The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #681  
Old 01-30-2008, 07:18 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,861
Of course not. What a facetious thing to say.
__________________

__________________
Kaye aka BeatrixFan
  #682  
Old 01-30-2008, 07:46 PM
Liz's Avatar
Liz Liz is offline
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 95
I don't understand all the fuss. She'll be married to the King so therefore she should be Queen Consort. It all seems very simple and matter of fact to me.
__________________

  #683  
Old 01-30-2008, 07:55 PM
lilytornado's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: -, United States
Posts: 503
Well, Máxima won't be Queen. And it is nothing she has done, etc but because of gender equality.
  #684  
Old 01-30-2008, 07:55 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,861
Eh? Why won't Maxima be Queen?
__________________
Kaye aka BeatrixFan
  #685  
Old 01-30-2008, 07:59 PM
lilytornado's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: -, United States
Posts: 503
Because the new rule says that the husband of a queen is a prince consort, and the wife of a king is a princess consort. So she will be princess of the netherlands, like prince claus was prince of the netherlands.

There is a thread about it:
http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums...tle-12957.html
  #686  
Old 01-30-2008, 08:02 PM
sirhon11234's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,453
But if Camilla becomes Princess Consort when Charles ascends the throne. Wouldn't that make the marriage look morganatic?
__________________
"I think the biggest disease the world suffers from in this day and age is the disease of people feeling unloved."
Diana, the Princess of Wales
  #687  
Old 01-30-2008, 08:10 PM
lilytornado's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: -, United States
Posts: 503
Quote:
Originally Posted by Empress View Post
Well, by that logic Beatrixfan, shouldn't the husband of a Queen be king?
Well, didn't Prince Henrik of Denmark say something like that he thinks it is really unfair that the husband of a queen is not called king?
  #688  
Old 01-30-2008, 08:18 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilytornado View Post
Because the new rule says that the husband of a queen is a prince consort, and the wife of a king is a princess consort. So she will be princess of the netherlands, like prince claus was prince of the netherlands.

There is a thread about it:
http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums...tle-12957.html
How ghastly. Seems rather ridiculous to me but not my affair. Britain is though and as such, I think we should keep things how they've been for quite a few centuries now.
__________________
Kaye aka BeatrixFan
  #689  
Old 01-30-2008, 08:28 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirhon11234 View Post
But if Camilla becomes Princess Consort when Charles ascends the throne. Wouldn't that make the marriage look morganatic?
Yes, it will, and we don't have morganatic marriage. Of course, the real test of a morganatic marriage is whether any children of the marriage get to inherit the father's title, and in this case that doesn't apply. So I suppose people could argue that it wasn't really morganatic if they had a mind to, but I'm not sure how they could justify it.
  #690  
Old 01-30-2008, 08:30 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,861
But we do have morganatic marriage in a way. Look at civil partnerships. If I entered into one with Prince Harry, I'm not entitled to his titles and styles, whereas a woman would be.
__________________
Kaye aka BeatrixFan
  #691  
Old 01-30-2008, 08:36 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,735
Quote:
So, let me see if I understand this. Regardless of everything that has occurred, when Charles becomes King, Camilla is automatically Queen--she cannot hold a lesser style because is Queen, according to Baldwin when Edward wanted to marry Wallis and give her the style of HRH The Duchess of Lancaster. That wouldn't work because the wife of the sovereign automatically becomes the Queen, correct?
Correct. In law and constitutional precedent, Camilla is automatically HM The Queen since Parliament has never recognized a morganatic marriage in which The King's wife holds a lesser style and rank than Queen Consort. In 1936, as in the future, if Parliament chooses to recognize a lesser rank and title for the wife of the King, it must be done through legislation and consented to by the Crown Commonwealth.

Quote:
So, one route is to create a law before Charles ascends the throne that would make Camilla HRH The Princess Consort upon his ascension; that way there is no confusion and it is settled in such a way that she is never Queen and thusly, never loses the title of Queen.
Technically, it would be possible for Parliament to pass legislation now, but it would require a more general change in the title and succession of the monarchy in which ALL future wives of a King would not have the right to be Queen automatically, but instead be granted honours and titles in their own right by the fount of honour when the time comes.


Quote:
Let's say she is created HRH The Princess Consort. If Charles predeceases Camilla, what would she then be known as? She wouldn't be the Dowager Princess Consort because William's wife would be Queen--would Camilla continue to be the Princess Consort? What would her ranking be?
I assume Charles would create her a Princess of the UK in her own right and declare her style and title to be HRH The Princess Consort while the King reigned and HRH The Princess Camilla as a widow. This could be dealt with in the letters patent creating her a Princess.

Quote:
A Dowager Queen still holds a great deal of rank--would we be looking at yet another title change for Camilla? Why should she have to lose title rank because Charles dies? How would that work? That's an issue that should be addressed.
This is why they cannot allow a situation in which she is legally Queen, but styled as Princess Consort instead. The precedents do not exist and must be decided on one way or another. Either she is allowed to be Queen with full rights and precedence or is downgraded to a morganatic wife with rights defined by letters patent.

Quote:
It is much easier to just let her be Queen and Dowager Queen. That is how it has been done. Why change it now?
There is no reason to change it unless the public is adamantly opposed to Camilla being Queen when the time comes. If that is the case, The Prime Minister will introduce the necessary legislation in the Commons to take care of it.
  #692  
Old 01-30-2008, 08:44 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,735
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirhon11234 View Post
But if Camilla becomes Princess Consort when Charles ascends the throne. Wouldn't that make the marriage look morganatic?
It wouldn't look morganatic, it would BE morganatic since Camilla would not share her husband's rank or title. She would be downgraded to a Princess with the style of Royal Highness, instead of her rightful title of Queen with the style of Her Majesty.

As what happened in 1937 with The Duchess of Windsor, Wallis was downgraded to a Duchess with the style of Her Grace, instead of her rightful title of Princess Edward with the style of Her Royal Highness as the wife of a son of the Sovereign.
  #693  
Old 01-30-2008, 09:03 PM
jcbcode99's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Richmond Area, United States
Posts: 1,979
branchg, Thank you for your detailed and thorough response. I think it makes a great deal of sense and simplifies this whole mess.

I have to say that I find this entire possiblity of Camilla being downgraded and given the status of morganatic wife utterly ridiculous and unnecessary. And, honestly, does anyone really believe that Prince Charles is going to let Camilla be anything but his equal in marriage? After everything they have endured--after everything SHE has endured, I really find it hard to believe that Charles is ok with her receiving such a slap-ola in the face. I think whoever came up with this HRH The Princess Consort thing should be sacked.

There was some discussion about whether Camilla even wanted to be Queen--well, of course she does. Honestly, put yourself in her position--do you want to be known as the woman who was downgraded in title? No, you do not. If she has to fulfill duties at Charles' side, then she should have the title too.

Honestly, this entire thing just irks me. And, the whole Maxima thing irks me, too. Wives should share the rank of their husband. This is not the middle ages, after all.
__________________
Janet

"We make a living by what we do; we make a life by what we give" Winston Churchill
  #694  
Old 01-30-2008, 09:23 PM
wbenson's Avatar
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeatrixFan View Post
But we do have morganatic marriage in a way. Look at civil partnerships. If I entered into one with Prince Harry, I'm not entitled to his titles and styles, whereas a woman would be.
I don't know if that's much of a difference, though. It's never been possible for a man to take on his spouse's titles.
  #695  
Old 01-30-2008, 09:40 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,861
What about lesbians though?
__________________
Kaye aka BeatrixFan
  #696  
Old 01-30-2008, 09:49 PM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 9,869
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeatrixFan View Post
No, it's a war between common sense and pandering to the Sun readers.
Just a wild punt here, but I have this crazy idea that when Queen Elizabeth II dies and the traditional "The Queen is dead, long live the King!" is announced, any tacky messing around with the additional statement ... "But the Queen is actually the Princess!" will not be forthcoming.

Any official punishment for perceived past sins, enacted into law at such a time, will not sit well with a Great Britain and Commonwealth in mourning who would see it as a grievous insult to QEII herself and, to the King.

Squabbling over such details would be offensive in that time of grief, implementation of any downgrading of Royalty would be perceived by the general public (obviously not Sun readers) as an insensitive attack on the Royal Family not to mention the monarchy itself.

So .... moves to change the law would have to be done in the very near future, if not now. Noone knows the number of their days, and so it is with HM Queen Elizabeth II.

Conversely, any parliamentary moves to change the Duchess of Cornwall's status will look like an unseemly personal attack on HM QEII, who appears to be going out of her way to publically display her appoval of "Crown Princess Camilla".

So, first we will mourn and have an enormous Royal Funeral. Then we will have a coronation, and we will celebrate. That is our tradition.

War? I look for the triumph of common sense!


ps: When is the next election?
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
  #697  
Old 01-30-2008, 09:55 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,861
Quote:
Originally Posted by MARG View Post
Just a wild punt here, but I have this crazy idea that when Queen Elizabeth II dies and the traditional "The Queen is dead, long live the King!" is announced, any tacky messing around with the additional statement ... "But the Queen is actually the Princess!" will not be forthcoming.
Well said and I agree. That'll be the way of things. The next election isn't until 2009 but Gordon may have to call one this year depending on how things hold up.
__________________
Kaye aka BeatrixFan
  #698  
Old 01-30-2008, 09:55 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,978
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcbcode99 View Post
There was some discussion about whether Camilla even wanted to be Queen--well, of course she does.
We don't know that. We can ony surmise given she married an heir to a throne...

I, personally, don't think Camilla would be much phased either way. Whatever her title, she's with her soulmate.

Personally, and this is not meant with ill intent, I just can't 'associate' with a Queen Camilla. To me, she doesn't present as a possible Queen, nor does such a title become her I think. It's not that she was an adultress, and it certainly has nothing to do with the late Diana, Princess of Wales. Diana was never going to be Queen Consort anyway.

Camilla is, dare I say it, fresh. She has brought something that neither Diana or Charles posses, and to be honest I'm not even sure what it is. Yet, I 'sense' it and appreciate it. She's not particularly beautiful as such, but there is such warmth about her, such character and amiability.

I see her and I see what I'd describe as a true Duchess. Image, attire, composure...she's every bit the royal Duchess and I'm so glade she is addressed as such. Though one of her many titles by marriage, I just couldn't imagine her being known as Princess of Wales. And again, not because of Diana but because she fits the illustration of a Duchess so wonderfully well.

I want her to be known as Princess Consort because like Camilla, it's something unprecedented. Not that I purposely wish for the destabilisation of tradition, but for someone I view as unique, I want her to have something which is her own, in her own right. I understand that this would be, ultimately, considered a downgrade from her hereditary entitlement as spouse of the King, but to be created a Princess of the United Kingdom is such an honour which I would like to see bestowed upon her. Being Queen, she would be Her Majesty, but only because her husband is King. It identifies not her, but her husbands position and I'd like her to have something that is her own to identify with. And as Fount of Honours, I'm most certain her husband would ensure her precedence at court would reflect the fact she is the King's wife. She would still be First Lady in the Land.

My reasons may seem flimsy to some, and you're welcome to think whatever you wish (really not phased), but to me Camilla fits the image of what I'd expect a Princess Consort to be, and so it's my hope that any legislation needed, will be passed when the times comes. If not? Well, I think I'll manage..hehe.

No doubt my motivations are entirely different to that of the court.
__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
  #699  
Old 01-30-2008, 10:15 PM
wbenson's Avatar
Moderator Emeritus
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: -, United States
Posts: 2,546
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeatrixFan View Post
What about lesbians though?
I think it would be the same. Women have never been able to give a title to their spouses.

I think in the case of a royal, however, something would at least be offered.

Wasn't it a while ago that someone in the college of arms proposed "Laddy" for the husband of a knight? I remember thinking it would sound ridiculous. There has to be something out there better than "Laddy," which sounds like something one calls a pet dog.
  #700  
Old 01-30-2008, 10:27 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,861
Well I'd just go with the same title tbh. If a man marries Sir Mincing Merrily then he becomes Sir Justin Queer. It does seem that Britain has a bit of a double standard when it comes to marriage. If you're what society deems to be morally pure then you can have your husband's title, if you're not then you have to settle for something lower as a hallmark of shame to be borne forever more until you burn in the fires of the great below. And I thought we'd moved on. Just let Camilla be Queen and I'll be happy. Because if I'm not happy it's going to be a very long decade.
__________________

__________________
Kaye aka BeatrixFan
Closed Thread

Tags
camilla, camilla parker bowles, 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
Victoria's Future Title? rop81 Crown Princess Victoria, Prince Daniel and Family 80 09-12-2021 08:00 PM
Will and should Camilla use the title of Queen when Charles becomes King? muriel The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall 17 11-10-2011 10:20 AM
Crown Prince Hamzah relieved of his title: November 28, 2004 Amoula Current Events Archive 338 04-22-2005 09:28 AM




Popular Tags
america american archie mountbatten-windsor asia asian british british royal family camilla camilla's family camilla parker bowles carolin china china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing chinese clarence house colorblindness commonwealth countries crown jewels customs daisy doge of venice dresses duchess of sussex duke of sussex edward vii family tree genetics gradenigo harry and meghan hello! highgrove history hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs japan japanese imperial family japan history jewellery kensington palace king edward vii king juan carlos książ castle liechtenstein lili mountbatten-windsor line of succession list of rulers meghan markle monarchist movements monarchists monarchy mongolia pless politics portugal prince harry queen elizabeth ii queen victoria royal ancestry solomon j solomon spanish royal family st edward sussex suthida thai royal family tradition unfinished portrait united states united states of america welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:49 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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