The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1761  
Old 02-07-2008, 10:11 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingJosh View Post

1. Last i checked her conection to the royal family started with Charles Lennox, 1st Duke of Richmond an illegitimate son of Charles II which excludes him from the Royal line as only legitimate children are included.
2. Her Grandfather may have been a Baron and her mother a Duaghter of a baron but England isn't run by the The Rt. Hon. the Baron Ashcombe and his family is it? And since your status in England seems to be influenced more buy who your father was or is, she is merely more then a Major's Daughter who married the right person.
Camilla belongs to the landed gentry families not aristocrats families. Truly, Camilla does not have a title inherited from her father.because her father did not have one. Her father was a Major of the Army and he was -a Deputy Lieutenant of Sussex, and Vice-Lieutenant of East Sussex from 1974 until 1992.

Landed gentry - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
__________________

  #1762  
Old 02-08-2008, 06:05 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,912
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingJosh View Post
Then what is an aristocrat's title? If someone can tell me Camilla's Title then fine.
2. Her Grandfather may have been a Baron and her mother a Duaghter of a baron but England isn't run by the The Rt. Hon. the Baron Ashcombe and his family is it? And since your status in England seems to be influenced more buy who your father was or is, she is merely more then a Major's Daughter who married the right person.
The country is indeed 'run' by many Rt. Hon's, as that is the courtesy title given to MP's. The country is 'run' by these people and not by Kings, Queens or any aristocrat!
The Right Honourable - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Honourable - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Most Honourable - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Camilla, as has already been pointed out comes from the 'landed gentry' but is descended from aristocrats.

Camilla's title is of course - Her Royal Highness, The Princess Charles Philip Arthur George, Princess of Wales and Countess of Chester, Duchess of Cornwall, Duchess of Rothesay, Countess of Carrick, Baroness of Renfrew, Lady of the Isles, Princess of Scotland. - I rather think that beats any aristocrats title, don't you?
__________________

  #1763  
Old 02-08-2008, 06:20 AM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
Camilla, as has already been pointed out comes from the 'landed gentry' but is descended from aristocrats.

Camilla's title is of course - Her Royal Highness, The Princess Charles Philip Arthur George, Princess of Wales and Countess of Chester, Duchess of Cornwall, Duchess of Rothesay, Countess of Carrick, Baroness of Renfrew, Lady of the Isles, Princess of Scotland. - I rather think that beats any aristocrats title, don't you?
Camilla's great-grandmother Alice Keppel was descended from two Stuart-princesses of Scotland, Charles is descended from Elizabeth Stuart, princess of Scotland, through her the electress Sophia inherited her right to the British throne.

But - and that's the important point: like in all monarchies, the souverain is the fount of honour. So it's HM's priviledge to ennoble people and that's what they are from then on. It's definately not you and me who have to decide if Camilla was noble enough to become The princess Charles, it was HM's privilege according to the Royal Marriage Act: once the souverain decides that a member of the Royal family may take a certain person as a bride or bridesgroom, this person is noble enough.

As the queen accepted Camilla as being equal to her son, I don't think we have a right to say she was not right in her decision.
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
  #1764  
Old 02-08-2008, 09:13 AM
KingJosh's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Penn Hills, United States
Posts: 37
Quote:
But - and that's the important point: like in all monarchies, the sovereign is the fount of honour. So it's HM's priviledge to ennoble people and that's what they are from then on. It's definately not you and me who have to decide if Camilla was noble enough to become The princess Charles, it was HM's privilege according to the Royal Marriage Act: once the souverain decides that a member of the Royal family may take a certain person as a bride or bridesgroom, this person is noble enough.

As the queen accepted Camilla as being equal to her son, I don't think we have a right to say she was not right in her decision
Right she is now Noble because of Her Majesty making her noble but it's important to remember That should she divorce His Royal Highness, which isn't likely she would lose her title and most likely be known as, Mrs. Camilla Parker-Bowles, Duchess of Cornwall, as she has her Husbands title and is not a Princess in her own right. So while she is married to HRH the Prince of Wales she is his equal. If she was so noble her whole life then why didn't His Royal Highness marry her in the first place? I could care less what Her title is now she never had a title before she married His Royal Highness.

Quote:
Camilla belongs to the landed gentry families not aristocrats families.
From Wikipedia:
In the 21st century, the term "landed gentry" is still used to some degree, as the landowning class still exists in a diminished form, but it increasingly refers more to historic than to current landed wealth or property in a family. Moreover, the respect which was once automatically given to members of this class by most British people has almost completely dissipated as its wealth, political power and social influence has declined, and other social figures have grown to take their place in the public's interest
This speaks for it self.


Quote:
The country is indeed 'run' by many Rt. Hon's, as that is the courtesy title given to MP's. The country is 'run' by these people and not by Kings, Queens or any aristocrat!
And while it is true that The Right Honorable is the Courtesy title given to Privy counsel MPs, and members of the House of Lords, Which her grandfather the 3rd Baron Ashcombe never sat in and there for never had any political power in the country, the title does not make her noble since her father was not noble.

I'm not saying that Her Majesty doesn’t have the right to raise who she wants to noble or royal status and that HRH the Duchess of Cornwall doesn’t out rank all other Aristocratic title I’m simply saying the She was never titled or noble before marriage whether or not she or her family owned land.
__________________
JIR
  #1765  
Old 02-08-2008, 09:52 AM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingJosh View Post
Right she is now Noble because of Her Majesty making her noble but it's important to remember That should she divorce His Royal Highness, which isn't likely she would lose her title and most likely be known as, Mrs. Camilla Parker-Bowles, Duchess of Cornwall, as she has her Husbands title and is not a Princess in her own right. So while she is married to HRH the Prince of Wales she is his equal. If she was so noble her whole life then why didn't His Royal Highness marry her in the first place? I could care less what Her title is now she never had a title before she married His Royal Highness.
Apart from you, obviously noone cares if she had a title or not before she married the prince. And her name on divorcing the prince would be Camilla Mountbatten-Windsor, princess of Wales or Camilla Mountbatten-Windor, duchess of Cornwall. Why should she revert to the Mrs. Parker Bowles-style after a second divorce. Not that I think there will be a divorce.

Maybe you could write to Clarence House and simply ask the one person who knows why he did not marry her in the first place: HRH THe Prince of Wales? Please, share his answer with us.
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
  #1766  
Old 02-08-2008, 09:59 AM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingJosh View Post
I'm not saying that Her Majesty doesn’t have the right to raise who she wants to noble or royal status and that HRH the Duchess of Cornwall doesn’t out rank all other Aristocratic title I’m simply saying the She was never titled or noble before marriage whether or not she or her family owned land.
Why state the obvious? But it is a fact that the former Camilla Shand has a pedigree which is recognized by the aristocracy, that she was received in the highest circles when a debutante and that her marriage to Andrew Parker Bowles (a male line descendent of the Parkers, earls of Macclesfield) was considered an equal one. The fact that in britain the aristocracy does not grant any male descendent the right to the title of his father does not make the descendants less noble than their European counterparts. As in the rest of Europe, it's the relation that counts and the acknowledgement by your social class. I doubt Camilla Shand has ever been denied this acknowledgement.

Here in Germany, a certain young woman has the legal right to call her Xenia, Duchess of Saxony, princess of Saxony - that's what her birth certificate says as she is the illegitimate daughter (father unknown) of a lady with the name of Duchess of Saxony, princess of Saxony, who was born from a morganatic marriage. Is this girl acknowledged by the Margrave of Meissen, Head of the Royal House of Saxony? I sincerely doubt it. But she can give this name by law to all her children and they can give it to all their children and so on....
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
  #1767  
Old 02-08-2008, 10:09 AM
KingJosh's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Penn Hills, United States
Posts: 37
Quote:
Here in Germany, a certain young woman has the legal right to call her Xenia, Duchess of Saxony, princess of Saxony - that's what her birth certificate says as she is the illegitimate daughter (father unknown) of a lady with the name of Duchess of Saxony, princess of Saxony, who was born from a morganatic marriage. Is this girl acknowledged by the Margrave of Meissen, Head of the Royal House of Saxony? I sincerely doubt it. But she can give this name by law to all her children and they can give it to all their children and so on....
Thats great that Gremany has diffrent rules on who can pass on titles but I don't think England is Germany, correct me if i'm wrong.

Quote:
Apart from you, obviously noone cares if she had a title or not before she married the prince.
And if you don't care then why argue with me on the issue.
__________________
JIR
  #1768  
Old 02-08-2008, 10:31 AM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,912
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingJosh View Post
..... Iím simply saying the She was never titled or noble before marriage whether or not she or her family owned land.
And so?

The question, unless I got lost in the threads is 'Will Charles Ever Reign', not 'is his wife of noble birth' (which her peers say believe she is). Every title started with an ordinary person 'enobled' by the monarch or through marriage.

HM's maternal grandmother and gt. grandmother were not aristocrats.
  #1769  
Old 02-08-2008, 10:42 AM
KingJosh's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Penn Hills, United States
Posts: 37
I'm just trying to support an opinion i stated in the #4 thread that is apperently a touchy subject with Camilla fans I didn't think it would end up being a big huge discussion.
__________________
JIR
  #1770  
Old 02-08-2008, 12:32 PM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingJosh View Post
Thats great that Gremany has diffrent rules on who can pass on titles but I don't think England is Germany, correct me if i'm wrong.



And if you don't care then why argue with me on the issue.
Because I hadn't so far realised that you apparently are not here to discuss in a friendly and politely way with others and to get a bit more information or even knowledge of how things are some place else.
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
  #1771  
Old 02-08-2008, 12:45 PM
KingJosh's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Penn Hills, United States
Posts: 37
I'm Sorry if I came off as being rude or uninterested in the rules of other countries, what i was trying to say was that I don't see how the rules of another country have anyhing to do with England. I wouldn't join a Forum like this if I didn't want to learn.

Quote:
I'm just trying to support an opinion (right or wrong) i stated in the #4 thread that is apperently a touchy subject with Camilla fans I didn't think it would end up being a big huge discussion.
We've all made good logical points and now maybe we can get back on subject
__________________
JIR
  #1772  
Old 02-08-2008, 02:32 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,912
Quote:
Originally Posted by KingJosh View Post
I'm just trying to support an opinion i stated in the #4 thread that is apperently a touchy subject with Camilla fans I didn't think it would end up being a big huge discussion.
Quote:
POST 284 BY KingJosh - PREVIOUS THREAD. - I don't think that HRH the Prince of Wales should be allowed to reign. He doesn't know how to play the game, You marry for the good of the monarchy and not for yourself. He should not be allowed to reign since he married out of nobility.
But you haven't 'supported' your opinion. Even some of HM's ancestors were not aristocrats, but simply landed gentry. Therefore I am unable to work out why you believe he should not be allowed to be King.
  #1773  
Old 02-08-2008, 04:42 PM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
But you haven't 'supported' your opinion. Even some of HM's ancestors were not aristocrats, but simply landed gentry. Therefore I am unable to work out why you believe he should not be allowed to be King.
And one should point out that as the British monarchy does not recognize foreign Royal titles once the holder becomes a British subject and does not automatically create a foreign princess to a British princess in her own right on marriage into the RF, even a foreign princess would just be HRH because of her husband's status. Yes, and if we talk about commoners - as the queen did not create her daughter a peeress in her own right, in your reading of the nobility as consisting only of people with titles in their own right and not because they are related to titled persons, The Princess Royal is actually a commoner as well who does not have a title in her own right but has just a courtesy title of HRH because she is the daughter of a souverain.
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
  #1774  
Old 02-08-2008, 05:04 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 589
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skydragon View Post
.POST 284 BY KingJosh - PREVIOUS THREAD. - I don't think that HRH the Prince of Wales should be allowed to reign. He doesn't know how to play the game, You marry for the good of the monarchy and not for yourself. He should not be allowed to reign since he married out of nobility.
Prince Charles married in his circle and this is the key IMO. Camilla has grown up in the circle since her childhood and she seems to have deep ties with many upper class families. One of the reasons why Prince Charles was permitted to marry Camilla finally was that Camilla is a PLU -she has a more proper background that The Duchess of Windsor did. Camilla is from landed gentry families which are recognised by upper class circle.

By the way, if Prince Charles were unfit to reign because of Camilla's family background, what do you reckon about Prince William's right to reign? I seriously doubt he would marry a princess or a girl from arstocratic families.
  #1775  
Old 02-08-2008, 10:39 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,735
Legally, she would be "Camilla Shand, Duchess of Cornwall" with divorce. Her style would be "Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall" as the former wife of a peer.

The Mountbatten-Windsor surname does not apply to descendants of The Queen and Prince Philip who were/are HRH.
  #1776  
Old 02-09-2008, 12:28 AM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,873
Most of the current crop of crown princes and quite a few kings haven't married nobles or aristocrats, and they seem to be doing fine. It's an interesting point, though, whether the royal families will be able to sustain the public's interest in a generation or two, when the crown princes have commoner mothers, grandmothers, and great-grandmothers, and when all their cousins and most of their friends are normal people like the rest of us. Presumably their interests, their schooling, and their entire outlook won't be that different from the rest of the people in their country, and when the king isn't that different from anyone else, it might lead to some serious questions being asked about the point of the monarchy.

And yes, I know I'm off topic.
  #1777  
Old 02-09-2008, 01:23 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,978
I've thought the same, Elspeth. It will be very interesting to see what eventuates.
__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
  #1778  
Old 02-09-2008, 02:45 AM
Jo of Palatine's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Munich, Germany
Posts: 3,323
Quote:
Originally Posted by branchg View Post
Legally, she would be "Camilla Shand, Duchess of Cornwall" with divorce. Her style would be "Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall" as the former wife of a peer.

The Mountbatten-Windsor surname does not apply to descendants of The Queen and Prince Philip who were/are HRH.
I'm not sure about the who "were" - but I'm pretty sure that if you are right then she would be Camilla Windsor - you need not revert back to your maiden name on divorce.

just checked:

If you take these two declarations into account, Camilla would be Camilla Windsor, duchess of Cornwall.

from: Royal Styles and Titles of Great Britain: Documents
House of Windsor (Feb 8, 1960)

At the Court at Buckingham Palace, The 8th day of February 1960.
Present, the Queen's Most Excellent Majesty in Council.
Her Majesty was this day pleased to make the following declaration:
"My Lords
Whereas on the 9th day of April 1952, I did declare in Council My Will and Pleasure that I and My children shall be styled and known as the House and Family of Windsor, and that My descendants, other than female descendants who marry and their descendants, shall bear the name of Windsor:
And whereas I have given further consideration to the position of those of My descendants who will enjoy neither the style, title or attribute of Royal Highness, nor the titluar dignity of Prince and for whom therefore a surname will be necessary:
And whereas I have concluded that the Declaration made by Me on the 9th day of April 1952, should be varied in its application to such persons:
Now therefore I declare My Will and Pleasure that, while I and My Children shall continue to be styled and known as the House and Family of Windsor, My descendants other than descendants enjoying the style, title or attribute of Royal Highness and the titular dignity of Prince or Princess and female descendants who marry and their descendants shall bear the name of Mountbatten-Windsor."

(London Gazette, issue 41948, Feb. 8, 1960, p. 1/1003. See also the Times Feb 9, 1960 p. 10E.)
Former Wives (1996)

Buckingham Palace
The Queen has been pleased by Letters Patent under the Great Seal of the Realm dated 21st August 1996, to declare that a former wife (other than a widow until she shall remarry) of a son of a Sovereign of these Realms, of a son of a son of a Sovereign and of the eldest living son of the eldest son of The Prince of Wales shall not be entitled to hold and enjoy the style, title or attribute of Royal Highness.

(London Gazette, issue 54510, Aug 30, 1996, p. 1/11603.)
__________________
'To dare is to lose one step for but a moment, not to dare is to lose oneself forever' - Crown Prince Frederick of Denmark in a letter to Miss Mary Donaldson as stated by them on their official engagement interview.
  #1779  
Old 02-09-2008, 12:51 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,912
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jo of Palatine View Post
I'm not sure about the who "were" - but I'm pretty sure that if you are right then she would be Camilla Windsor - you need not revert back to your maiden name on divorce.
Definitely Windsor, even the ex's of princes do not have to revert to their maiden name, unless they specifically want to!
  #1780  
Old 02-09-2008, 01:04 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 8,012
Speaking off-topic ...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elspeth View Post
Most of the current crop of crown princes and quite a few kings haven't married nobles or aristocrats, and they seem to be doing fine. It's an interesting point, though, whether the royal families will be able to sustain the public's interest in a generation or two, when the crown princes have commoner mothers, grandmothers, and great-grandmothers, and when all their cousins and most of their friends are normal people like the rest of us. ....
It is sad, but current royal families lose the charm and special aura that used to surround the royals.
__________________

Closed Thread

Tags
prince charles, prince of wales


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
Reign of Felipe VI: How Will Things Be Different? muriel King Felipe VI, Queen Letizia and Family 90 01-03-2017 06:30 PM
ďThe Lady Queen: the Notorious Reign of Joanna I, Queen of Naples, Jerusalem, and Sic An Ard Ri Royal Library 0 07-06-2014 07:27 PM
Is Victoria Ready to Reign? NotAPretender Crown Princess Victoria, Prince Daniel and Family 20 06-19-2011 07:05 AM
Elizabeth II: Oldest British Monarch (Dec 20 2007); 2nd Longest Reign (May 12 2011) WindsorIII Queen Elizabeth II 33 05-30-2011 07:40 AM




Popular Tags
america archie mountbatten-windsor asia asian baby names birth britain britannia british royal family camilla camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles carolin china china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing chinese clarence house colorblindness commonwealth countries coronation crown jewels customs duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex edward vii elizabeth ii family life fashion and style gemstones george vi gradenigo gustaf vi adolf hello! henry viii highgrove hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs jack brooksbank japan kensington palace king edward vii książ castle lili mountbatten-windsor line of succession list of rulers medical meghan markle monarchist movements monarchists mongolia mountbatten nara period pless politics prince harry princess eugenie queen elizabeth ii queen louise royal ancestry royalty of taiwan solomon j solomon spanish royal family suthida taiwan thai royal family tradition united states of america wales


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:02 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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