Title for Camilla

[Warren]

I highly doubt Charles would ask the Prime Minister to consider removing his wife's legal right to hold precedence and title as Queen.

It would certainly be novel if one of the new King's first acts was to focus attention on his wife's status by requesting she be officially and humiliatingly downgraded!
I can't see Charles equating his "darling Camilla" with the hapless Queen Caroline.

 

[Madame Royale]

I agree 100% it is natural for her to support England, but I think the Commonwealth has a lot of expectations from her since she has made it a high priority throughout her reign to represent them, to not forget them. She has usually taken her Commonwealth "duty" very seriously. It was a tough position for her to be in, however. I don't envy her at all. I can't imagine being in such a no-win situation. If she had supported Australia, would England have been upset? Maybe the better thing for her to do was not to say anything about it?? I don't know. That is tough.

Of course support her homeland, but there's no reason as to why the Queen couldn't have supported both, or all teams which retain her as monarch. Sending a viedo message (as has been done for various other occasions) would not have been too much to ask of HM the Queen of Australia

But, back to Camilla...

 

[Roslyn]

Of course support her homeland, but there's no reason as to why the Queen couldn't have supported both, or all teams which retain her as monarch. Sending a viedo message (as has been done for various other occasions) would not have been too much to ask of HM the Queen of Australia

I fully expect her to give her main support to her homeland, but a simple message of good wishes and encouragement to the teams of all the countries of which she is Queen would have been nice.

I wonder whether she would have sent the message if England had been competing against Scotland or Wales or Northern Ireland?!

But, back to Camilla...

 

[jcbcode99]

I do not think that Camilla was honoring Diana at all by choosing to be called the Duchess of Cornwall--seriously, Diana referred to Camilla as the "Rottweiller". I highly doubt that honor is the reason for not using the title of PoW. I honestly think that Camilla was just being a lady about everything--her stepsons' feelings, the feelings of the British people, etc....I agree that it is her title, Princess of Wales, and if she wants it she should use it, but Duchess suits Camilla so well. Besides, she will be Queen one day, and that is title superior to that of Princess. I think that Camilla has become a true asset to the monarchy, and her future title will reflect that.

 

[HRH Kerry]

It would certainly be novel if one of the new King's first acts was to focus attention on his wife's status by requesting she be officially and humiliatingly downgraded!
I can't see Charles equating his "darling Camilla" with the hapless Queen Caroline.

Definitely can't see that scenario. However, if the PM took it upon himself to seek action, how do all think this would sit with the people of the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth Nations? (hope that's right) I mean what is really the issue here that she's a divorcee? That 'King Charles' and Camilla had an affair? What's really the issue since Diana wouldn't have been a queen anyway?

 

[branchg]

Definitely can't see that scenario. However, if the PM took it upon himself to seek action, how do all think this would sit with the people of the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth Nations? (hope that's right) I mean what is really the issue here that she's a divorcee? That 'King Charles' and Camilla had an affair? What's really the issue since Diana wouldn't have been a queen anyway?

If that many Britons are so opposed when the time comes, the question of an abdication becomes inevitable. Parliament may reach the conclusion the people no longer consent to the monarchy and consider far more reaching changes.

I doubt there will be any meaningful objections to Camilla being Queen. But we'll have to wait and see.

 

[HRH Kerry]

I hope it won't come too that either especially when those opposed can't give you legitimate reason why Camilla shouldn't be queen.

 

[CasiraghiTrio]

It would certainly be novel if one of the new King's first acts was to focus attention on his wife's status by requesting she be officially and humiliatingly downgraded!
I can't see Charles equating his "darling Camilla" with the hapless Queen Caroline.

Never.... George IV was not in love with his wife; he wanted rid of her. Charles is desperately in love with Camilla. No comparison there.

 

[branchg]

Never.... George IV was not in love with his wife; he wanted rid of her. Charles is desperately in love with Camilla. No comparison there.

And Queen Caroline was a hardly respectable consort....she was known to be quite indifferent to monogamy and had many affairs openly throughout Europe.

 

[RubyPrincess168]

I know that Camilla is legally entittled to the royal titles, etc. but in my mind she'll only have one (okay maybe several), and it isn't a pleasant one.

 

[Elspeth]

Considering how hard George IV tried to deny Caroline the title of Queen Consort and failed, it's going to take some fairly major effort to deny Camilla the title, especially when, as Warren and Kerry have pointed out, Charles has no reason to want to do.

Things may change in the next couple of months, but it seems that the press is having to work really hard to whip up enough interest in the Diana 10th anniversary to be really profitable; she's faded into history for a lot of younger people, and I don't think there'll be any serious opposition to Camilla being Queen Consort to Charles, espcially when it's so obvious that she's such a strong support to him and he seems to be so improved for having her around.

 

[Polly]

I, like millions of others, really liked Diana, though I was never blind to her faults and faux pas. Sadly, Diana's dead, and the world moves on.

The Duchess of Cornwall is, legally, The Princess of Wales, no matter what she's called.

When Charles is crowned King, Camilla will be Queen, and in my opinion, she too should be crowned Queen, as is right and proper, and legally and traditionally appropriate.

It is not possible, really, for Camilla to be denied the status of Queen. This would require a re-drafting of the law in the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and every Commonwealth country in the world which accepts Elizabeth II and her heirs and successors as their Head of State.

At a human level, it appears that Prince Charles is very happy. I'm pleased that this is so and that Diana's children respond so favourably to Camilla and like her.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

I, like millions of others, really liked Diana, though I was never blind to her faults and faux pas. Sadly, Diana's dead, and the world moves on.

Very well said. Exactly my thoughts. This could be my post

Time is on Camilla's side. The longer QE II is alive, the more comfortable people will get with a future Queen Camilla and I think it's a good and natural thing. Camilla has so much improved since her marriage and she deserves it. She seems not only to be the perfect partner for Charles but has also become an appropriate dresser. Well done.

 

[branchg]

It would be very tricky, if not impossible, for Parliament and the Crown Commonwealth nations to come up with legislation somehow denying British constitutional and common law rights to the wife of the King. Once Charles becomes King, Camilla is automatically Queen with the rights and precedence of Her Majesty The Queen for the remainder of her life.

The only way to accomplish this would be to pass the legislation before The Queen dies, which would set a future precedent that future wives of the King will not hold the right and precedence to be Queen automatically.

 

[lyndaW]

No matter what anyone person wants or thinks, legally she will be Charles Queen as long as England has a monarchy. What Australia, Canada and New Zealand do after THE Queen dies is anyones guess, but I hope these Countries will stick it out and give Charles and wife a chance, and then William. If Prince William marries someone that is "suitable" who knows what the future may bring.

 

[BillW65]

I have not read through all of the posts in this thread but since I'm new here I did want to convey my opinion. I do hope that the Duchess of Cornwall is allowed her rightful title as Queen when Charles becomes King. I believe they are suitable for one another and she understands her role and is supportive of the Prince of Wales. I'm a bit of a traditionalist.

 

[muriel]

As another new member I thought I should set out my thoughts. I think Camilla will legally be Queen, though she will probably have to use the title of Princess Consort. I think there are too many steps required for her to be anything other than Queen.

It is unfortunate that Camilla will probably end up using the title Princess Consort as we seem to expect our Royal family to follow social norms different from our own - this is a country where about 25% of children are born outside wedlock, one in 3 marriages ends in divorce, and let not even try and find a statistic for infidelity. The Church and the public just need to move on, and accept Camilla as somebody who makes the future King incredibly happy. Camilla has never put her foot wrong (other than sh*gging the PoW when they were both married to others) but most people would still have preferred Diana to be Queen despite her many faults!!!

I also think that it is highly likely that Australia and NZ would probably not have Charles as head of state.

 

[Skydragon]

but most people would still have preferred Diana to be Queen despite her many faults!!!.

As you might imagine, I disagree with this statement. As all the details of Dianas affairs came to light, people were becoming disillusioned with Diana. Had she not died, I believe her popularity would have started to drop further.

Camilla's title when Charles becomes King, (without an act of parliament), will be Queen Consort.

Australia has been seeking to become a republic for some time, so I don't think we can 'blame' Charles for that, but perhaps we had better ask our Australian members!

 

[Jo of Palatine]

As you might imagine, I disagree with this statement. As all the details of Dianas affairs came to light, people were becoming disillusioned with Diana. Had she not died, I believe her popularity would have started to drop further.

This is a thread about Camilla's title when Charles becomes King and without an act of parliament, she will be Queen.

When I was in the mountains, I talked to two elderly couples from England who stayed at the same hotel. While the men thought it absolutely right that Camilla as wife of Charles should be his queen, the ladies were equally sure about that this will happen, but found it not right.

"Not right yet", one lady said, "but she is growing on all of us." And the other added that only because Britain has had queens with high moralistic principles since Victoria one tended to forget that people are people, whoever they are. It seemed to me that while they were not really comfortable with the idea of a queen Camilla, they would not oppose her.

And I still believe times works in her favour. All those people claiming what a nice person Camilla is after having met her can't be wrong.

 

[wymanda]

Australia has been seeking to become a republic for some time, so I don't think we can 'blame' Charles for that, but perhaps we had better ask our Australian members!

As far as this Australian is concerned I am happy to swear allegiance to the Crown and whomever is sitting on it at the time. Like it or not our history stems from Britain &, basically, "If it aint broke; don't fix it"! The Queen does not interfere in the way our country is run and, before anyone says it, Mr Whitlam was dismissed by the Govenor General in the Queens name. HM was not consulted or asked for her permission to carry out the act. Therefore, things work well as they are so why mess with it and cause all the red tape & expense that would result were we to cease to have HM as our head of state. Incalculable amounts of legislation would have to be rewritten & republished as well as what may seem like inconsiquential things like goverment stationary etc that would have to be replaced.

 

[Jo of Palatine]

I must confess it's my opinion, too. The more the public learned about the person behind that glorious image, the more people realised that she was just a normal human who had been responsible for the things she did. And some were not very nice at all. Others were, to be true.

And then: I believe it's one thing to be a Royal and another to be none. I'm not so much interested in Royals as persons, but as symbols. So in my eyes a Royal can get away with a lot as long as he/she is doing her duty: positive and often symbolic acts for the sake of the others. Call that a patrician view and you're right. But that's how I believe a lot of monarchists see the Royals. With Diana her status came from her marriage, she was partly responsible for the divorce, so the status went with it. When she ceased being the wife of the heir, for me at least she lost the reason to overlook most of her antics. She was not longer "The Princess of Wales" and future queen, but became a socialite. Aristocratic, yes, but not longer Royal.

And so I don't see why Camilla, who has been next to be the wife of the heir, should not be queen. Her private life or morals play no role in that at all.

 

[sirhon11234]

Well yes after the divorce Diana became semi-royal, but I never beleived in the glorious image that the media and the die-hard Diana fans tried to paint her as. I for one like the woman who was just human and made alot of mistakes.

But we are way off topic, I have come to accept that Camilla will become Queen Consort whether you like it or not. And if one doesen't like it they can either move out of England or the other CommonWealth countries or just sit and fret about it.

 

[Iluvbertie]

As you might imagine, I disagree with this statement. As all the details of Dianas affairs came to light, people were becoming disillusioned with Diana. Had she not died, I believe her popularity would have started to drop further.

So true - I remember the headlines and press reports that were coming out in the weeks before she died criticising her for her holidays etc and questioning her commitment to her 'causes'. These were coming out at a rate of one or more per day with many letters in the papers also criticising her but that was all forgotten when she died.

I do believe that if she had lived, and continued the way she had been that summer, that her popularity would have started to fall dramatically.

Camilla's title when Charles becomes King, (without an act of parliament), will be Queen Consort.

As it rightly should be. Anything less will be an insult to all women by saying that at least one woman isn't the equal of a man! By taking the title Queen she is the equal of the King but anything less takes women back to the dark ages.

Australia has been seeking to become a republic for some time, so I don't think we can 'blame' Charles for that, but perhaps we had better ask our Australian members!

Charles is really only a blip on the radar in this issue - it is about us having an Australian Head of State and not one from overseas. As all levels of government in Australia, local, state and national, have started the process of removing the Queen from various aspects of their day to day functioning e.g. oaths, pictures etc, we are on the way to being a republic. All that is needed is for a final yes vote in a referendum. A couple of examples from my school - the official portrait of the Queen was removed from our Assembly Hall in 1998 and was going to be thrown on the tip but I asked for it to be put in my staffroom and our school song book in its latest edition removed God Save the Queen which used to be sung in chapel when celebrating things like the Queen's Jubilee or royal weddings etc. Now we won't celebrate these things at all as the school community are completely opposed to them.

I know that within my circle of colleagues, friends and acquaintances I am the only one who would vote to keep the Queen (down from about 20 in 1999 I might add). I am continually laughed at and ridiculed for my monarchist stance and I am finding it increasingly difficult to justify a Head of State who isn't resident in Australia and doesn't support Australia first and foremost in all things.

 

[Madame Royale]

LOVE the Queen, but as time goes by, I find myself questioning the lingering unrelevance the monarchy now plays within Australia.

If Charles does become King of Australia, it won't be for too long I'd imagine. And as for the Duchess, while Camilla shall have no role to play within Australia, Australian's on the whole are so terribly indifferent to her that the association between her, Australia's King and Australia just doesn't warm the hearts of the majority. But, it's also that 'we' don't care I guess.

 

[Al_bina]

Just my subjective views...

Reasons for the new wife of Prince Charles to have the title Duchess of Cornwall primarily stem from negative public opinion regarding the British Royal Family after Diana's death. It has nothing to do with any feelings of heirs and/or other parties concerned.
As for the FUTURE official title of Duchess of Cornwall, let us hope that somewhat snobbish parliament members would find a right way out of this delicate situation, which I define as "both the wolves have eaten much and the sheep have not been touched".

 

[jcbcode99]

Camilla's rightful title, upon Charles ascension to the throne, will be Queen Consort--just as Queen Alexandra, Queen Mary, and Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother. This a family, no, an institution, that is steeped solidly in tradition and custom. England is steeped solidly in these things as well and I firmly doubt that Parliament would ever pass a law denying the wife of the King her rightful title. That is really just silly to even consider--that hundreds of years of tradition can be undone for Diana? Seriously, when she and Charles divorced, Diana gave up her right to become Queen Consort, did she not? So why, pray tell, should Camilla have to give up a title Diana willingly relinquished and would never have held anyway? There is no way that Parliament or the monarchy would allow the wife of the King to be viewed as a second rate royal. That honor is reserved for those who divorce out of the royal family and behave badly. JMHO.

 

[Polly]

Camilla will be Queen when Charles becomes king simply because it would require a change in the law in the UK and about 15 other commonwealth countries to deny her the title It has little to do with sentiment and tradition and everything to do with practicalities.

 

[BillW65]

Camilla will be Queen when Charles becomes king simply because it would require a change in the law in the UK and about 15 other commonwealth countries to deny her the title It has little to do with sentiment and tradition and everything to do with practicalities.

I would generally agree with you but what concerns me is that the British Royal family seems to just change the rules and do what they desire as far as titles are concerned without going through the proper methods as in issuing new Letters Patent. Although legally the Duchess is HRH The Princess of Wales, they just chose to ignore that and she goes by the prince's secondary title. The case with Louise of Wessex is very similar, a royal princess just using a different style without legally changing it. Both have set a precedence. So when Charles becomes king I can envision the Duchess adopting the title Princess Consort as planned without going through the process of legally changing the law.

 

[Madame Royale]

Personally speaking

Whatever her future title, I'm just glade Camilla's on the scene in an official capacity.

I enjoy following her engagements and the many pictures illustrating a lady whom possess a warmth and gentle demeanour.

Wish her hair wouldn't flop so much, but hey...

 

[acdc1]

I honestly don't care what title she gets when Charles becomes king. If she wants the title "Princess Consort" that's fine, but if she becomes Queen Camilla that's fine as well. The only title I think that she shouldn't have had was Princess of Wales. That title is so associated with Diana, and I know that William's wife, and William's son's wife, and William's grandson's wife will probably carry it if the men are created Prince of Wales, but I think that Camilla, being a huge part of the dissentigration of Charles and Diana's marriage, shouldn't carry the title. It's too risky, and a ton of die-hard Diana fans would put up huge protests, because they won't be too happy about it.