If The Duke of Edinburgh outlived The Queen... - Page 2

Iluvbertie · #21 03-05-2006, 11:42 PM

The reports and the facts, as I interpret them, don't necessarily agree.

1. Edward is the baby of the family - and therefore often the favourite.

2. Edward quit the marines and upset his father in doing so - or did he? His father may very well have been proud that his son stood up to him and said that the military wasn't for him.

3. Edward is the one who is to get his father's title - even though Charles will inherit it the decision was made the Edward was to have it recreated for him - not something a father would necessarily want for a son with whom he wasn't close! Of course Philip may have agreed to that so that the title could pass on!

4. Edward is the son replacing Philip as head of the Duke of Edinburgh award scheme and on the Commonwealth Games committee. i.e. Edward is taking over his father's positions - again something indicative of a closeness if not favouritism for the baby.

5. Charles has made comments that upset his father about his father's as a father and therefore their is the potential for some tenseness. Whether that constitutes a riff is another matter. Philip is close to Charles' sons and has many things in common with Charles so I don't really think there is a riff but more a feeling that Charles is the third favourite out of three sons, and probably the child with whom Philip would least like to live. "Least like" doesn't equal 'not like' by the way.

Georgia · #22 03-07-2006, 10:01 PM

I think - and this is just my personal view - that Philip and Charles are just two different people who hold different opionions on the same things. It's probably not a rift rather just what happens in hunderds of other families when sons grow up and have families and responsibilities of their own. Their fathers are no longer the most important or influencial people in their lives.

Empress · #23 03-07-2006, 10:45 PM

Could we try not to refer to Camilla as Queen until/if such time that it becomes fact.

She still has some ways to go to redeem herself in my eyes, although I suppose that that is not impossible.

And, no I am not saying that Diana was perfect or that Camilla is evil, or the other way around. I just think that the whole situation could have been better handled from the get go.

I hope I do not offend anyone.

Saragli · #24 03-07-2006, 11:28 PM

No offence. But as you will quickly learn. Past is the Past and you cant change it. You accept what you and you look at the good and you move on. Camilla WILL be Queen, what she is called is something else. But lets not discuss that.

branchg · #25 03-07-2006, 11:30 PM

Camilla will be Queen unless Parliament agrees to pass an Act allowing her to be Princess Consort instead. The likelihood of that happening is next to zero. She cannot be "something else" without legislation being passed.

Iluvbertie · #26 03-08-2006, 01:06 AM

The awkward thing to my mind with her title is when would Parliament pass this legislation?

If they pass it before the Queen dies then they are asking her mother-in-law to sign legislation making her son's wife a second class wife - ie not good enough to be queen and therefore raise the question of whether the marriage should ever have taken place in the first place.

If they wait until Charles is king she will automatically become queen. Then they pass legislation taking away a title. They would have to give a reason surely - again - not good enough to be queen - what a great accession present for the new king that would be - 'congratulations on your accession Your Majesty - by the way your wife isn't going to be queen any more and you have to sign the legislation taking it away from her'.

Does anyone really envision either of these situations actually happening? I don't.

She will be Queen.

Toledo · #27 03-08-2006, 01:11 AM

I'm afraid to admitt that will happen. Camilla will be Queen because Charles won't have it any other way. Even though I was always a big fan of Diana, past is past and we all have to adapt the same way her kids adapted to the changes in the family.

Warren · #28 03-08-2006, 06:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toledo

Camilla will be Queen because Charles won't have it any other way.

Toledo, let's not over-dramatise. Camilla will be Queen automatically when Charles becomes King. What other way is there? If we are looking for signs, two tiaras speak volumes.:)

Toledo · #29 03-08-2006, 08:34 AM

tabloid pressure. My prediction, when Charles becomes King and Camilla Queen the tabloids and yellow press around will have a field day at their expense. Frankly, I have come to the point that I'm starting to like the present Camilla, not the past one and her doings. But she gains on you with time.
Got to go now...

Empress · #30 03-08-2006, 09:17 AM

I did not mean that she is not growing on me as well, she is. What I meant is that she still has some ways to go before I personally would feel comfortable calling her queen. I understand the politics of it, no question there, but unless she chooses, along with Charles to be called as queen, I think that we should not refer to her as such. never mind that it seems somewhat disrespectful to Queen Elizabeth.

Two tiara do speak volumes. BUt then againthe Queen is in something of a sticky situation. There has already been one marriage that did not work due to the pressures of royal life, and that was compuounded by them both airing their dirty laundry in public. I think that (in my opinion) that she would like to avoid a repeat of the situation and get the Royal Family back on the same sort of footing that it used to be on, ie respectful, full of class, and what a royal family should be. I am sure that as she gets older she also wants to have her family as a whole and not torn apart by someother friction, and therefore is trying to show sympathy, respect and empathy with her sons choice.

My opinion only though.

Elspeth · #31 03-08-2006, 12:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chrissy57

The awkward thing to my mind with her title is when would Parliament pass this legislation?

If they pass it before the Queen dies then they are asking her mother-in-law to sign legislation making her son's wife a second class wife - ie not good enough to be queen and therefore raise the question of whether the marriage should ever have taken place in the first place.

If they wait until Charles is king she will automatically become queen. Then they pass legislation taking away a title. They would have to give a reason surely - again - not good enough to be queen - what a great accession present for the new king that would be - 'congratulations on your accession Your Majesty - by the way your wife isn't going to be queen any more and you have to sign the legislation taking it away from her'.

Does anyone really envision either of these situations actually happening? I don't.

She will be Queen.

I could envision the second scenario if Camilla really wanted to not be Queen. But I hope that in that case, some influential people sit her down and give her a talking to about the responsibilities she took on when she married Charles.

branchg · #32 03-08-2006, 08:05 PM

It didn't happen in 1936 and it won't happen in the future. Parliament and the Crown Commonwealth nations will never allow a precedent to be enshrined with legislation allowing the King's wife to hold a lesser title and rank.

**Zonk** · #33 03-08-2006, 09:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by branchg

It didn't happen in 1936 and it won't happen in the future. Parliament and the Crown Commonwealth nations will never allow a precedent to be enshrined with legislation allowing the King's wife to hold a lesser title and rank.

Its a different world than 1936. I personally think Camilla will be Queen. If we were living in the same world..they would have never married. The question of a divorcee marrying the PoW was at one time unthinkable. And that was shattered last year.

Empress · #34 03-08-2006, 10:46 PM

In any case, as stated by the BRF website, she will NOT be known as queen, rather as The Princess Consort. So that settles that.

Now as to whether or not she is actually Queen, only those in government can answer I suppose.

That does bring up the whole hornets nest of questons.. i.e If she and say Queen Sylvia are in the same room at the same time, who takes precedence? The one with Queen in her title or the one with Princess who might actually be queen?

Can anyone answer that? I can't.

ysbel · #35 03-08-2006, 11:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Empress

In any case, as stated by the BRF website, she will NOT be known as queen, rather as The Princess Consort. So that settles that. .

Empress, you may want to read these threads where Camilla's title was exhaustively discussed.

Title for Camilla part 1
Title for Camilla part 2
Will Charles Ever Reign

There are problems with the Princess Consort title (albeit what the BRF website says) which is more thoroughly discussed there.

Perhaps you'd like to pose your questions there.

Elspeth · #36 03-09-2006, 01:02 AM

Three threads? That was pretty exhaustive!

I expect the Queen's lawyers read these threads when they need to be given some pointers on the finer aspects of royal doings. They can count themselves fortunate to have us to turn to in their moments of need.

crisiñaki · #37 03-09-2006, 01:38 AM

Aren't we getting out of topic here?
That's exactly why there are 3 threads for the Camilla discussion and I wish this won't become number 4:( .

I rather think that QEII and DoE will die very close to each other; it's a fact that losing your significant other, your life partner takes a big toll in old people so I believe that he'll leave Buckingham and live with one of his children, probably with Edward him being the youngest and all.

sorry about the bold but I wanted my point stated without doubts:o

Jo of Palatine · #38 03-09-2006, 05:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by branchg

It was agreed an earldom would be conferred at this time because the intention is for Charles to create him Duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Merinoth and Baron Greenwich after the death of The Queen and Prince Philip. The reason for this is both William and Harry will have their own peerages by the time their father becomes King and will not inherit their grandfather's titles.

Does anyone know if it has already been fixed that The Earl of Wessex is to be the title of the heir of the Duke of Edinburgh and that Edward will automatically inherit when his father dies? Normally the eldest son of a duke inherits the title and the dukedom and in this case there is still another son in-between Edward and Charles.

So: what was written in the original patent letter for Prince Philip about the future of his title? Did these rules change in favour of Prince Edward? Was there something included in Prince Edward's patent letters? Or is it up to Prince Charles to give his brother the dukedom in case his father survives the queen and Charles is already king when the duke of Edinburgh dies?

Thank you in advance for telling me.

Jo of Palatine · #39 03-09-2006, 06:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Empress

That does bring up the whole hornets nest of questons.. i.e If she and say Queen Sylvia are in the same room at the same time, who takes precedence? The one with Queen in her title or the one with Princess who might actually be queen?

Can anyone answer that? I can't.

I guess that's what protocoll officers are there for. It would depend who is hostess and who is guest IMHO as the official positions are equal: both are the wifes of the head of their state. I believe any First lady who is wife of the head of state is equal to a Royal First lady nowadays.

But the details will probably worked out in any case seperately.

branchg · #40 03-09-2006, 10:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine

Does anyone know if it has already been fixed that The Earl of Wessex is to be the title of the heir of the Duke of Edinburgh and that Edward will automatically inherit when his father dies? Normally the eldest son of a duke inherits the title and the dukedom and in this case there is still another son in-between Edward and Charles.

So: what was written in the original patent letter for Prince Philip about the future of his title? Did these rules change in favour of Prince Edward? Was there something included in Prince Edward's patent letters? Or is it up to Prince Charles to give his brother the dukedom in case his father survives the queen and Charles is already king when the duke of Edinburgh dies?

Thank you in advance for telling me.

When Charles becomes King, we will have to see how he recreates the Dukedom of Edinburgh for Edward. It's possible he will forgo creating his brother Earl of Merinoth and Baron Greenwich as subsidiary titles in favor of his existing earldom and viscountcy. In that case, Edward's eldest son, if any, would hold the courtesy title, Earl of Wessex.

The current creation of the Dukedom of Edinburgh included the standard remainder to male heirs. So, Prince Charles will automatically succeed his father as the 2nd Duke if he is not yet King. If he is already the Sovereign, the titles would merge with the Crown since the King cannot be a peer. At that point, he would recreate it for Edward.