Welcome to the Historical Fiction Online forums: a friendly place to discuss, review and discover historical fiction.
If this is your first visit, please be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above.
You will have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed.
To start viewing posts, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Prince William & Kate Middleton Are Finally Engaged

User avatar
Madeleine
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 5732
Joined: August 2008
Currently reading: "Tidelands" by Philippa Gregory
Preferred HF: Plantagenets, Victorian, crime, dual time-frame
Location: Essex/London

Post by Madeleine » Wed November 17th, 2010, 8:49 pm

I thought Camilla was Duchess of Cornwall (as Charles is Duke), and would be his Consort if he ever became King.
Currently reading: "Tidelands" by Philippa Gregory

User avatar
Leo62
Bibliophile
Posts: 1027
Joined: December 2008
Location: London
Contact:

Post by Leo62 » Wed November 17th, 2010, 9:00 pm

*sigh*

I look forward to spending 2011 getting in touch with my inner republican :D
listen:there's a hell
of a good universe next door;let's go
ee cummings

User avatar
Michy
Bibliophile
Posts: 1649
Joined: May 2010
Location: California

Post by Michy » Wed November 17th, 2010, 9:07 pm

[quote=""EC2""]A well known author said on Twitter yesterday that Kate in her blue dress looked like a frump and it was a dull outfit. I thought it was just beautiful and classy, I'd have worn it, but what do I know.[/quote] I don't know who the well-known author is, but if she's female, I'd have to say she's a mite bit envious. ;) Because Kate has never looked frumpy in anything I've seen her in. That blue dress was gorgeous and she looked stunning in it, IMO. Just because an outfit doesn't have bling doesn't make it dull. ;)


[quote=""sweetpotatoboy""]Yes, I think the British public in general, myself included, have accepted Camilla - and even quite taken to her - since they married. She really seems a down-to-earth, no-nonsense sort who's simply in it because this is the man she wants to be with, rather than because she has any grander aspirations.
She has taken a lot of ribbing, including for her looks - when she is a perfectly pleasant-looking woman, especially as she has matured - and what did being beautiful even do for Diana?

[/quote]
Sweetpotato boy - yes. The nation has quite taken to Camilla for all the reasons you state. She's a nice lady.
I agree. I think all the spite directed at Camilla -- even back when Diana first died -- was a bit unfair, really. She's not totally to blame for Charles' and Diana's breakup -- Charles was no Prince Charming, and it does take two to tango, after all. And she's certainly not to blame for Diana's death. I think the way she has kept a low profile (or, at least it seems that way over here!) and conveyed that she's not trying to take Diana's place has shown a lot of wisdom and decency. And as for her looks -- I thought in her and Charles' wedding pictures she looked lovely. Her dress was very classy and becoming.


But as for being titled "Queen" -- I've always been under the impression that she could never be called "Queen" because she's been divorced. Or is it "Her Royal Highness" that she can never be called? Or am I completely mistaken?

User avatar
Telynor
Bibliophile
Posts: 1465
Joined: August 2008
Location: On the Banks of the Hudson

Post by Telynor » Wed November 17th, 2010, 10:12 pm

Well, I've heard bits that Camilla will be called Princess Consort when Charles comes to the throne, as a response to the bit that she's not Diana. Go figure. She is an HRH now, however. I wonder what royal title will be resurrected for William when he marries -- I hope not Duke of Clarence, that doesn't have a very good reputation. For those interested in all things royal, take a look at this site for the official scoops:

http://www.royal.gov.uk/

User avatar
Michy
Bibliophile
Posts: 1649
Joined: May 2010
Location: California

Post by Michy » Wed November 17th, 2010, 10:23 pm

Why did Edward ____ have to abdicate to marry Wallis Simpson, and she could never be called HRH because she'd been divorced, but Camilla is called HRH and apparently won't stand in the way of Charles becoming king? What is the difference in the two situations, other than that was the 1930s and this is now?
Last edited by Michy on Wed November 17th, 2010, 10:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Vanessa
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 4250
Joined: August 2008
Currently reading: The Farm at the Edge of the World by Sarah Vaughan
Interest in HF: The first historical novel I read was Katherine by Anya Seton and this sparked off my interest in this genre.
Favourite HF book: Gone with the Wind by Margaret Mitchell!
Preferred HF: Any
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Post by Vanessa » Wed November 17th, 2010, 10:34 pm

I think it was to do with being divorced but things have changed since the 1930s. And I'm not sure if it wasn't because she wasn't British either or at least European.
currently reading: My Books on Goodreads

Books are mirrors, you only see in them what you already have inside you ~ The Shadow of the Wind

User avatar
Vanessa
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 4250
Joined: August 2008
Currently reading: The Farm at the Edge of the World by Sarah Vaughan
Interest in HF: The first historical novel I read was Katherine by Anya Seton and this sparked off my interest in this genre.
Favourite HF book: Gone with the Wind by Margaret Mitchell!
Preferred HF: Any
Location: North Yorkshire, UK

Post by Vanessa » Wed November 17th, 2010, 10:41 pm

[quote=""Madeleine""]I thought Camilla was Duchess of Cornwall (as Charles is Duke), and would be his Consort if he ever became King.[/quote]

Yes, she is the Duchess of Cornwall, which is the title she uses, but she is also Princess of Wales, which she doesn't use!

As to Camilla's title, I think we will have to see what happens if and when Charles becomes king. It wouldn't bother me if she was called queen. I like her. She suits him far better than Diana ever did. And I liked Diana, too. She just wasn't suited to the 'royal' type of life.
Last edited by Vanessa on Wed November 17th, 2010, 10:45 pm, edited 1 time in total.
currently reading: My Books on Goodreads

Books are mirrors, you only see in them what you already have inside you ~ The Shadow of the Wind

User avatar
JMJacobsen
Reader
Posts: 113
Joined: September 2008
Location: Gig Harbor, Washington

Post by JMJacobsen » Wed November 17th, 2010, 10:46 pm

Edward chose to abdicate, although he technically didn't have to by the strict letter of the law. But at the time, it wasn't believed that Edward could hold the title of Supreme Governor of the Church of England and marry a woman whose previous spouse (s) were still living. Her divorces weren't recognized by the Church. But there were so many other political influences at the time....Wallis had a LOT of "baggage" besides her divorces and politically Edward really had no choice if he wanted to marry her.

I was under the impression that if Charles ever takes the throne, Camilla will legally be queen, but it has been decided she will be referred to as HRH, The Princess Consort.
Last edited by JMJacobsen on Wed November 17th, 2010, 10:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
EC2
Bibliomaniac
Posts: 3661
Joined: August 2008
Location: Nottingham UK
Contact:

Post by EC2 » Wed November 17th, 2010, 11:16 pm

Edward who married Mrs Simpson used to come to hunting parties in our village. They used to employ ummm... ladies of a certain type to entertain them and who were paid good money to keep their mouths shut. The queen has an illegitimate cousin living in my community and those in the know can tell he's a Windsor just by looking at him. There was another child born about that time too. I think he splashed it all over the papers - Tim Sealy or Seely or some such, although his mother was a family friend rather than a one off.
At the time, these huntin' shootin' parties were well known about in the village.
There are photos in the village history of HRH taking a stroll along the road while resident!

Michy, re the writer who didn't like the blue dress was Susan Hill (author of The Lady in Black) and I guess I can post it here because it's there for all to see in her Twitterfeed. She tweeted:

Photo of William and Kate. She looks 40, has frock to match and far too much makeup. And looks like her mother. Wiliam, are you SURE ?
Les proz e les vassals
Souvent entre piez de chevals
Kar ja li coard n’I chasront

'The Brave and the valiant
Are always to be found between the hooves of horses
For never will cowards fall down there.'

Histoire de Guillaume le Mareschal

www.elizabethchadwick.com

User avatar
Michy
Bibliophile
Posts: 1649
Joined: May 2010
Location: California

Post by Michy » Wed November 17th, 2010, 11:42 pm

[quote=""EC2""]Edward who married Mrs Simpson used to come to hunting parties in our village. They used to employ ummm... ladies of a certain type to entertain them and who were paid good money to keep their mouths shut. The queen has an illegitimate cousin living in my community and those in the know can tell he's a Windsor just by looking at him. There was another child born about that time too. I think he splashed it all over the papers - Tim Sealy or Seely or some such, although his mother was a family friend rather than a one off.
At the time, these huntin' shootin' parties were well known about in the village.
There are photos in the village history of HRH taking a stroll along the road while resident! [/quote]

I read a biography of Wallis many years ago and, if it was true, then she and Edward led a fairly kinky lifestyle! :eek:
Michy, re the writer who didn't like the blue dress was Susan Hill (author of The Lady in Black) and I guess I can post it here because it's there for all to see in her Twitterfeed. She tweeted:

Photo of William and Kate. She looks 40, has frock to match and far too much makeup. And looks like her mother. Wiliam, are you SURE ?
I can't help but feel that Ms. Hill sounds like an ex-girlfriend of William who is still seething over being dumped by him in favor of Kate. :D Absolutely scrambling for something negative to say about Kate's appearance..... I think Kate is cute. Not beautiful, but very cute. And if she looks 40, well, all I can say is, we all should look so good at age 40!!! :p

As for William, he's looking less like a hunk and more like his dad every day! :eek:

Post Reply

Return to “Chat”