents/relatives considered suitable as a husband/wife.

How I hate the word suitable!
__________________
  #175  
Old 10-02-2007, 02:56 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Dallas Fort Worth, United States
Posts: 211
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
Times really have changed, back then parents and even grandparents went to a great deal of trouble to ensure that friends of either sex were suitable. Those that may have been considered suitable friends were not always considered suitable spouses, many times it was to advance or strengthen one or other of the families, (whether the couple got on or not). It would have taken an exceptionally strong character to marry a suitable as a friend person, set against someone the parents/grandparents/relatives considered suitable as a husband/wife.

How I hate the word suitable!
What happened when one of the young people simply said "no" to going along with the program? I am well aware that American and English societies do and certainly did have difference, but I feel confident that there were those back then who simply were not willing to allow "custom and tradition" to rule their life. What practical penalty was imposed? Not being invited to the proper social function / dinner / ball / tea?

I would NEVER allow my family to dictate my life and choices as an adult and I have not. I dated and married as I pleased and to whom I pleased.
__________________
  #176  
Old 10-02-2007, 03:37 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Merseyside, United Kingdom
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by love_cc View Post
thanks for listing the original source about "Camilla's bizarre engagment news on the Times" from Tina Brown's book about Diana: she wrote that Andrew PB told John Bowes-Lyon that Camilla's parents published the announcement and Johh Bowes-Lyon observed that Andrew PB was not that interested in marrying Camilla.I think this was an act out of love by Camilla's parents to force Andrew to commit himself to Camilla and gave him no time of wasting Camilla's life for waiting for him. I believe that Camilla loved Andrew at that time but she had feelings for Charles at the same time, but since forming a family was more important for her and she would accept Andrew's hand without any doubt once he made up his mind to marry her. It was quite dramatic, isn't ? It was said that Major Shand talked to Prince Charles several months befor he proposed to Camilla formally to tell him his position on that matter, he think Charles should make a honest woman of Camilla. It is really interesting to see how Major Shand act as a loving father but using steelful and effective strategy to ensure Camilla's happiness.

I think Lord Mountbatten's granddaughter was 15 in 1973. After receiving the famous letter of "marrying a sweet-character girl letter" on Valentine Day of 1974, Charles wrote to Amanda's parents to ask the permission to court their daughter but they asked Charles to wait until Amanda to grow up more and let herself make the choice. I think the problem for Charles would never marry without Lord Mountbatten's permission, QEQM's permission and Queen's approval, but they wanted Charles's happiness but they wanted their own favourite candiates to succeed. There were reports said that Charles's friends said that it was Lord Mountbatten who played an important role to change the event in 1972. It could be very true because Charles listend to him about love and marriage then he delayed to propose to Camilla and on the other hand Lord Mountbatten invited Camilla to broadland twice at before the christmas of 1972. It is only Camilla who knew what really happened during the weekened and what can happen afterwards. Charles- Camilla- Andrew - Anne is a much interesting love triangle for me. I often wonder what if Andrew PB were not a roman Cathelic and how it turned out? Probably Andrew married Anne at the first place and gave Charles some longer time to make up his own mind about Camilla at least he may fight for his feeling before he had no choice but to accept the fact" the groom is not me""

Charles and Camilla are soulmates and I think it is exactly the nature why their love have caused so many pains.In perfect world they should have get married straight ahead but in an imperfect world, their love needs to overcome great obstacles to succeed. It is the way of their twist of fates driven to unknown.

Thank you for posting Tina Brown's confirmation of the fact that Camilla's marriage to APB was also arranged. It still seems a pity that both the Shand and the Royal families couldn't have waited a few months to allow Charles to return and introduce Camilla to the Queen at Balmoral in August 1973. He couldn't legally ask for her hand in November 1972 because he was only 24 and under the Royal Marriage Act of 1772 as amended at the Queen's request in 1956 he couldn't get engaged or marry without the Queen's permission until he was 25. Even aged 25 he would still have needed the permission of Parliament if he had wanted to marry without the Queen's permission, that only changed when the European Human Rights Act was incorporated into British law in October 2000. It seems to me that everybody would have been better off if the Queen and Mountbatten had not interfered & instead allowed Prince Charles to continue his relationship with Camilla in 1973. His behaviour towards Lady Jane Wellesley in 1973/4 would suggest that he was all too eager to get married and have a family not that he was postponing his wedding day.
__________________
  #177  
Old 10-02-2007, 03:49 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Merseyside, United Kingdom
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamondBrg View Post
I would be very interested in finding out how the rest of the Royal Family feels about it's newest member. I think the Queen was quite kind in giving Camilla an engagement ring that was four times more valuable than the one Diana chose and perhaps there are several reasons for that? I have never heard how the siblings feel about Camilla or Prince Philip? Are Camilla's children from her first marriage included in any of the Royal Family gatherings? I was thinking specifically about their Summer holiday at Balmoral and then at Christmas?
I think the answer to this question lies in Tom PB's joky story that he told the New York Times(?) that at the wedding the whole PB/Shand family had the doors of St George's Chapel closed in their faces preventing them coming out on the steps to join the happy couple and the Queen and her family for a a photo-opp for the press - at least that was what was planned according to the media pack on Prince Charles's website. As for Christmas time since his marriage to Camilla they spend barely 24hours at Sandringham (Christmas Eve to Christmas lunch) before either going back to Highgrove or on to Birkhall for Scottish Hogmanay celebrations.
__________________
  #178  
Old 10-02-2007, 03:51 PM
Al_bina's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 5,608
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamondBrg View Post
What happened when one of the young people simply said "no" to going along with the program? I am well aware that American and English societies do and certainly did have difference, but I feel confident that there were those back then who simply were not willing to allow "custom and tradition" to rule their life. What practical penalty was imposed? Not being invited to the proper social function / dinner / ball / tea?

I would NEVER allow my family to dictate my life and choices as an adult and I have not. I dated and married as I pleased and to whom I pleased.
I dare to assume that invitations to the proper social functions/dinners/balls/ teas still remain important to a fair number of English people. Thus, customs and traditions tend to govern the life to a certain extent.
__________________
"I never did mind about the little things" Amanda, "Point of No Return"
  #179  
Old 10-02-2007, 04:34 PM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al_bina View Post
I dare to assume that invitations to the proper social functions/dinners/balls/ teas still remain important to a fair number of English people. Thus, customs and traditions do govern the life.
I think there is a difference between according something an "Importance" in one's life and "do govern a life".

I have to confess I'm really curious about how life is in Kazachstan at the moment, as we do have a lot of Russian-Germans from Kazachstan here and none as yet reported about a rather "Ancien Rgime" kind of lifestyle there - which is the image you bring here.

Okay, there are different kind of people anywhere but still...
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
  #180  
Old 10-02-2007, 05:54 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by diamondBrg View Post
What happened when one of the young people simply said "no" to going along with the program? I am well aware that American and English societies do and certainly did have difference, but I feel confident that there were those back then who simply were not willing to allow "custom and tradition" to rule their life. What practical penalty was imposed? Not being invited to the proper social function / dinner / ball / tea?
It could vary. Having your allowance stopped, therefore removing your social status was one of the options. Friends willing to house and feed you would soon dry up. Being stopped from having any contact with your family, (parents, siblings, Grandparents etc) and friends willing to go against their parents, it is amazing how 'alone' you can be made to feel. Employment options could be stopped by a phone call, everyone knew someone who could 'have a word'.

Social functions/dinners/balls etc would not come into it.

There were probably many who defied custom and tradition, unfortunately many of them discovered that mummy and daddy were right.
__________________

__________________
Closed Thread

Tags
camilla, duchess of cornwall, marriage, prince charles, prince of wales


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





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 duchess of cambridge dutch royal history fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern 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 olympic games ottoman poland pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:25 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]