The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #441  
Old 01-24-2008, 01:36 PM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToytownZara View Post
On that, we agree - but what about the religious aspects? And does the Archbishop of Canterbury get any say in it, if her ex WAS still living at the time of coronation?

Could she be CALLED Queen without being CROWNED as such - or am I just a dithering idiot who needs major revision on the subject of royalty?

I'm not trying to be difficult, I'm just a bit confused.
As Camilla's first husband was a Catholic, I guess fot the CoE Charles is a widower and Camilla never was married properly. At least that's how Catholics deal with the case when the first spouse was not a catholic and the first marriage did not take place in the Catholic church according to the wedding sacrament, then the second marriage is the real one.

But if now a document shows up by Andrew Parker Bowles saying that the queen is going to abdicate next year and that Charles will bump him off, I start yelling!
__________________

__________________
'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.
  #442  
Old 01-24-2008, 03:28 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Merseyside, United Kingdom
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimebear View Post
What was the childish behavior?
According to the media press pack on Prince Charles's website for the wedding there was meant to be a 5 minute photo-call for the couple and their families on the steps of St George's Chapel when they emerged after the service. This never happened, because: a) the Queen walked off the steps and into her waiting car, leaving Prince Charles ushering to an empty space beside him; and b) someone ordered the ushers inside the chapel to close the doors in front of the Shand family, thus preventing them from emerging onto the steps until after the Queen & Prince Philip had departed. The former can be confirmed by looking at an unedited video of the ceremony and the latter by Tom P-B's joke about it on US tv recently.
The 'Greville' jewels which Camilla frequently wears - the 5 strand necklace & engagement ring - were given to the Queen Mother in 1942 by a close friend. King George VI thought them so extravagant that he forbade her to wear them in public during & after the war years. They first appeared in public onlyafter the King's death, in 1960 for the State Visit of President De Gaulle. I, therefore, doubt that she would have considered them part of the Royal Collection of jewels. Certainly, according to people I know in the Royal Collection the Queen Mother didn't consider her paintings collection to belong to the Queen and therefore bequeathed it to Prince Charles, knowing that he would then allow the Royal Collection to display it. So I would think that it was quite possible that this particular set of jewels - particularly the engagement ring - was bequeathed to Prince Charles directly. NB It was recently revealed in the BRitish press that the Queen went to great lengths to prevent the Queen Mother's will from ever being revealed in public - so none of us in the Forum will probably live to know who the Queen Mother bequeathed the jewels to.
__________________

__________________
  #443  
Old 01-24-2008, 03:36 PM
jcbcode99's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Richmond Area, United States
Posts: 1,980
I thought that the Queen Mother left all jewels to her daughter in a sovereign to sovereign exchange that would exempt the pieces from taxation.
__________________
Janet

"We make a living by what we do; we make a life by what we give" Winston Churchill
  #444  
Old 01-24-2008, 04:54 PM
kimebear's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Albany, United States
Posts: 1,382
That's what I thought too. I had always believed that (a) Charles was very close to his grandmother (more so that to his own mother) and (b) the Queen Mother highly disapproved of Camilla and any idea that Charles had about marrying her. So I would be suprised if the jewels actually went directly to Charles since he would have had to pay a duty on them and that, if they had, he would dishonor his grandmother's feelings about Camilla by letting her wear the jewels without his mother's consent. Like I said earlier, I don't think the queen was especially happy about the marriage, but if she had wanted to, she could have made it impossible for them to marry without taking away his place in the line of succession. For a variety of reasons, their wedding day was probably not a happy one for the queen and perhaps her stellar sense of propriety was lessened on the occasion, but she and Camilla seem to get along nowadays and that's all that matters.
__________________
  #445  
Old 01-24-2008, 06:16 PM
wbenson's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,230
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToytownZara View Post
Could she be CALLED Queen without being CROWNED as such - or am I just a dithering idiot who needs major revision on the subject of royalty?
She very well could be. No coronation is necessary to affirm her title. The wife of the King becomes the Queen immediately upon the death of the previous monarch.
__________________
  #446  
Old 01-25-2008, 04:15 AM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimebear View Post
For a variety of reasons, their wedding day was probably not a happy one for the queen and perhaps her stellar sense of propriety was lessened on the occasion, but she and Camilla seem to get along nowadays and that's all that matters.
As all mothers, the queen had to learn that at some point her children are grown-ups who make their own decisions and their own faults. I found an interesting page about the documents that were exchanged by the involved bodies of the government when it came to the queen's wish to bestow the title of a prince of the UK on her husband (which had never been done before to a person not born into the British Royal family). I think after prince Charles and Camilla had decided to marry they informed the queen and she started the procedure to see how it could work when it comes to the constitution.

In any case Charles could have asked parliament for their agreement if the queen had decided to say no and if parliament did not agree, he could have gone to the European Court of human rights to have the Royal marriages Act changed so he could marry Camilla without loosing his place in the succession. I am convinced he did not want to do that but he could have done it. So he had quite some arguments against all the queen could say and somehow I doubt she said so much about this matter. She only took care IMHo that the procedure was conform with the laws and that was that.
__________________
'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.
  #447  
Old 01-25-2008, 02:24 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Merseyside, United Kingdom
Posts: 180
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimebear View Post
That's what I thought too. I had always believed that (a) Charles was very close to his grandmother (more so that to his own mother) and (b) the Queen Mother highly disapproved of Camilla and any idea that Charles had about marrying her. So I would be suprised if the jewels actually went directly to Charles since he would have had to pay a duty on them and that, if they had, he would dishonor his grandmother's feelings about Camilla by letting her wear the jewels without his mother's consent. Like I said earlier, I don't think the queen was especially happy about the marriage, but if she had wanted to, she could have made it impossible for them to marry without taking away his place in the line of succession. For a variety of reasons, their wedding day was probably not a happy one for the queen and perhaps her stellar sense of propriety was lessened on the occasion, but she and Camilla seem to get along nowadays and that's all that matters.
If the Queen Mother was so anti Charles and Camilla as a couple why did she allows Prince Charles to entertain Camilla at Birkhall Lodge (her own property) during her lifetime. IMO I don't think we'll ever find out the QM's true opinion of the couple until William Shawcross's official biography of the QM gets published - if that ever happens of course! According to Richard Kay the text of the biography was handed to the Queen's private secretary for royal vetting and approval in the first week of September 2007. According to Penguin Publishers' website it was due for publication in October 2007. It hasn't been heard of since September and no new publication date has been given. Jonathan Dimbleby's 820page tome took less than 2 months to vet and we know that that had pieces edited out of it at Buckingham Palace's request, because Dimbleby admitted as much in 1994. So heaven knows what is being edited out of the QM biography during the 4 months its already been with the Queen.
__________________
  #448  
Old 01-25-2008, 02:49 PM
milla Ca's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Hannover, Germany
Posts: 1,515
I´m sure the Queen Mother always wanted the best for her favourite grandson Charles. So she liked Diana as long as she thought she was good for Charles ( and the monarchy ) and she began to dislike her when she saw that Charles was very unhappy with her and Diana tried to damage the monarchy ( with her interviews etc. )
I´m also sure the Queen Mother had nothing against Camilla. I think she liked her and knows about her importance for Charles. But she had always her brother-in-law (Edward VIII ) and Wallis Simpson in her mind. And the worst word for her, i think, was abdication. So she always was afraid that Charles could one day marry the divorced Camilla and the result could be a abdication again.
__________________
´We will all have to account for our actions to our children and grand-children, and if we don´t get this right, how will they ever forgive us?´
Prince Charles in a speech, 6th December 2006
  #449  
Old 01-25-2008, 03:17 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by kimebear View Post
Like I said earlier, I don't think the queen was especially happy about the marriage, but if she had wanted to, she could have made it impossible for them to marry without taking away his place in the line of succession. For a variety of reasons, their wedding day was probably not a happy one for the queen and perhaps her stellar sense of propriety was lessened on the occasion, but she and Camilla seem to get along nowadays and that's all that matters.
HM originally agreed to (and therefore supported the marriage), the use of Windsor for the civil ceremony. That doesn't sound like someone putting obstacles in the way. Camilla and Charles were probably a little nervous after the threats that had been made by the Diana circle but in the end the DC idiots didn't manage a big show and Charles and Camilla had a wonderful wedding.
HM was positively beaming, as she seems to have been ever since!

the QM supported Charles in every way that she could and I doubt we will every know the true amount of help she gave to Charles and Camilla. Charles and Camilla were stepping out in public together before the QM died, if she was so upset by this, she wouldn't have left Charles a brass razoo.
__________________
  #450  
Old 01-25-2008, 05:08 PM
wbenson's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,230
Is the Queen even able to choose for herself whether or not to sanction a marriage, or is that done only "on advice"?
__________________
  #451  
Old 01-25-2008, 11:29 PM
kimebear's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Albany, United States
Posts: 1,382
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
HM originally agreed to (and therefore supported the marriage), the use of Windsor for the civil ceremony. That doesn't sound like someone putting obstacles in the way. Camilla and Charles were probably a little nervous after the threats that had been made by the Diana circle but in the end the DC idiots didn't manage a big show and Charles and Camilla had a wonderful wedding.
HM was positively beaming, as she seems to have been ever since!

the QM supported Charles in every way that she could and I doubt we will every know the true amount of help she gave to Charles and Camilla. Charles and Camilla were stepping out in public together before the QM died, if she was so upset by this, she wouldn't have left Charles a brass razoo.
I wasn't trying to insinuate that it was Camilla herself that HM didn't care for. Just the past sense of scandal that was created. The queen is nothing, if not, duty first. I think it probably really bothered her that her heir's wedding (second or not) was not celebrated in a larger fashion. After all, the bride is most likely the next queen and the current queen might have wanted a larger affair for the wedding of the next monarchs without the shadow that was cast over it.
__________________
  #452  
Old 01-26-2008, 12:29 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
Quote:
Originally Posted by ToytownZara View Post
On that, we agree - but what about the religious aspects? And does the Archbishop of Canterbury get any say in it, if her ex WAS still living at the time of coronation?

Could she be CALLED Queen without being CROWNED as such - or am I just a dithering idiot who needs major revision on the subject of royalty?

I'm not trying to be difficult, I'm just a bit confused.
Yes. Edward VIII was King from the moment of his accession to the moment of his abdication, even though he was never crowned. She wouldn't just be called Queen, she would be Queen.

The Archbishop could conceivably refuse to crown Charles and/or Camilla, but considering the morals of some of the previous monarchs who have been crowned with no problems, I can't see it happening, and I have a feeling it might backfire fairly nastily on the Church if it was seen that the Church was putting its foot down about who is and who isn't suitable to be Head of State. We're way beyond the days when the Church was that powerful.
__________________
  #453  
Old 01-26-2008, 09:52 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by wbenson View Post
Is the Queen even able to choose for herself whether or not to sanction a marriage, or is that done only "on advice"?
The Sovereign must take advice from The Prime Minister if the marriage is considered to be of importance to the State (i.e. the heir to the throne, his/her children, controversial with the public).

For marriages of other family members or distant relatives, it is not necessary.
__________________
  #454  
Old 01-29-2008, 11:45 AM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
I just found this interesting poll about the question if Camilla should become queen - with long term results:

Ipsos MORI: Monarchy Trends

While the figures are still not very pleasant, the tendency is!
__________________
'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.
  #455  
Old 01-29-2008, 02:48 PM
cde cde is offline
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Marina del rey, United States
Posts: 235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine View Post
I just found this interesting poll about the question if Camilla should become queen - with long term results:

Ipsos MORI: Monarchy Trends

While the figures are still not very pleasant, the tendency is!
Well no one ever said convincing people Camilla should be Queen was a quick weekend project. Sigh
Still your right, the numbers are looking up. And that is the important thing.
__________________
  #456  
Old 01-29-2008, 05:43 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
See, I find the asking people pretty pointless as they've got no say in it anyway. She will be Queen and there's nothing anyone can do about it except the Almighty. Why bother with these useless polls?
__________________
  #457  
Old 01-29-2008, 06:23 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,983
Quote:
I find the asking people pretty pointless as they've got no say in it anyway.
If we, the people, have no part to play, then there would have been no need to propose an alternative now would there...

Directly? It is a decision which is to be made within the corridors of power and it is there the final word is said.

Indirectly? Abolsutely the people have a say. By the time Charles is King and if no greater majority had warmed to the idea, then The Prime Minister of the day, amongst others, would surely not neglect the show of public feeling. Not reading the public mood can be a very precarious business, as they well know.

If the greater majorty support Camilla as Queen Consort then full steam ahead. If in the event they do not, then there's really nothing standing in the way of creating her Princess Consort. I would be certain the appropriate executive papers would be drawn up, and passed, quite quickly.
__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
  #458  
Old 01-29-2008, 06:39 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
But thats the point of monarchy - you get what you get and you don't get a say. If you want a say, you ditch the crown and get a President in where you can have a say. Anyone who thinks the monarchy is governed by committee is always going to be disappointed.
__________________
  #459  
Old 01-29-2008, 06:43 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,731
The monarchy must have the consent of the people to survive. To ignore the wishes of the public is to deestablish it altogether and have a republic instead.

If the majority of Britons remain opposed, Parliament will act to remove Camilla's right to be HM The Queen, allowing Charles to issue letters patent creating her HRH The Princess Consort instead.
__________________
  #460  
Old 01-29-2008, 06:45 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: San Francisco, United States
Posts: 2,030
Camilla will be Queen Camilla. Charles will never settle for anything less. The public will only have any say in the issue if the public outcry and opinions are so strong that the future of the monarchy is in jeopardy.
When the current Queen dies and Charles ascends the throne the country will be in deep mourning and whatever he wants he will get.
__________________

__________________
Closed Thread

Tags
camilla, duchess of cornwall, princess consort, queen consort, styles and titles


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
Princess Madeleine, Current Events Part 3: August 2004 - June 2005 Josefine Current Events Archive 279 06-26-2005 08:56 PM
Royal Family of Belgium Part 2 Alexandria Current Events Archive 190 03-30-2005 11:56 AM
Prince Felipe and Princess Letizia, Current Events Part 3: October - December 2004 Alexandria Current Events Archive 274 12-04-2004 08:11 AM
King Carl XVI Gustaf and Queen Silvia, Current Events Part 1: November 2002-June 2004 Josefine Current Events Archive 300 06-12-2004 08:13 AM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit current events diana fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri habsburg infanta cristina infanta elena infanta leonor infanta sofia king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander olympics ottoman palace picture of the month pom president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince felix prince floris prince frederik prince pieter-christiaan princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess haya princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marie princess mary princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia spain state visit sweden wedding william


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

RV & Travel Trailer Communities

Our RV & Travel Trailer sites encompasses virtually all types of Recreational Vehicles, from brand-specific to general RV communities.

» More about our RV Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:46 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]