Will Charles Ever Reign?

[Elspeth]

Well, the old Duke of Gloucester was already in a very bad way even before Prince William died; I'm pretty sure that if he'd been King, some sort of at least semiformal regency would have alreaady been in place. But I agree that having a child die, especially as a young adult, must be devastating for a parent. Even though Princess Alice lived for several more decades, all reports are that she was never quite the same again after her son's death.

 

[selrahc4]

But given that Charles had declared at the time of the divorce that he would not remarry,

"delcared"? "would not"?

What form did this declaration take? What were his exact words?

 

[hornsen]

"delcared"? "would not"?

What form did this declaration take? What were his exact words?

There was no declaration. It was this usual "good friend" or "an aid"-story.

 

[RubyPrincess168]

A man who wait soo many years to marry his true love when he was forced to marry a person who he doesn't love and who wasn't so different than him....

I don't think it happened like that. She choose not to wait for him and risk becoming an old maid. Plus I think there were concerns about her sexual history. These were different times back then. He was not "forced" to marry Diana. He was strongly encouraged to marry someone "appropriate" (ie of respectible lineage, a virgin, etc.) and chose Diana. I think he put minimal effort into the marriage to ensure there were heirs, but he clearly never gave up Camilla.

Interesting point made about Camilla possibly not living to see Charles' coronation. I hadn't considered that. Of course being in the US, I don't know what the political climate in the UK is like. This talk of seperating the Church of England from the Government is interesting.

 

[BeatrixFan]

She choose not to wait for him and risk becoming an old maid

And you know Camilla and she's told you this has she? These comments just seem to get wheeled out as if they were fact to be taken as gospel when in fact, nobody knows what really happened or what they really felt, thought or wanted. Let's just accept the public side of it and move on.

As to Camilla not living to see Charles becoming King - God you lot can be doom-mongers.

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

As to Camilla not living to see Charles becoming King - God you lot can be doom-mongers.

Well, it's as much possible as the Queen will exceed her mother's age. Who knows? Camilla has been a smoker for many years and both her parents are already dead (although her dad was quite old) while we don't have to discuss the toughness of the Windsor genes.
However, it's not the way it's supposed to be but given the history of this family it's not an impossibility either. We are speculating all the time - why not on this issue

 

[milla Ca]

We are speculating all the time - why not on this issue

Okay, you can speculate, why not?
But if some post in this threat can´t tell apart speculation from the truth or has the only wish to paint a bad pic of the Prince or the Duchess, i think it is okay too to contradict.
I agree with BeatrixFan!

 

[Jo of Palatine]

We are speculating all the time - why not on this issue

Because it touches a taboo for many people - me included. I think it is utterly tasteless to speculate on the death of a person out of the reason that you don't want him/her to reach a social position you don't want them to inhabit. I have no problems with speculations about genes etc. But the fact that those who oppose Camilla seems to glee with joy on thinking about her potential early demise before she can claim the title she would be entitled to as Charles's wife in case he becomes king does in fact bother me very much. It's not only unpolite, it's inhuman: there is finally a couple who loves each other and share their live. Shouldn't we all wish them well?

 

[milla Ca]

Because it touches a taboo for many people - me included. I think it is utterly tasteless to speculate on the death of a person out of the reason that you don't want him/her to reach a social position you don't want them to inhabit. I have no problems with speculations about genes etc. But the fact that those who oppose Camilla seems to glee with joy on thinking about her potential early demise before she can claim the title she would be entitled to as Charles's wife in case he becomes king does in fact bother me very much. It's not only unpolite, it's inhuman: there is finally a couple who loves each other and share their live. Shouldn't we all wish them well?

Very well said Jo, thank you!

 

[scooter]

Of course we wish them well! But they parties are the age that the parties are. If she's 60 and he doesnt inherit for 25 years..do the math. How old were Mr and Mrs Shand when they died? Were they smokers does anyone know?

 

[BeatrixFan]

But the fact that those who oppose Camilla seems to glee with joy on thinking about her potential early demise before she can claim the title she would be entitled to as Charles's wife in case he becomes king does in fact bother me very much

That's the impression I get from these discussions. And it annoys me.

 

[Elspeth]

I think everybody needs to have a bit of tolerance for people with other views on this topic. There's no point having a discussion on whether Charles will be King unless we acknowledge the fact that the Queen isn't immortal. However, it's quite unnecessary for people to be salivating with anticipation of Charles predeceasing his mother or Camilla predeceasing both of them in order that Diana might somehow be posthumously vindicated; it's equally unnecessary for people to be gleefully anticipating Charles's accession and Camilla's coronation as a way to stick it to the Diana fans. As long as people show some consideration for the opinions and feelings of others, we should be fine.

 

[TheTruth]

Charles could be a really good King. He seems to be nice to everyone he meets. Perhaps he could impose himself, sometimes he looks transparent, too shy. Although I'm sure he would do fine!

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

Because it touches a taboo for many people - me included. I think it is utterly tasteless to speculate on the death of a person out of the reason that you don't want him/her to reach a social position you don't want them to inhabit. I have no problems with speculations about genes etc. But the fact that those who oppose Camilla seems to glee with joy on thinking about her potential early demise before she can claim the title she would be entitled to as Charles's wife in case he becomes king does in fact bother me very much. It's not only unpolite, it's inhuman: there is finally a couple who loves each other and share their live. Shouldn't we all wish them well?

Wow, this is a harsh response ... I did not say at all that I don't wish them well or that I don't want Camilla to be Queen and some other awful things that are suggested here. This was not my intention at all. If everything goes after plan, Charles will be King and Camilla will be Queen, no question about that and this is the way it's supposed to be. But if QEII goes on and on and on for many more years - which has become kind of a running gag as people cannot imagine that she will be gone some day - it could well be that she even outlives her own son and daughter in law. That's not a nasty remark but a fact - and I am far from wishing that this should happen.

I am not too often on the British threads so I am a bit surprised about this reaction. Seems that Camilla is being attacked here very often for whatever reasons given that a simple remark is provoking such a reaction. Well, I don't belong to the group of people who either love her or hate her - for me Camilla is simply Charles's wife and the future Queen consort. In fact I am happy for them that they were able to make their commitment towards each other at that quite late stage of their lifes and IMO they are looking one of the most comfortable couples in the royal circle.

I hope I made myself clear now ... and I hope the discussion can go ahead a bit more cooled down

 

[love_cc]

Of course we wish them well! But they parties are the age that the parties are. If she's 60 and he doesnt inherit for 25 years..do the math. How old were Mr and Mrs Shand when they died? Were they smokers does anyone know?

Camilla's mother died at 72 and her father died at 89 I believe. And Camilla's maternal grandmother died at 86 and her great autie(on her mother's side) died at 76 and Alice Keppel died at 80.I have no information about Major's forebears.
I wish Prince Charles and Camilla well. We only sepculate whether they would be king and queen or not. I think Charles and Camilla are a lovely couple and he will be a good king with the woman he loves by his side.

 

[ysbel]

Duke of Marmalade, its not only Charles and Camilla, some members got upset when other members started a thread to predict who of the current crown princes was going to be the next king.

Some people are squeamish about predicting someone's death while others are sqeamish about criticizing the dead.

As long as it is done with a bit of civility, the forum doesn't have a problem with either. Monarchy by nature is hereditary so the only way many monarchs ascend the throne is the unhappy death of a parent or close relative. And because of the historical nature of some previous royals, if we couldn't criticize royals that have died, discussions in the forums would dry quite up.

I hope you don't let the reaction dissuade you, royalwatchers are a passionate group sometimes.

 

[branchg]

No one knows what tomorrow will bring. But it certainly is reasonable to assume Charles will not have a long reign, given his mother's good health and the fact his grandmother lived to be 101.

 

[scooter]

Duke of Marmalade, its not only Charles and Camilla, some members got upset when other members started a thread to predict who of the current crown princes was going to be the next king.

Some people are squeamish about predicting someone's death while others are sqeamish about criticizing the dead.

As long as it is done with a bit of civility, the forum doesn't have a problem with either. Monarchy by nature is hereditary so the only way many monarchs ascend the throne is the unhappy death of a parent or close relative. And because of the historical nature of some previous royals, if we couldn't criticize royals that have died, discussions in the forums would dry quite up.

I hope you don't let the reaction dissuade you, royalwatchers are a passionate group sometimes.

I'm not trying to suggest glee at anyone's passing. I just dont understand how one can have a whole thread dedicated to will Charles ever rule, if we're not going to take into consideration when QE is likely to die. I mean...how else is he going to inherit?

 

[Elspeth]

Scooter, I know you aren't suggesting glee; however, in the past some posters have done so, and it's made other posters sensitive to possible subtext on this issue, as you can see. We've had to deal with "Camilla deserves to die because she's evil" and "there are reports that she has cancer, I hope she dies of it soon" and "I hope Charles dies soon so William can be the next king" and "Diana deserved everything she got" and other equally callous comments - some of which were vicious enough to be removed from the threads they were posted in, but of course were read by other people beforehand.

As long as people are careful about how they word their posts in this thread, it's fine to talk about the royals dying. As you said, given that the Queen is very unlikely to abdicate, Charles won't become King until she dies; however, given that Charles was born when the Queen was in her early 20s and the Windsor women tend to have longer lifespans than the Windsor men, the chances that she'll outlive him are not trivial.

 

[scooter]

Thank you, Elspeth. This was exactly my thought!

 

[Duke of Marmalade]

I hope you don't let the reaction dissuade you, royalwatchers are a passionate group sometimes.

No way Thanks for your response ysbel!

 

[crisscross1]

I don't know if there is a thread discussing this, but there is talk on the Aussie news today about the people's reaction to Camilla becoming Queen. According to the polls a majority of 'Brit's' are against her ever becoming Queen. From the British forum members points of view, is this the case or is the media on another bandwagon?

 

[Avalon]

I don't know if there is a thread discussing this, but there is talk on the Aussie news today about the people's reaction to Camilla becoming Queen. According to the polls a majority of 'Brit's' are against her ever becoming Queen. From the British forum members points of view, is this the case or is the media on another bandwagon?

The poll you are talking about was conducted by a very trashy (and I mean very trashy) tabloid, 99% of which readers are fanatical Diana-fans (no disrespect to anyone meant).
The newspaper certainly is not worth paying much attention to it.

The majority of polls conducted by more serious and reliable newspapers show that British public is warming up to Camilla and many view the fact she will become Queen favorably.

 

[BillW65]

Prince Charles changing his name?

I have read of a rumor, from many sources, that there is a possibility of The Prince of Wales adopting a different name upon his accession to the throne. One of the possibilities I have heard was George VII.

any one else heard of this? What are your thoughts? I personally doubt that it will happen, however, is not with out precedence within the Royal Family.

 

[acdc1]

I've heard that he may do it. If he kept the same name, he'd be Charles III, right? I'm not awesome on British royal history before George III, but I do know that one of the Charles' did something awful, and would probably not be best to be accociated with. George VII would be good, I don't think he'll be a King Arthur I, since that's too much like the mythical King Arthur, maybe Philip I, but I think George VII would be the best bet. Personally, I'd still rather him do Charles III, since we're so used to calling him Charles.

 

[BillW65]

I've heard that he may do it. If he kept the same name, he'd be Charles III, right? I'm not awesome on British royal history before George III, but I do know that one of the Charles' did something awful, and would probably not be best to be accociated with. George VII would be good, I don't think he'll be a King Arthur I, since that's too much like the mythical King Arthur, maybe Philip I, but I think George VII would be the best bet. Personally, I'd still rather him do Charles III, since we're so used to calling him Charles.

Well, King Charles I was beheaded at the end of the Civil War in 1649. His son, Charles II, although I believe was a popular king was a bit of a womanizer and they might remind the British people of a dark time in thier history. That might be a reason to bypass that name.

I wouldn't mind if he uses his own first name and becomes Charles III, but on the other hand I think George VII sounds rather nice and it would be a nice honor to both his grandfather (George VI) and George III whom the prince greatly admires.

 

[hornsen]

Wouldn´t he become Charles IV? I think so...
I heard something like this, too. But I would prefer his real name. We know him to long with this name. I mean he is one of the most-have-to-wait heir. Another name would be very strange.
And beside that: King Charles and Queen Camilla sounds very good to me...

 

[Skydragon]

Well, King Charles I was beheaded at the end of the Civil War in 1649. His son, Charles II, although I believe was a popular king was a bit of a womanizer and they might remind the British people of a dark time in thier history. That might be a reason to bypass that name.

Most British people have no knowledge of history, so I don't think that is something he would have to consider.
Whatever he decides to call himself (perhaps King Fred) I'm sure he will make a wonderful King.

 

[Elspeth]

Hello, BillW65, and welcome!

You might want to have a look at these threads, where this has been discussed recently:

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f44/will-charles-ever-reign-part-3-a-9668-11.html?#post615010

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f44/king-charles-queen-camilla-8101-6.html?#post488075

 

[CasiraghiTrio]

I always rather liked the idea of him being Charles III. It goes along with the whole spirit that inspired the Queen to name her first two Charles and Anne in the first place -- it revives the Stuart names, shows her very well-known pro-Scottish sentiments, after all the Queen is half-Scottish.
No matter what Charles and Charles II did won't reflect on Charles III. It was centuries ago that Charles I lambasted (sp?) Parliament for having the audacity to put him on trial, and almost as long when Charles II had like a gazillion mistresses! They won't ruin anything for Charles III. It's a good name and I think it sounds awesome, very regal and dignified.
I would be happy, of course, if he did go with George VII, and happier if he went with King Philip, though some might not like that so much considering the King Philip who married Queen Mary of the House of Tudor; he wasn't any nicer than the Charles'es in the Stuart house, was he? I guess you could point to many villains in history who bore the names Charles, Philip, and George..... kind of hard getting around that.....
I think Harry has the best one of all, though. He'd be King Henry IX, the first King Henry after the notorious polygamist, how cool is that?