King Charles and Queen Camilla

[BeatrixFan]

Prince Michael would wear his Naval Uniform and I imagine would wear a Prince's coronet and the robes accorded to a Prince of the realm. He'd wear his orders and decorations and Princess Michael would wear any orders or decorations she has, a tiara and a gown.

 

[Toledo]

Definition: queen consort
queen consort =noun : the wife of a reigning king. Source: Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)

Prince consort, the husband of a queen regnant.
Queen consort, the wife of a king, as distinguished from a queen regnant, who rules alone.

Article on The Title of British Prince and Styles of British Princes

• Sons of sovereigns- HRH The Prince ‘’X’’, eg HRH The Prince Edward
• Grandchildren- HRH Prince ‘’X’’ of ‘’Y’’, where Y is the territorial designation of their father’s peerages, eg HRH Prince Michael of Kent
• Great-grandchildren- HH Prince ‘’X’’ of ‘’Y’’ (until 1917, as described above).
• The Prince of Wales is normally styled HRH The Prince of Wales,
• and royal dukes, HRH The Duke of Y. Royal dukes remain princes, however.

Wives of British princes take on their husbands' titles. If the prince has a peerage, the wife will become HRH and the female equivalent of the peerage rank, eg HRH The Countess of Wessex. If the prince has no peerage, as in the case of HRH Prince Michael of Kent, the wife will become HRH and will take the title Princess with her husband's name, eg HRH Princess Michael of Kent.
Following the marriage of the Prince of Wales to Camilla Parker Bowles on 9 April2005 his new wife uses the style HRH The Duchess of Cornwall, using one of his peerage titles, instead of Princess of Wales. These formal styles are not often used in the media or by the general public. The terms "Prince Charles", "Princess Diana" "Prince Andrew", "Prince Edward", "Princess Anne" and suchforth are most commonly heard, even though the persons involved may never have held that formal style.

Article on the title King consort

and this other one on King Consort:
Victoria of the United Kingdom wanted to make her husband Albert king consort. But the British government refused to introduce a bill allowing it, as Albert was a foreigner. She instead gave him the title of Prince Consort in 1857.
In the United Kingdom, there is no automatic right of the consort of a Queen to receive any title, as with any husband of a suo jure peeress. Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom (reigned 1952 - ) did not create her husband Philip, Duke of Edinburgh a Prince of the United Kingdom until 1957, five years after her accession. He has never been formally designated prince consort or king consort.

 

[sweetness]

Perhaps you also believe that all 2nd/3rd/4th etc wives should be called by a different name than is generally used in the UK.

How many wives Charles had or for that matter has, (and I think Charles is now happily married to the woman of his dreams), it will always be his wife at the time that is important.

I agree with Hayz64, The deceased ex wife of Prince Charles has no place in this discussion!

Except this so called deceased ex wife of Prince Charles also happens to be the mother of the future king of UK so she is "important"....as far as I am concerned (and I suspect many others as well in this forum) there is just one Princess of Wales and she is Diana, Princess of Wales!

 

[Tzu An]

Okay, here's my opinion/speech on this and I hope I don't get too flamed:


Ladies and Gentlemen of the UK and the rest of the world: Diana is dead. Yes, you heard me correctly, Diana is dead. She died in a car crash in Paris with her Arab lover Dodi Fayed. She was divorced from His Royal Highness Prince Charles of Wales. She was the one who wanted a divorce in the first place. As we all know the divorce was quite messy. She was stripped of her royal title "HRH" since she was not born a royal in her own right and humiliated the royals immensely during her divorce campaign.

Since she's been dead almost ten years now I think it is best to move on. The new wife of Charles is Camilla, who in my eyes is a perfect Princess of Wales. Yes, I called her that. I think moving on is critical since that is how society moves forward. I don't believe it would be humane and modern if the politicians were to slap Camilla in the face and introduce legislation making sure that Camilla is not Queen Consort. Contrary to what rabid Diana fans think, Diana was not Charles' wife at the end of her life and that was entirely up to her. Diana pursued the divorce (yes, there was adultery but Charles still wanted a marriage, however much a sham so his kids wouldn't grow up in a broken home and for other reasons I will not mention) and got what she wanted. The rest we know what happened.

Now, forward quite a few years later (yes, moving forward is what healthy and modern societies do) Camilla and Charles are finally married. They are no longer a covert couple forced to hide their love for one another is because Camilla is *gasp*, old. This is also a facet of a modern monarch is that he marries an old woman because they love one another. To me this is a thoroughly modern couple and the fact that Charles has made an honest woman out of his former mistress is another good thing he has done. Charles could have pursued another younger female with aristocratic connections but he didn't. He married for love and this is what is expected of our modern monarchs.

Contrary to what rabid Diana fans think, the title Princess of Wales was not hers by right, or hers alone. It belongs to the wife of the Prince of Wales, and that wife now is Camilla. Diana threw it away when she pursued a divorce from Charles. In conclusion, Diana may be an icon, but Camilla is a true princess.

THE END

 

[Elspeth]

Except this so called deceased ex wife of Prince Charles also happens to be the mother of the future king of UK so she is "important"....as far as I am concerned (and I suspect many others as well in this forum) there is just one Princess of Wales and she is Diana, Princess of Wales!

However, that doesn't make it so. There have been a whole lot of Princesses of Wales over the centuries, and she's just the last but one in the list.

Now, since this thread isn't about Diana, could we get back on topic?

 

[grevinnan]

Camilla has chosen to not use the title Princess of Wales. As she has been close to Charles and his boys for a very long time so she probably know much more about how they feel about their mother than anyone outside of the royal family. Camilla most likely will never use the P of Wales title out of respect and love for William and Harry. That title was used by their beloved mother and Camilla is very respectful of that. Camilla has made it clear she is to be titled Duchess of Cornwall and that should be respected as well.

 

[Tzu An]

I just had to get that off of my chest.

 

[love_cc]

I am not an Australian citizen yet, however I will vote for a Queen Camilla. I felt sorry for Diana, Princess of Wales, but I am happy Prince Charles can marry Camilla finally which should probably happened three decades ago. I see Prince Charles marry Camilla as a move to modernise the monarchy rather than stuck in those absurd old royal protocols

Of course I hope that crowned Princes or crowned princesses can marry people from the right background just what Diana had in her, but I hope that they can marry for love and their marriages can grow stronger through the thin and the thick. Marriages are not about beauty,age, or bloodline but about understanding, shared interests, toleracne and support. These are things I feel that Camilla can provide to Prince Charles but Diana failed to do so.

Camilla is entitled to have Princess of Wales and Queen Consort. I cannot see why Camilla should be prevent to have the title. Charles is

 

[Alexa]

I have a question to those who know more than me about the history of the English Monarchy and its establishment's transition into modernity. As my limited understanding, the Duchess of Cornwall was already a part of the establishment before she married the Prince of Wales. I have read she attended a finishing school in Switzerland supposedly called Mon Fertile. I have heard rumors that there are still such schools in operation, but not publicized. Is anyone aware if the school is still in existence or any similar one, other than Villa Pierrefeu? This thought came up when you mentioned that its a total evaluation of the society that was built. I think it is the small thinks in the end that really paint the bigger picture. Thanks

 

[Jo of Palatine]

I know it's different when you have a queen regnant, but for a ruling king I think a grandson is always an heir presumptive because the king could marry a young wife and have another child.

But even if a ruling king would get another child, this child surely would be in line behind the firstborn son of the firstborn son? Otherwise Prince Andrew would take precedence over Prince William, as he is the son of the souverain, but William is "only" the grandson?

Louis XIV. comes to mind, who lost son and grandson in direct line before his death and was followed by his great-grandson Louis XV. Okay, that's France, but I thought the same rules (apart from the "Salic" part) applied to GB?

 

[Skydragon]

Except this so called deceased ex wife of Prince Charles - there is just one Princess of Wales and she is Diana, Princess of Wales!

Trust me she is deceased! As Elspeth keeps telling you, there have been many 'popular' princesses of Wales over the years and in the years to come, there will probably be more. Your 'idol' was just one of many, as is Camilla, our current Princess of Wales.
Camilla has decided not to use the title Princess of Wales but, that is what she is and will remain until she becomes Queen Consort.

 

[Frothy]

Can I just add one note? I read somewhere that Charlotte, daughter of George IV, who predeceased him, was styled Princess of Wales in her own right. Wonder if that is true?

Re: coronation, I do hope Camilla is styled Queen as well as legally Queen.

 

[Skydragon]

As my limited understanding, the Duchess of Cornwall was already a part of the establishment before she married the Prince of Wales. I have read she attended a finishing school in Switzerland supposedly called Mon Fertile. I have heard rumors that there are still such schools in operation, but not publicized. Is anyone aware if the school is still in existence or any similar one, other than Villa Pierrefeu?

My old school is still going although some of it's remit has altered to include business and internet studies! Another is Surval Mont Fleuri.

Presenting young women to the Queen and society as immaculately turned out, well mannered debutantes, has died out. Very few schools exist anymore in the UK, although a handful still operate in Switzerland and it is just a handful, these are generally known because of experience or personal recommendation I think.

 

[Warren]

Of Wales and Wales

I read somewhere that Charlotte, daughter of George IV, who predeceased him, was styled Princess of Wales in her own right. Wonder if that is true?

I assume she would have been 'The Princess Charlotte of Wales'; if she had survived to see her father become King, the 'of Wales' would be dropped as it was redundant.
Princess Charlotte was not "The Princess of Wales" as such, as that title would have been held by the Prince Regent's wife, Princess Caroline. (I don't think she was referred to as "The Princess Regent").
We are spared such confusion today as Charles does not have an heiress daughter.

 

[hayz64]

Except this so called deceased ex wife of Prince Charles also happens to be the mother of the future king of UK so she is "important"....as far as I am concerned (and I suspect many others as well in this forum) there is just one Princess of Wales and she is Diana, Princess of Wales!

Well go and have fun on the Diana thread then!

 

[hayz64]

Okay, here's my opinion/speech on this and I hope I don't get too flamed:


Ladies and Gentlemen of the UK and the rest of the world: Diana is dead. Yes, you heard me correctly, Diana is dead. She died in a car crash in Paris with her Arab lover Dodi Fayed. She was divorced from His Royal Highness Prince Charles of Wales. She was the one who wanted a divorce in the first place. As we all know the divorce was quite messy. She was stripped of her royal title "HRH" since she was not born a royal in her own right and humiliated the royals immensely during her divorce campaign.

Since she's been dead almost ten years now I think it is best to move on. The new wife of Charles is Camilla, who in my eyes is a perfect Princess of Wales. Yes, I called her that. I think moving on is critical since that is how society moves forward. I don't believe it would be humane and modern if the politicians were to slap Camilla in the face and introduce legislation making sure that Camilla is not Queen Consort. Contrary to what rabid Diana fans think, Diana was not Charles' wife at the end of her life and that was entirely up to her. Diana pursued the divorce (yes, there was adultery but Charles still wanted a marriage, however much a sham so his kids wouldn't grow up in a broken home and for other reasons I will not mention) and got what she wanted. The rest we know what happened.

Now, forward quite a few years later (yes, moving forward is what healthy and modern societies do) Camilla and Charles are finally married. They are no longer a covert couple forced to hide their love for one another is because Camilla is *gasp*, old. This is also a facet of a modern monarch is that he marries an old woman because they love one another. To me this is a thoroughly modern couple and the fact that Charles has made an honest woman out of his former mistress is another good thing he has done. Charles could have pursued another younger female with aristocratic connections but he didn't. He married for love and this is what is expected of our modern monarchs.

Contrary to what rabid Diana fans think, the title Princess of Wales was not hers by right, or hers alone. It belongs to the wife of the Prince of Wales, and that wife now is Camilla. Diana threw it away when she pursued a divorce from Charles. In conclusion, Diana may be an icon, but Camilla is a true princess.

THE END

Perfect,Tzu An,perfect!

 

[qui mal y pense]

Don't Diana fans get it? Even if she were still alive when Charles ascends the throne SHE WOULDN'T BE QUEEN. It is very nice that Camilla has styled herself Duchess of Cornwall (a title Diana had too BTW), but she will be the Queen. When William marries and eventually becomes POW will they let his wife use the title or will we have to call her Countess of Carrick or Lady Renfrew...

 

[Frothy]

Warren, you're absolutely right, I looked it up, it was the author's confusion: Charlotte of Wales, not the Princess of Wales.

to get seriously pedantic title wise (but we love that at TRF right?) it would have been HRH Princess Charlotte of Wales, no "the" in front. "The" is reserved for children of a reigning or deceased monarch, so HRH The Princess Margaret, The Prince Andrew (before he was made Duke of York). Prince/ss X of Y has no "the" even if the Y is Wales.

 

[BeatrixFan]

Tzu An - Bravo. Well said.

 

[Skydragon]

Contrary to what rabid Diana fans think, the title Princess of Wales was not hers by right, or hers alone. It belongs to the wife of the Prince of Wales, and that wife now is Camilla. Diana threw it away when she pursued a divorce from Charles. In conclusion, Diana may be an icon, but Camilla is a true princess.

Your whole 'speech' sums it all up nicely!

 

[Avalon]

Okay, here's my opinion/speech on this and I hope I don't get too flamed:


Ladies and Gentlemen of the UK and the rest of the world: Diana is dead. Yes, you heard me correctly, Diana is dead. She died in a car crash in Paris with her Arab lover Dodi Fayed. She was divorced from His Royal Highness Prince Charles of Wales. She was the one who wanted a divorce in the first place. As we all know the divorce was quite messy. She was stripped of her royal title "HRH" since she was not born a royal in her own right and humiliated the royals immensely during her divorce campaign.

Since she's been dead almost ten years now I think it is best to move on. The new wife of Charles is Camilla, who in my eyes is a perfect Princess of Wales. Yes, I called her that. I think moving on is critical since that is how society moves forward. I don't believe it would be humane and modern if the politicians were to slap Camilla in the face and introduce legislation making sure that Camilla is not Queen Consort. Contrary to what rabid Diana fans think, Diana was not Charles' wife at the end of her life and that was entirely up to her. Diana pursued the divorce (yes, there was adultery but Charles still wanted a marriage, however much a sham so his kids wouldn't grow up in a broken home and for other reasons I will not mention) and got what she wanted. The rest we know what happened.

Now, forward quite a few years later (yes, moving forward is what healthy and modern societies do) Camilla and Charles are finally married. They are no longer a covert couple forced to hide their love for one another is because Camilla is *gasp*, old. This is also a facet of a modern monarch is that he marries an old woman because they love one another. To me this is a thoroughly modern couple and the fact that Charles has made an honest woman out of his former mistress is another good thing he has done. Charles could have pursued another younger female with aristocratic connections but he didn't. He married for love and this is what is expected of our modern monarchs.

Contrary to what rabid Diana fans think, the title Princess of Wales was not hers by right, or hers alone. It belongs to the wife of the Prince of Wales, and that wife now is Camilla. Diana threw it away when she pursued a divorce from Charles. In conclusion, Diana may be an icon, but Camilla is a true princess.
THE END

I sign after every and each word. A very good speech indeed and yoou said everything I was longing to say but couldn't find the words.

 

[Toledo]

This may help. From the Prince of Wales Website...

The Duchy estate was created in 1337 by Edward III for his son and heir, Prince Edward, and its primary function was to provide him and future Princes of Wales with an income from its assets. A charter rules that each future Duke of Cornwall would be the eldest surviving son of the Monarch and the heir to the throne.

Thanks Warren. But your link makes me ask one question that I could not find the answer for in the Prince Charles website. Is the title Duke of Cornwall passed only to the first born male child that will be King one day or is it also passed onto women? Like, was Queen Elizabeth II ever Duke/Duchess of Cornwall? Somewhere in the news (maybe The Royalist news site?) I read that Queen Elizabeth does have a title as a male (don't ask me where I read that, I can't remember at this moment) and she went to some type of ceremonial event using the title style as if she was a male. Does the same applies to the Duke of Cornwall title?
Anyone knows?

 

[cde]

Very nice speech Tzu An.

Now if we could just get the Dianafanatics to comprehend and accept it.

 

[grevinnan]

Luckily Camilla has compassion and integrity. She has chosen not to use the title. Diana will forever be the mother of the second in line to the throne and will be associated with the title Princess of Wales until William inherits the title and is married. Camilla understands and has shown that she is respectful of that. She is a lady of class and integrity. Perhaps take note.

 

[Elspeth]

Could we please dispense with the little digs at people who hold different views? Much more of this, and the moderators are going to start editing or deleting or even close the thread if it's just going to descend into sniping.

Elspeth

British Forum moderator

 

[Warren]

Thanks Warren. But your link makes me ask one question that I could not find the answer for in the Prince Charles website. Is the title Duke of Cornwall passed only to the first born male child that will be King one day or is it also passed onto women? Like, was Queen Elizabeth II ever Duke/Duchess of Cornwall? Somewhere in the news...I read that Queen Elizabeth does have a title as a male.

I think The Queen's titles (broadly and not specific) were, in order: Princess Elizabeth of York (birth to 1936, accession of her father), The Princess Elizabeth (to 1947, marriage), Duchess of Edinburgh (to 1952, accession), Queen and Duke of Lancaster (as Sovereign).
Queen Elizabeth has never been "Duke or Duchess of Cornwall" because she was an Heir(ess) Presumptive. The Charter refers to the eldest surviving son and heir of the Monarch.

Lancaster is the Monarch's equivalent of the Duchy of Cornwall, designed to provide a private income. The title "Duke of Normandy" may be used by French romanticists.

... it was the author's confusion: Charlotte of Wales, not the Princess of Wales.
to get seriously pedantic title wise (but we love that at TRF right?) it would have been HRH Princess Charlotte of Wales, no "the" in front. "The" is reserved for children of a reigning or deceased monarch, so HRH The Princess Margaret, The Prince Andrew (before he was made Duke of York). Prince/ss X of Y has no "the" even if the Y is Wales.

Quite correct Frothy, what some call pedantry we see as the fine detail, which is what makes it all the more interesting. Yes, my error: I gave a "The" to the ill-fated Charlotte when she was not entitled to it. Does anyone have any idea when this usage became common or standard?

 

[Alexa]

RE: finishing schools and Duchess of Cornwall

My old school is still going although some of it's remit has altered to include business and internet studies! Another is Surval Mont Fleuri.

Presenting young women to the Queen and society as immaculately turned out, well mannered debutantes, has died out. Very few schools exist anymore in the UK, although a handful still operate in Switzerland and it is just a handful, these are generally known because of experience or personal recommendation I think.

Actually I was recommended to one such Swiss school which is not publicized, but the person who wanted to recommend me flaked out at the last minute because I did not lose 10kg (and believe me I am already very thin)! --mind you she didn't attend this school but knows of it. It was the idea of my parents and she needed a job in our region and wanted to get in their good graces by offering a referral for me. But then she flaked out when she used connection through another influential person. You know how people can be. My parents were undeterred by her behavior because their rank here is above hers, and the person she ended up going to happens to be a very very close family friend of ours.

This experience of 'debutantes' has not died out in my part of the world. It is still expected but only known by those in the loop....its just called something different.

Getting back to the topic. Perhaps when the time does come for the coronation the world will be such a different place socially that there may not me much public opposition to 'Queen Camila'. How it fits in with the English law, is like reading Chinese to me because its not my subject. But I had read that even consitutionally Anglicans can not remarry in the church once divorced..is this true? I know there was big debate about the English laws, but the Archbishop of Cantebury approved in the end. For me it is nothing personal, and I think that people of rank and priviledge also have a right to be happy in their personal lives just like anybody else does...and the fact that they found this happiness in their lifetime is in itself a blessing for them because many people never find it, or if they do they lose it. It does not ditract from his duties as Prince of Wales, it rather enhances them. Its not really a role you can do alone.

I see the marriage as beneficial for both at this stage, even though I was also a Diana fan, personally I think she made too many public disclosures at the end. If you notice, Duchess of Cornwall has never given not 1 interview about her private life with the Prince of Wales and I so admire that. In my country (kuwait) we say: don't just win the battle, win the war! I admire Camilla's personal approach to things more than Diana. I think she adds to her husband also, and many on the thread only see it as one sided. Why not discuss how he also benefits from having her as his wife (even though I'm sure the Duchess of Cornwall is too well-bred and humble to raise the subject about herself)? So good for them.

 

[Stefan]

I think The Queen's titles (broadly and not specific) were, in order: Princess Elizabeth of York (birth to 1936, accession of her father), The Princess Elizabeth (to 1947, marriage), Duchess of Edinburgh (to 1952, accession), Queen and Duke of Lancaster (as Sovereign).
Queen Elizabeth has never been "Duke or Duchess of Cornwall" because she was an Heir(ess) Presumptive. The Charter refers to the eldest surviving son and heir of the Monarch.

Lancaster is the Monarch's equivalent of the Duchy of Cornwall, designed to provide a private income. The title "Duke of Normandy" may be used by French romanticists.

Quite correct Frothy, what some call pedantry we see as the fine detail, which is what makes it all the more interesting. Yes, my error: I gave a "The" to the ill-fated Charlotte when she was not entitled to it. Does anyone have any idea when this usage became common or standard?

After her Wedding she was The Princess Elizabeth, Duchess of Edinburgh

 

[Stefan]

Thanks Warren. But your link makes me ask one question that I could not find the answer for in the Prince Charles website. Is the title Duke of Cornwall passed only to the first born male child that will be King one day or is it also passed onto women? Like, was Queen Elizabeth II ever Duke/Duchess of Cornwall? Somewhere in the news (maybe The Royalist news site?) I read that Queen Elizabeth does have a title as a male (don't ask me where I read that, I can't remember at this moment) and she went to some type of ceremonial event using the title style as if she was a male. Does the same applies to the Duke of Cornwall title?
Anyone knows?

It is for the oldest son of the monarch. For example the future George III. was not Duke of Cornwall after the death of his father and before his accession to to the Throne as he was not the eldest son of the monarch.

 

[User0501]

After her Wedding she was The Princess Elizabeth, Duchess of Edinburgh

After HM's wedding,HM was known as HRH Princess Elizabeth,The Duchess of Edinburgh not The Princess Elizabeth,Duchess of Edinburgh.