The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #161  
Old 11-01-2005, 06:26 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,532
Yes...but all this could have been avoided had he stood up to certain people and did not dilly dally on making decisions in regards to marriage.

We all have heard the 'if onlys'

If only Lord Mountbatten had been alive at the time, he would not have married Diana...

If only Prince Philip had not pushed him into it...

If only the courtiers would for once just shut up and let a royal make up their own minds...

No one is in the right....
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #162  
Old 11-01-2005, 06:29 PM
Princejohnny25's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: , Antarctica
Posts: 2,033
Since Camilla has become a senior member of the firm she has showed nothing but utter grace and perfection in her royal duties as a consort to the heir. If that is not Queen Consort materiel than the whole royal family is doomed to hell. When I said it is not right to judge someone by their looks I ment people putting Camilla down cause she is not as sexy and glam as Diana. Diana is dead. Repeat that ten times and take a deep breath. She is gone. No matter how many times you look at her pictures and read her stories and watch her on TV she is never coming back. Charles or Camilla did not cause pain to Diana. Diana was a women going through a divorce. She obviously knew she had the upper hand not being a born royal. In no way did she want to seem as a bad wife. She did not want the blame for the break up of the marriage on her so she shifted the blame to Charles and Camilla. Come on people. She was a distressed women getting a divorce who would not take responsibilty.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #163  
Old 11-01-2005, 06:30 PM
tiaraprin's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Near NY City, United States
Posts: 1,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Marmalade
Or....you can surmise that any other woman who married him other than Camilla may have had to deal with the same issues....
Thank you Lady Marmalade, you understood the post.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #164  
Old 11-01-2005, 06:31 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
Well, you assume Camilla would have married him if he'd asked back in the 1970s. I mean, look at what happened to Charles's relationship with Davina Sheffield when the existence of one former lover came to light; the press would have had a field day with Camilla's past. It would have mattered a lot more then than it does now. Plus, if she wanted the life of a country lady without endless constraints, she wouldn't be keen to marry Charles.

Unfortunately she thought she could have her cake and eat it by marrying someone else and continuing her relationship with Charles; now she's in this position, and while she's doing a very good job of it, I'm not sure it's one that such a private person would have wanted.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #165  
Old 11-01-2005, 06:32 PM
tiaraprin's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Near NY City, United States
Posts: 1,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Princejonnhy25
Since Camilla has become a senior member of the firm she has showed nothing but utter grace and perfection in her royal duties as a consort to the heir. If that is not Queen Consort materiel than the whole royal family is doomed to hell. When I said it is not right to judge someone by their looks I ment people putting Camilla down cause she is not as sexy and glam as Diana. Diana is dead. Repeat that ten times and take a deep breath. She is gone. No matter how many times you look at her pictures and read her stories and watch her on TV she is never coming back. Charles or Camilla did not cause pain to Diana. Diana was a women going through a divorce. She obviously knew she had the upper hand not being a born royal. In no way did she want to seem as a bad wife. She did not want the blame for the break up of the marriage on her so she shifted the blame to Charles and Camilla. Come on people. She was a distressed women getting a divorce who would not take responsibilty.
Charles and Camilla are blameless? Please! All three have the blame!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #166  
Old 11-01-2005, 06:34 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
Re:

Quote:
We all have heard the 'if onlys'
Exactly! So why keep bashing out the same old tune on the drum? The if onlys mean nothing now.

Quote:
Since Camilla has become a senior member of the firm she has showed nothing but utter grace and perfection in her royal duties as a consort to the heir. If that is not Queen Consort materiel than the whole royal family is doomed to hell. When I said it is not right to judge someone by their looks I ment people putting Camilla down cause she is not as sexy and glam as Diana. Diana is dead. Repeat that ten times and take a deep breath. She is gone. No matter how many times you look at her pictures and read her stories and watch her on TV she is never coming back. Charles or Camilla did not cause pain to Diana. Diana was a women going through a divorce. She obviously knew she had the upper hand not being a born royal. In no way did she want to seem as a bad wife. She did not want the blame for the break up of the marriage on her so she shifted the blame to Charles and Camilla. Come on people. She was a distressed women getting a divorce who would not take responsibilty.
PrinceJohnny25 - put perfectly. Well Said. :)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #167  
Old 11-01-2005, 06:34 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,532
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth
Well, you assume Camilla would have married him if he'd asked back in the 1970s. I mean, look at what happened to Charles's relationship with Davina Sheffield when the existence of one former lover came to light; the press would have had a field day with Camilla's past. It would have mattered a lot more then than it does now. Plus, if she wanted the life of a country lady without endless constraints, she wouldn't be keen to marry Charles.

Unfortunately she thought she could have her cake and eat it by marrying someone else and continuing her relationship with Charles; now she's in this position, and while she's doing a very good job of it, I'm not sure it's one that such a private person would have wanted.
I know. Did you ever read the story about what Prince Philip allegedly did to Sabrina Guinness so she would stop seeing Prince Charles?

In many respects, it has been because of the treatment towards him, the poor man could not make up his mind.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #168  
Old 11-01-2005, 06:34 PM
iowabelle's Avatar
Royal Highness
Royal Blogger, TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Des Moines, United States
Posts: 2,405
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth
Well, you assume Camilla would have married him if he'd asked back in the 1970s. I mean, look at what happened to Charles's relationship with Davina Sheffield when the existence of one former lover came to light; the press would have had a field day with Camilla's past. It would have mattered a lot more then than it does now. Plus, if she wanted the life of a country lady without endless constraints, she wouldn't be keen to marry Charles.

Unfortunately she thought she could have her cake and eat it by marrying someone else and continuing her relationship with Charles; now she's in this position, and while she's doing a very good job of it, I'm not sure it's one that such a private person would have wanted.
I have read that he did ask Camilla, and she said no because she was really after Andrew Parker Bowles (and she knew that as a girl with a past she would have been deemed unacceptable).
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #169  
Old 11-01-2005, 06:43 PM
Princejohnny25's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: , Antarctica
Posts: 2,033
I did not say Charles was blameless. I just said Diana did not want the press to portray her as a bad wife and mother. So she put the blame on Charles and Camilla. I think Camilla has no fault in the break up of the marriage. It is completly Diana and Charles fault. They both were immature, lonely, brats who wanted love and fame. Charles found it in Camilla and that calmed him down. Diana found it in other places and men. Diana was still growing and at the top of her fame when she tragically died. Sadly, she was never able to settle down like Charles and I think that is why people do not like Charles and Camilla. They settled down and had the good life. But, maybe Diana did not want to settle down and have the man of her dreams. She had a family, an ex husband who is a great father and friend, maybe she just wanted to have fun and live her life outside the trappings of royalty. She is gone and nothing can be changed.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #170  
Old 11-01-2005, 08:28 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
I agree that Camilla probably didn't want to marry Charles. As hard as it is to believe, I think her marriage to him was a sacrifice of sorts.

Quite frankly, I see the Queen behind the push for marriage and the seeming push to get Camilla accepted as Queen. From her vantage point, otherwise she's going to leave her throne to an heir that for all intents and purposes has a morganatic wife (I know the marriage is not morganatic but with the Princess Consort title, it gives that effect) and that's not a good situation.

If she's able to get Camilla accepted as the next Queen, there will still be talk about Diana but the Queen will have achieved what she wanted in the first place, to leave the throne to the next King and his Queen. They don't need to be wildly popular but they do need to seem competent for the job.

Then the Queen can feel that she has done all she can for the success of the monarchy and she can live out the rest of her reign in peace.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #171  
Old 11-01-2005, 08:36 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: , Canada
Posts: 1,692
That's an interesting perspective. The accepted wisdom relies on Prince Charles as the only one pushing for the marriage. It doesn't even matter who wished for the marriage more, the fact that they are married settled a knotting issue for the monarchy.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #172  
Old 11-01-2005, 09:47 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: , Canada
Posts: 3,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel
I agree that Camilla probably didn't want to marry Charles. As hard as it is to believe, I think her marriage to him was a sacrifice of sorts.

Quite frankly, I see the Queen behind the push for marriage and the seeming push to get Camilla accepted as Queen. From her vantage point, otherwise she's going to leave her throne to an heir that for all intents and purposes has a morganatic wife (I know the marriage is not morganatic but with the Princess Consort title, it gives that effect) and that's not a good situation.

If she's able to get Camilla accepted as the next Queen, there will still be talk about Diana but the Queen will have achieved what she wanted in the first place, to leave the throne to the next King and his Queen. They don't need to be wildly popular but they do need to seem competent for the job.

Then the Queen can feel that she has done all she can for the success of the monarchy and she can live out the rest of her reign in peace.
I think this is a really interesting perspective ysabel. And I agree with it a lot.

I've always believed that Camilla didn't really want to marry Charles. Yes she loves Charles and wants to spend the rest of her life with him, but was marriage necessary to put a stamp on their relationship in her eyes? No.

I think the push came from Charles via the Queen to make things right and make things traditional -- even if the route of arrival wasn't conventional. Any married King and Queen is better in the eyes of Queen Elizabeth II than a King and his former mistress at his side.

I think too that there is some expectation/hope that in time the dalliances and transgressions will be less memorable. Unlikely to think that Charles and Camilla's affairs will ever be forgotten, but in time diminished in memory and less of a factor, especially if by the time Charles becomes King he and Camilla have been married for 10 years or so. And by then, William and Harry will be seriously dating, even married, so the majority of the focus will be on them rather than their father and Camilla, King and Queen or not.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #173  
Old 11-01-2005, 10:59 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
Well Alexandria and Incas, I can't claim any great insight here and I may be wrong. I was totally fooled by the Princess Consort business at first.

But when Camilla came out with the Dehli Durbar tiara that had only been worn by two reigning Queen Consorts, I figured that only the Queen could have done that. It was her tiara and if she had wanted to set Camilla up as the future Princess Consort she could have given Camilla another tiara. The tiara may not have the significance we ascribe to it but I can't see how it doesn't.

Plus I just couldn't see Camilla going to the Queen and begging, "Can I please, please, please wear the Delhi Durbar tonight?" No, no, no, that is just not Camilla.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #174  
Old 11-01-2005, 11:19 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: , Canada
Posts: 3,220
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel

But when Camilla came out with the Dehli Durbar tiara that had only been worn by two reigning Queen Consorts, I figured that only the Queen could have done that. It was her tiara and if she had wanted to set Camilla up as the future Princess Consort she could have given Camilla another tiara. The tiara may not have the significance we ascribe to it but I can't see how it doesn't.

Plus I just couldn't see Camilla going to the Queen and begging, "Can I please, please, please wear the Delhi Durbar tonight?" No, no, no, that is just not Camilla.
I think Camilla wearing the Dehli Durbar tiara at the Norwegian visit was a very loud and clear message from the Queen, even if indirectly. Camilla will be Queen, no matter what title she uses now. And perhaps the Queen's acceptance of Camilla as the future Queen is a nod or "permission" for the rest of her subjects to come around to this. There will of course be some resistance, but if the Queen has come to terms with it, then the rest should follow suit.

I've always felt that the Queen's acceptance of Camilla as a daughter in law is one thing. She is a mom and wants her son to be happy afterall as all moms would. But whether the Queen would accept Camilla as Queen of a country she's worked so hard for was another matter altogether. But the recent appearance of Camilla in that tiara has removed any remaining doubts I might've had about this, too.

I don't think Camilla would ever go and beg the Queen to be dripping in jewels either. That has never seemed Camilla's thing. Perhaps she was even uncomfortable wearing such a grand piece of jewellery and a tiara of such importance.

On this note, I also think that all these articles lately about "Camilla Chic" and Camilla's country fashion sense makes her rather uncomfortable. That has never seemed her thing -- to be conscientious of her fashion choices and designers. It may be the thing for other princesses who care about such things but Camilla has never seemed the sort who does and just wants to go about her business.

On the news this morning they were commenting about all the outfits Camilla had taken on her trip to the U.S. Even the news commentators commented that this seemed excessive for eight days for someone like Camilla. All this spiraled into a discussion about how if Camilla had her way she probably would've brought 10 outfits -- one for each day plus two to spare -- and been done with it. She would've shown up for all her scheduled events, happy to be two steps behind Charles and let him take the spotlight. But that the one thing Camilla probably wanted least -- to be in the spotlight -- is the one thing that will most certainly happen. I think that the description of what Camilla wants -- to let Charles be in the spotlight -- is exactly the sort of thing the Queen would approve of as a role for Camilla. Not because she was once Charles' mistress, but because that is what good consorts do.

I think that in her own quiet, understated way Camilla will change the monarchy. It won't be a change of leaps and bounds, but subtle changes that will have an impact on the roles played by William and Harry's wives.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #175  
Old 11-02-2005, 12:02 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: , Canada
Posts: 1,692
What seems amazing to me is that Camilla is finally coming across in the press as someone who is very comfortable in her own skin. Yes, she is dressing up more. But I get the sense that she is doing it for Charles, to make him look good. It's the press that made more hay out of her lack of interest in fashion, rather than her own discomfort. I find it admirable for any woman who can still maintain her self-confidence inspite of being judged for so long as lacking in physical attraction.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #176  
Old 11-02-2005, 12:55 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mapple
Maybe it is her genuine desire to be Princess Consort; but maybe it was a PR move to stave off criticism.
I don't doubt Camilla would have preferred to take a lower profile as Princess Consort and has no ambition or desire to be Queen. But, she is a member of the royal family now and understands she has responsibilities as consort to Charles, both as Prince of Wales and King. She will grow into her role and be a good Queen.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #177  
Old 11-02-2005, 12:59 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 589
Here are more peaceful and progressive opinions to see Charles and Camilla's future as King and Princess Consort. I am very glad that more and more people begin to accept Camilla as Chareles' wife and wish them good. I admire Prince Charles's achievements as Prince of Wales and I believe he will be a good King if he is given the chance. Camilla will certainly support Charels to achieve the goal of his life. Charles always needs a wife to support him and share his burden to be the future King. I wish he has found in Camilla. The Queen, the government, the church are compassionate to see this key point. I am really happy for that.
Edward VIII said he cannot be King without a woman he loved beside him. I am glad the history will not repeat when Charles becomes King. It is a big step for modernise the monarch. William and Harry will learn from his parents' mistakes and make better judgements for their future marriages. I hope that Charles and Camilla will be more accpetable by the public in future years.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #178  
Old 11-02-2005, 10:29 AM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
Re;

Camilla has been friends with Princess Alexandra for many many years and sat with her at the Golden Jubilee 'Prom/Party at the Palace' and is a frequent visitor to Thatched House Lodge. She was at Angus Ogilvy's funeral as well.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #179  
Old 11-02-2005, 10:39 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 7
Quote:
Originally Posted by HMQueenElizabethII
As The Duchess of Cornwall has become a member of the Royal Family for 3 months and had appeared together with other members of the Royal Family several times,so giving your opinion that how do you think of the relationship between other members of the Royal Family with the Duchess of Cornwall?
Daily Mail had an article that said she doesn't really have a relationship with any of the Royals.Apparently Camilla went to the Garter ceremony at Windsor by car with the Duchess of Gloucester but deserted her without explanation to make the return journey in Charles's carriage with him.Same article said Camilla doesn't like Sophie Wessex and calls her an "irrelevance"and was annoyed to be put in the carriage with her at Trooping the Colour in June.Anne it is said is very cool with Camilla out of loyalty to Andrew Parker Bowles her former love.Anne didn't talk to Diana either and was reported as snubbing Cherie Blair recently.Is there anyone Anne does talk to?That leaves the Queen and the Mail article said Camilla is scared of her and visibly shakes if she enters the room.True or not you can't have a relationship with someone who has that effect on you.Camilla's sister Annabel Elliot is a regular visitor to all her homes,but none of the Royals have been invited so far.Annabel helped Charles and Camilla to keep their affair going and has also taken on work redecorating Duchy of Cornwall properties for the Prince which never went out to tender.No one will say what she was paid.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #180  
Old 11-02-2005, 10:42 AM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,399
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mary Wellesley
Daily Mail had an article that said she doesn't really have a relationship with any of the Royals.
Seems to be quite an extensive hatchet job, eh? Written by Richard Kay by any chance?
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
british royal family, camilla, duchess of cornwall, relationships


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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Royal Families of Italy Jewellery Josefine Royal Jewels 148 07-19-2014 12:49 PM
Duchess of Cornwall Fashion and Style Part 1: April 2005 - December 2009 A.C.C. Archives 399 12-25-2009 01:30 AM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth charlene crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge dutch royal history engagement fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta leonor infanta sofia jewellery jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king constantine ii king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympic games ottoman picture of the month poland pom president hollande prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess mary queen anne-marie queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:48 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]