The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #841  
Old 09-11-2015, 10:45 PM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 9,864
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolph View Post
YouGov conducted a poll between 3-4 Sept 2015 on the popularity of the monarchy.

The question of Camilla's future title was asked.

16% believe Camilla should be called ‘Queen’ when Charles becomes King compared to 38% that prefer the title of ‘Princess Consort’. Just less than a third (32%) feel she should be given no title at all. 13% don't know.

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/09/08...chy-here-stay/
I wouldn't bet the house on those polls. At the last General Election all polls had the Opposition winning by a landslide and then . . . .
__________________

__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #842  
Old 09-12-2015, 01:07 AM
AfricanAUSSIE's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 888
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roslyn View Post
Because a surprisingly large number of people believe that Camilla is a home-wrecking witch who cast a spell on Charles that caused him to fall out of love with the saintly Diana and leave her and run to Camilla's arms and that since she is to blame, that it is all her fault and that therefore she should be punished by not being known as Queen Consort in due course.
Hahahaha! Well put. My mother has those sentiments exactly! And they have not abated over time.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #843  
Old 09-12-2015, 01:38 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,731
I'm of the opinion that when the time does come, no matter what title is chosen and used for Camilla, it will be what it is and if there is controversy surrounding what she is known as, it won't be Camilla or Charles that instigates it.

Regardless of if she's called HM, Queen Camilla or HRH The Princess Consort or just plain Gladys, her role and support of her husband will be the same as it is now.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #844  
Old 09-12-2015, 02:26 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jun 2015
Location: Southern California, United States
Posts: 22
I think the problem is creating a new title like "The Princess Consort" just specifically for Camilla that seems to be an issue. Right now she's the Princess of Wales but uses her next highest title, Duchess of Cornwall. No one has a problem with it because Cornwall is one of her titles. When Charles is King she will be Queen but couldn't she use her next highest title, Duchess of Lancaster?

HM The King and HRH The Princess Consort just sounds weird. We are used to HM The Queen and HRH The Duke of Edinburgh. HM The King and HRH The Duchess of Lancaster would be closer to what people are used to and would avoid having to even bother making up a title just for Camilla.
Reply With Quote
  #845  
Old 09-12-2015, 02:45 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 11,167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
[...] She rarely gives interviews [...]
That is a BIG plus actually. Has Queen Elizabeth ever, ever given an interview?

The interview which was given by the previous Princess of Wales almost destroyed the monarchy, so that was not a too big success either...



As no other media, the British love to frame everything. When they decide that a certain lady is too forceful, she becomes "Princess Pushy". The Duchess of Cornwall experiences the same. She is the most natural, most approachable and most easy-going of the lot. She seems to have a good sense of humour and an infectuous laughter. Yes, I think she will come closer and closer. The Princess Lilian of 1978 was no comparison to the Princess Lilian of 2008. Times change. People too.
Reply With Quote
  #846  
Old 09-12-2015, 04:26 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 8,908
Quote:
Originally Posted by MARG View Post
I wouldn't bet the house on those polls. At the last General Election all polls had the Opposition winning by a landslide and then . . . .
Clearly Clarence House pays attention to polls regarding Camilla otherwise we would all be calling her the Princess of Wales right now.
Reply With Quote
  #847  
Old 09-12-2015, 05:05 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolph View Post
Clearly Clarence House pays attention to polls regarding Camilla otherwise we would all be calling her the Princess of Wales right now.
I could be totally wrong but if I remember right, it was Camilla's choice to use the Duchess of Cornwall title and in no way a reaction to public opinion. In 2005, it had only been 7 years since Diana's death and being known by a different title no only respected the memory of Diana but also put to rest any kind of indication that Camilla was trying to step into Diana's shoes.

JMO of course.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #848  
Old 09-12-2015, 05:21 AM
AfricanAUSSIE's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 888
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolph View Post
Clearly Clarence House pays attention to polls regarding Camilla otherwise we would all be calling her the Princess of Wales right now.
I agree.

Camilla may have chosen her current title hoping to placate the public. The Palace concurs because of the polls.
Reply With Quote
  #849  
Old 09-12-2015, 06:05 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 11,167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolph View Post
Clearly Clarence House pays attention to polls regarding Camilla otherwise we would all be calling her the Princess of Wales right now.
Nonsense, already before her marriage it was informed that the new Princess of Wales is known as Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Cornwall (Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Rothesay in Scotland) and they have simply maintained it, with or without any poll. It was also communicated that it was Camilla's wish - apparently out of respect for the mother of her stepsons.
Reply With Quote
  #850  
Old 09-12-2015, 06:19 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,231
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I'm of the opinion that when the time does come, no matter what title is chosen and used for Camilla, it will be what it is and if there is controversy surrounding what she is known as, it won't be Camilla or Charles that instigates it.

Regardless of if she's called HM, Queen Camilla or HRH The Princess Consort or just plain Gladys, her role and support of her husband will be the same as it is now.
I wonder though if other continental European royal princes will curtsy to Camilla if the British court chooses to refer to her as Princess Consort regardless of whether she is legally Queen or not. I remind you that James and Louise for example are styled as children of an earl even though they should be legally HRHs.
Reply With Quote
  #851  
Old 09-12-2015, 06:29 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
I wonder though if other continental European royal princes will curtsy to Camilla if the British court chooses to refer to her as Princess Consort regardless of whether she is legally Queen or not. I remind you that James and Louise for example are styled as children of an earl even though they should be legally HRHs.
I would think the best example of protocol would be to look at how Prince Philip is regarded in the pecking order. His role and title now are the closest to what Camilla's would be as a Princess Consort I bet.

James, if all goes according to plan, will eventually inherit the title of Duke of Edinburgh and once Edward is created DoE, Louise will be Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
Reply With Quote
  #852  
Old 09-12-2015, 06:40 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,231
As for Camilla, I suppose her low profile is striking to us outside Europe maybe because we got used to high profile royal ladies in the continent like Maxima, Mathilde, Mary, or, to stay in Camilla's generation, Sylvia of Sweden. Camilla , who is not very qualified academically either, pales in comparison.
Reply With Quote
  #853  
Old 09-12-2015, 08:28 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 11,167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
I wonder though if other continental European royal princes will curtsy to Camilla if the British court chooses to refer to her as Princess Consort regardless of whether she is legally Queen or not. I remind you that James and Louise for example are styled as children of an earl even though they should be legally HRHs.
At most European Courts the révérence or the bow has disappeared but okay: when it is done, it is done to the Consort too. People curtsied to Prince Philip, Prince Henrik, the late Prince Claus, the late Prince Bernhard, etc. It is not the title, it is the precedence. I can imagine King Charles III issue the following:

"WHEREAS in testimony of the great love which We bear towards Our most dearly beloved spouse Camilla Rosemary Mountbatten-Windsor, being sensible of the high regard and affection in which she is held by Our loving subjects, We are desirous of conferring upon her a style and dignity appropriate to her rank and station.

NOW KNOW YE that We, of Our especial grace certain, do by these presents give and grant unto Camilla Rosemary Mountbatten-Windsor the title and dignity of Princess Consort to be held and enjoyed by her during Our joint lives in all places and on all occasions as her proper title and dignity.

AND We do further of Our royal favor and affection grant unto her, Our said most dearly beloved spouse, that by the said title of Princess Consort she shall have and enjoy the rank, place, pre-eminence and precedence of a royal consort."

Reply With Quote
  #854  
Old 09-12-2015, 08:36 AM
AdmirerUS's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 6,034
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mbruno View Post
I wonder though if other continental European royal princes will curtsy to Camilla if the British court chooses to refer to her as Princess Consort regardless of whether she is legally Queen or not. I remind you that James and Louise for example are styled as children of an earl even though they should be legally HRHs.
Whereas I just wonder how frequently Charles and Camilla will be face to face with the Continentals to even share a curtsy...
Reply With Quote
  #855  
Old 09-12-2015, 08:52 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 8,908
Here is the issue some experts have with 'Princess Consort'. The title does not exist in common law.

The constitution already provides a title and precedence for Camilla.

The wife of a King has the highest rank and dignity in the realm after her husband assigned to her by law.

The highest rank and dignity after a king is a queen not 'princess consort'

The reason 'Prince Consort' exits is because the constitution completely ignores the husband of a Queen.

(The Duke of Edinburgh was never created Prince Consort btw but a Prince of the United Kingdom)

Will the government allow Charles to just invent the title out of thin air?
Reply With Quote
  #856  
Old 09-12-2015, 11:17 AM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 4,112
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolph View Post
Here is the issue some experts have with 'Princess Consort'. The title does not exist in common law.

The constitution already provides a title and precedence for Camilla.

The wife of a King has the highest rank and dignity in the realm after her husband assigned to her by law.

The highest rank and dignity after a king is a queen not 'princess consort'

The reason 'Prince Consort' exits is because the constitution completely ignores the husband of a Queen.

(The Duke of Edinburgh was never created Prince Consort btw but a Prince of the United Kingdom)

Will the government allow Charles to just invent the title out of thin air?

The other issue is that in creating the title and denying her the use of the title of Queen, Charles is creating morganatic law in Britain.
Reply With Quote
  #857  
Old 09-12-2015, 11:33 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 11,167
In 1857 Queen Victoria created her spouse Albert Prince-Consort. I fail to see why King Charles can not create his spouse Camilla Princess-Consort. He can litterally use the Letters-Patent of 1857 and just adapt it to the current situation...

The monarchy is much more flexible than often is thought on these boards. The Prince of Wales marrying for a second time with a divorced lady? No problem. The children of the heir to the Heir also become a Prince of the UK? No problem. Making the succession gender neutral? No problem. Allowing successors to marry Catholics? No problem. Making Camilla a Princess-Consort? That will be no any problem at all, otherwise the Court would not have hinted this intention.
Reply With Quote
  #858  
Old 09-12-2015, 11:39 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 11,167
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
The other issue is that in creating the title and denying her the use of the title of Queen, Charles is creating morganatic law in Britain.
No he is not because morganatic law does not exist. Almost all approved marriages in the British royal family are with "commoners" and have been for several generations. Note that Camilla fully shares in all the Prince of Wales' titles but "is known as" the Duchess of Cornwall or the Duchess of Rothesay, this dismisses any "morganatic" claim. Note that Peter Phillips and Zara Phillips have no any title at all but are nevertheless very much in the line of succession.
Reply With Quote
  #859  
Old 09-12-2015, 02:00 PM
cepe's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,333
Holding a poll at the beginning of September, when the papers are reporting the anniversary of the death of Diana is poor practice.

As with all polls, the wording of the questions and the timing will influence results.
__________________

This precious stone set in the silver sea,......
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England,
Reply With Quote
  #860  
Old 09-12-2015, 02:26 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Belfast, United Kingdom
Posts: 255
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
I consider the Duchess as one of the assets of the royal family whom will become one of the most beloved royals. Wait and see. In 10 years time Camilla has become such a natural part of the royal family and she is able to become a sort of Princess Lilian type. She is a wonderful lady. The total opposite of flat, boring and predictable Catherine.
I totally agree with your assertions regarding Camilla - she is valued very much by Prince Charles who seems to be happier than he has ever been in his life - she is valued by Prince Philip, who is often seen having a joke or a quiet moment of fun with her - she is valued by Her Majesty The Queen who gave her the highest personal honour a Monarch can bestow, the Dame Grand Cross of the RVO in 2012 - and she appears to be valued dearly by her step-sons the Duke of Cambridge and Prince Harry. And the general public seem to be warming to her too.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
camilla, duchess of cornwall, public opinion


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





Popular Tags
american archie mountbatten-windsor asia baby names biography birth britain britannia british royal family buckingham palace camilla camilla's family camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles china china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing chinese clarence house colorblindness commonwealth countries coronation crown jewels daisy doge of venice dresses duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex edward vii family life gemstones george vi gustaf vi adolf hello! henry viii hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume history hypothetical monarchs jack brooksbank japan jewellery kensington palace king edward vii książ castle lili mountbatten-windsor line of succession list of rulers medical meghan markle monarchy mountbatten names nara period plantinum jubilee pless politics portugal prince charles of luxembourg prince harry princess eugenie queen louise solomon j solomon spanish royal family speech sussex taiwan thai royal family united states wales


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:40 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×