Charles and Camilla - The Early Years (1970s)

[Moonmaiden23]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

I had a quick flick through and I don't know where the assertion that they were not in love/lovers came from, not me I think. I did point out that Brown's book is based on, among others Bradford's and as neither one of them were there or have spoken to Charles or Camilla..... I recall the gossip that they were getting carried away when they were dancing, with the pair of them being energetic, certainly never the suggestion that they were kissing in front of everyone, let alone French kissing.

I'll provide the exact passage for you on Thursday. Page number and all.

As I have already stated, Sarah Bradford has no reason to lie or embellish. She is not and was not a member of the Diana Set...she is more of an Establishment member since her husband is a peer(Viscount Bangor?) She has no dog in this fight as we say here in the US.

But no problem...Thursday I will be happy to quote the passage and the page and even the source if Viscountess Bangor lists them in her book.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by CaliforniaDreamin

Great point Boris, and I have begun to wonder the same exact thing. Thank goodness I am not hallucinating or imagining this.

For anyone who does insists on quotes, pages, etc I won't be around tomorrow but will be happy to provide this info when I come back on Thursday.

Perhaps because on these threads, as I have said, time and again people seem to misquote or repeat gossip as fact. We have one poster saying Dimbleby stated one thing and another poster saying that wasn't quite what he said.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by CaliforniaDreamin

I'll provide the exact passage for you on Thursday. Page number and all.

As I have already stated, Sarah Bradford has no reason to lie or embellish. She is not and was not a member of the Diana Set...she is more of an Establishment member since her husband is a peer(Viscount Bangor?) She has no dog in this fight as we say her in the US.

But no problem...Thursday I will be happy to quote the passage and the page and even the source if Viscountess Bangor lists them in her book.

I am sure someone will be able to help us out tomorrow. Sarah Bradford married in I believe!

[Elspeth]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

I recall the gossip that they were getting carried away when they were dancing, with the pair of them being energetic, certainly never the suggestion that they were kissing in front of everyone, let alone French kissing.

I remember seeing that passage. Including the French kissing, and the comment from Andrew Parker Bowles that HRH seemed very fond of his wife or something equally obvious. I don't remember the book, though. I'll try and find it. I do remember that the chapter containing this description was called "Kissing Camilla."

[ysbel]

I well remember reading in the 70s about the press knowing that Charles often would ask his women friends to escort him publically so he could hide the real woman he was interested with. And this was in the late seventies before his marriage. The press gave the impression that it was not one woman during all this time but that Charles was hiding different romantic interests at different times. I don't know how they'd know that but I suspect if Charles had kept a silent flame for Camilla all that time, the press would have eventually found out as they later did with Diana. I remember thinking at the time that he took the precaution simply because Lady Jane Wellesley had been harassed by the press so much during their 2 year courtship and he did not want a repeat of what happened to Lady Jane.

[Moonmaiden23]

Originally Posted by Elspeth

I remember seeing that passage. Including the French kissing, and the comment from Andrew Parker Bowles that HRH seemed very fond of his wife or something equally obvious. I don't remember the book, though. I'll try and find it. I do remember that the chapter containing this description was called "Kissing Camilla."

Elspeth the book I saw the passage in was from Sarah Bradford's "Diana"...I read it just this past Sunday and it shocked and repulsed me. APB wasn't upset though, of course he had not a leg to stand on considering what he was up to himself.

I am reading the paperback version and I will bring the book on Thursday so I can confirm the chapter and pages, etc.

[Moonmaiden23]

Originally Posted by ysbel

I well remember reading in the 70s about the press knowing that Charles often would ask his women friends to escort him publically so he could hide the real woman he was interested with. And this was in the late seventies before his marriage. The press gave the impression that it was not one woman during all this time but that Charles was hiding different romantic interests at different times. I don't know how they'd know that but I suspect if Charles had kept a silent flame for Camilla all that time, the press would have eventually found out as they later did with Diana. I remember thinking at the time that he took the precaution simply because Lady Jane Wellesley had been harassed by the press so much during their 2 year courtship and he did not want a repeat of what happened to Lady Jane.

Sarah Bradford alleges that Anna Wallace, daughter of a Scots landowner, dumped Charles because he took her to a party and spent the whole night talking to Camilla. Good for her!

At the great ball that preceded their wedding, Charles opened the ball by dancing with his fiancee Diana only once the entire evening. He then spent the rest of the night dancing attendance on Mrs Parker Bowles, and glued to her side.

It was roughly two nights before the wedding, and Diana could not back out then.

For all her horrible and ill-advised behavior during her marriage and afterward it's information like this that makes me have more sympathy for Diana in this entire tragic fiasco than I could ever have for Charles and Camilla.

The poor girl really never had a chance.

[COUNTESS]

It is page 59 of the Bradford book for purity. "Jane Ward" a former girlfriend recalled, that Charles and Camilla spent the whole evening together, basically dancing and behaving passionately to one another, " French Kissing", etc, etc. Andrew could not have cared less, also a quote. Of course, The lord, himself, cannot authenticate this, thus to some it must be a lie. I asked the Lord's forgiveness. Sarah Bradford is not given to sensation or lies in her very admired career. Charles and Camilla do and did love each other and to that end they did what they wished. They just hoped for more circumspection. As someone else stated, he married the wrong person for that. Camilla and he could have carried on for life for all Andrew cared, as long as it didn't appear in the papers.

[Elspeth]

Well, here's one reference to the French kissing, from Christopher Wilson's "The Windsor Knot," chapter "Kissing Camilla," p. 85-86.

'The Cirencester Polo Club Ball was, as always, a private affair with no members of the press or public allowed. A biannual celebration, it was remarkable that year only because it was exceptionally hot: A marquee was built on the lawns of Cirencester House, a large Cotswold stone edifice, set in fifteen thousand acres, belonging to Earl Bathurst, and around three hundred and fifty black-tied and bejeweled guests were expected.

The guest of honor would be the Prince of Wales, a man who adored the turf of the Cirencester ground and played there reguarly. Among the other guests were Andrew and Camilla Parker Bowles. It was a glittering occasion where the wine flowed and the hot summer evening raised the temperatures of all but the dullest reveler.

"But what happened was quite astonishing," recalled one guest that night, Charles's former girlfriend Jane Ward. "Charles and the Parker Bowleses shared the same table, and Charles spent the whole evening dancing with Camilla. They were kissing passionately as they danced - on and on they went, kissing each other, French kissing, dance after dance.

"Andrew wasn't quite sure how to react - he sat there smiling and saying to people: 'HRH is very fond of my wife. And she appears to be very fond of him.' He seemed not uncomfortable with what was going on, but other people were, especially the older ones. Some were embarrassed and shocked and upset because the whole thing was so blatant," went on Ms. Ward. "It's bad enough, in such company, to monopolize one woman all evening. It's worse if it's someone else's wife. But the way they were behaving was completely beyond the pale." '

[Elspeth]

I had a look at the Bradford book, and she cites the above passage from the Wilson book as her source. Since she seememd to be trying to write a careful and accurate biography, and since the source of this information was named, I assume she did some checking and satisfied herself as far as possible that there was some truth to it before including it in her book.

[MARG]

Originally Posted by Boris

How come that the 'British Royals' forum is the only one here in which certain people permanently require the exact sources and quotes on which the wording of other people's posts are based?

If we are honest we will admit that the threads that are challenged refer to the Charles/Camilla/Diana triangle. Posts that make sweeping generalisations and damning inditements cause most problems when the poster omits the very important "IMHO" and present the statements as "fact".

Originally Posted by boris

This constant challenging is obviously one-sided and has become so very tiresome already when you only attempt to read certain threads, let alone when you choose to reply to them.

Yes, treating other posters with respect can be very trying, however, and this is a biggee . . . . you do not have to participate!
As for me, I believe that Camilla was head over heels in love with the dashing and romantic APB. I also believe that Camilla and Charles shared an abiding friendship. Further I believe it is possible that Charles may have been head-over-heels in love with Camilla, but suffered from the "boy next door" syndrome. The friend in which Camilla confided. Oh well, such is life.

[Elspeth]

Originally Posted by Boris

How come that the 'British Royals' forum is the only one here in which certain people permanently require the exact sources and quotes on which the wording of other people's posts are based?

Partly because we've experienced quite a lot of "Charles said....." comments which have turned out to be "Diana claimed that Charles said..." when you read what was actually written and who actually wrote it. If there are verifiable quotes that can clarify who really said what and preferably in what context, then we'd appreciate the time taken to provide that clarification.

This standard holds across the forums; it's just that the Charles-Diana business is a little unusual in how much was said at second or third hand, and how much of this second- and third-hand stuff is reported as though it was stated verbatim by the person concerned.

Then of course we have the tabloid media with their "a source close to" and "a friend of the prince/princess" and "we can now reveal based on a confidential tipoff" and all that good stuff. It isn't always easy to distinguish primary sources from secondary sources from outright fiction, but it makes for more productive conversations if people can at least make a good-faith attempt.

Why not just trust in general that someone taking the time to post here does have opinions based on knowledge acquired by reading up on the subject and doing his homework, unless the opinion voiced is decidedly outlandish to begin with?

Because we've learned that that doesn't always work. There have been some members who apparently don't understand the difference between something Charles said in a recorded interview and a comment by Diana about something she said that Charles told her in private. I see no advantage in threads going on at length about the implications of something that Charles, Camilla, Diana, the Queen, or Prince Philip was alleged to have said when, in the last analysis, there's no evidence they actually said it. That would only give false legitimacy to the rumours, which we'd rather not do.

This constant challenging is obviously one-sided and has become so very tiresome already when you only attempt to read certain threads, let alone when you choose to reply to them.

As I said, we've learned to be wary of some of these sweeping "Charles said..." statements. If you go back to the source, the reality can be fairly different. Diana supporters are welcome to challenge comments by Charles supporters if they believe they're being misrepresented.

Regarding Dimbleby, restricting myself to the first of three phases of the Camilla & Charles relationship as reasonably requested by Warren:
Jonathan Dimbleby:
The Prince of Wales
1994 Warner Books soft cover edition
Pages 220-222, page 232, page 335
I take it for granted that no-one here should be supposed to deliver a transcript of whole book pages.

No, but providing short extracts wouldn't come amiss. Not everyone owns these books, so a simple reference to a page number or page range will leave quite a few of the participants in the conversation none the wiser.

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by marian

IN THIS PAGE WE CAN SEE THAT THEY HAD PROBLEMS.
Charles and Camilla mark anniversary in steam carriage - but have they hit the buffers? | Mail Online

From that article:

"
Certainly the pair looked the pictures of happiness yesterday as, dressed almost identically in tartan, they visited the village of Ballater, Royal Deeside, close to Birkhall, their Scottish home.
The couple are spending a fortnight on the estate where they honeymooned three years ago, broken by visit to Lincolnshire tomorrow to see Prince William before he receives his RAF wings on Friday."



Now give me these problems any day... noone whose marriage has real problems spends a fortnight together in a secluded corner of Scotland when in London two little baby grand-daughters are waiting for their gran to come visiting....

[Jo of Palatine]

Originally Posted by CaliforniaDreamin

The poor girl really never had a chance.

Diana had the same chance as Amanda Knatchbull and Jane Wellesley.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Elspeth

"But what happened was quite astonishing," recalled one guest that night, Charles's former girlfriend Jane Ward. "Charles and the Parker Bowleses shared the same table, and Charles spent the whole evening dancing with Camilla. They were kissing passionately as they danced - on and on they went, kissing each other, French kissing, dance after dance.

"Andrew wasn't quite sure how to react - he sat there smiling and saying to people: 'HRH is very fond of my wife. And she appears to be very fond of him.' He seemed not uncomfortable with what was going on, but other people were, especially the older ones. Some were embarrassed and shocked and upset because the whole thing was so blatant," went on Ms. Ward. "It's bad enough, in such company, to monopolize one woman all evening. It's worse if it's someone else's wife. But the way they were behaving was completely beyond the pale." '

Thank you Elspeth for the passage and information, I had presumed that CaliforniaDreamin had the book with her when she said "and I quote".

Their behavior may have been shocking for some of the older guests, but everything the young did shocked back then (times haven't really changed). I have always challenged this account, purely based on my recollections of Polo & Hunt Balls. Yes he probably ignored Anna to some extent, she was possibly not as good a dancer or conversationist, and she did storm out, (they didn't call her whiplash for nothing), IMO.

This sentence sums up why I ask for links and full quotes - A woman without her man is nothing -

[MARG]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Their behavior may have been shocking for some of the older guests, but everything the young did shocked back then (times haven't really changed).

Thinking back on Military Balls back then, much the same thing happened here, although tonsillectomies on the dance floor were definitely not the going thing. Myself, I have always thought that part of the story smacked of good old fashioned spite and malice.

Originally Posted by Skydragon

This sentence sums up why I ask for links and full quotes - A woman without her man is nothing -

Would that be:

a. A woman without her man, is nothing, or (my personal favourite)

b. A woman, without her, man is nothing!

[CasiraghiTrio]

Originally Posted by ysbel

I started following the British Royals around the marriage of Princess Anne in 1973 and I agree with agatha, Camilla was hardly mentioned in the 70s.

Lady Jane Wellesley was the most talked about girlfriend I remember and then of course there was the Knatchbull girl.

But I think that in the early 70s both Charles and his sister Anne were dealing with expectations that they would make a royal match. Before her engagement was announced, Princess Anne expressed distaste at being matched up with a suitable royal foreign prince and it does seem that she was introduced to Carl Gustaf while he was still Crown Prince of Sweden in hopes of a royal match. Charles claimed that while he knew it was better to marry a princess because they knew what the job entailed, he'd rather marry an English girl. Of course, Camilla, Lady Jane, Amanda Knatchbull, and Diana all fit that description of an English girl so Charles didn't give any clue as to what type of English girl he preferred.

This is very interesting. Another possible reason for Charles being disinclined toward making a royal match is illustrated in Barry's book, when Charles points out that most of the eligible princesses proposed for him in the media were Catholic.

[Elspeth]

Thinking back to the 1970s and the speculation about a possible bride for Charles, foreign royals were mentioned sort of in passing (most papers were talking about Princess Caroline despite the religion issue, possibly because she was the only princess that most of the tabloid readers would have ever heard of), but the serious candidates were all members of the aristocracy.

I don't think Camilla Shand would have really been given serious consideration even if the papers had picked up on the fact that she and Charles were serious about each other for a while, because she wasn't the daughter of the Duke of This or the Earl of That and because she had - horrors! - a "past." The existence of a previous serious boyfriend heralded the end of Davina Sheffield's chances, and it doesn't seem as though it'd have been hard to find a similar skeleton or three in Camilla's closet.

The Prince's girlfriends, even back then, tended to be referred to in two categories - possible wives and girls he was just dating casually. If the press had picked up on his relationship with Camilla before she was married, I'm pretty sure she'd have come under the second heading.

[iowabelle]

Don't forget, Sarah Spencer was in the running ... and I think she had a decent shot at it until she talked to the press. I think she probably would have made a more equal partner than her sister (in terms of education and interests), although they might have encountered some of the same emotional issues. In fact, Sarah might have made an even more tumultuous partner.

I have had a thought about Charles's thought process. IMO it seems that he found attractive young women who might be suitable ... and then waited for the approval of others (his parents, Granny, Lord Mountbatten and the press) to make up his mind. Ultimately, he picked the one that the press seized upon.

I'm not sure how much was really known about the background of Camilla Shand, but Charles surely would have known about her relationship with APB and that would probably have served as a disqualifier. (I remember Davina Sheffield being "outed" for having dared to live with a man.)

[ysbel]

Charles was linked to Marie-Astrid of Luxembourg and members of government were very enthusiastic even though she was Catholic. I remember a member of the Cabinet saying that religion wouldn't be an unsurmountable obstacle if both parties wanted to go through with the marriage and I wondered how they'd pull that one off if Charles and Marie-Astrid wanted to marry. I don't think Charles was interested in Marie-Astrid though. Stephen Barry, Charles' valet, was very adamant that Charles liked the 'English Rose' type of girl and was turned off by Continental women. But given that his family was not adverse to some arranging when it came to his marriage to Diana, I think its very plausible that they thought of Marie-Astrid for a match. Also rumours that Anne was introduced to Carl Gustaf to test their suitability for a match suggest that the royal family was not adverse to arranged marriages.

How far they went with all of this discussion is anyone's guess but I think its very believable that the idea some of these royal matches for Charles were kicked around in the back rooms of Buckingham Palace.