Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

to think that Camilla is a bit of a national treasure

385 replies

GitAwfMayLend · 29/04/2011 20:23

Yes another wedding based thread.

I think she seems a good egg. And looked lovely today.

Plus there were a few moments where she looked very emotional in the abbey, was very touching.

OP posts:
hocuspontas · 29/04/2011 20:40

I think the Queen will be glad she's dead when that question comes up. I thought they said she could never become queen? Maybe I imagined that.

Alibabaandthe80nappies · 29/04/2011 20:42

laInfanta - I thought it wasn't necessarily a done deal?

Animation · 29/04/2011 20:42

I don't mind Camilla - thought she looked a bit jittery and nervy today. Charles and her are looking like a couple of old foggies these days - and seem harmless enough now. They caused a lot of heartache in their time though.

Seems like their sins are forgiven but poor old Fergie remains in purgatory.

NinkyNonker · 29/04/2011 20:42

I like her. ANd regardless of their past, I like the fact that they are genuinely in love and regardless of protocol and opinion they still got married because of it. MAybe I am a hopelessly naive romantic.

Original poster
GitAwfMayLend · 29/04/2011 20:43

Think morganatic marriage is where the person the King is married to is not permitted to become Queen (usually done in Europe for religious reasons iirc) and any children of that marriage are not allowed to inherit.

Or summat.

I might be making it up.

OP posts:
laInfanta · 29/04/2011 20:44

There's nothing in the constitution to say she can't be queen, so she will be. I think they said initially she wouldn't be queen just to see how people reacted to her.

A morganatic marriage is when two people are married but the lower-status one doesn't have automatic rights to the money and/or title the same way a normal spouse would. I don't think it really happens any more.

People get confused about the divorced thing because of Wallis Simpson. But that was just to do with social etiquette of the 30s (no divorcees at court) and the fact that she was fucking von Ribbentrop at the time. Edward could have married her, but the entire government threatened to resign so Ed had to go instead.

SybilBeddows · 29/04/2011 20:45

ahhhh thank you GetOrf.

diddl · 29/04/2011 20:45

I rather like Camilla as well.

C&C look great together.

They look comfortable & suit each other.

I don´t understand why they didn´t marry in the 70´s-too young?

Did he even ask?

SybilBeddows · 29/04/2011 20:46

xposts, thank you LaInfanta.

that's what I thought happened re Camilla - at that stage they thought the public would never accept her as queen so they said she wouldn't necessarily be.
I'm sure she couldn't care less.

Original poster
GitAwfMayLend · 29/04/2011 20:47

Was she really shagging von Ribbentrop? blimey.

Franz Ferdinand who got shot in Serbia was married morganatically.

First really liked Camilla when she got married - after they got spliced she came out and did her first regal wave, and clouted her own hat. That is the kind of stupid thing I would do.

OP posts:
SybilBeddows · 29/04/2011 20:47

I thought he was told she was too common and had too much of a history so he didn't ask, then by the time he realised he didn't want to marry any of the other eligible girls that were being shoved in front of him, she'd married someone else. But I only know that from Diana Her True Story.

hocuspontas · 29/04/2011 20:47

It's been indicated she might be styled 'Princess Consort' according to Wiki. I didn't realise that although she is legally HRH Princess of Wales she prefers the title Duchess of Cornwall in deference to Diana. I like her even more now.

meditrina · 29/04/2011 20:47

Morganatic marriage is one from which even legitimate offspring are excluded from the succession. I don't think it's been done in Britain, and the question never arose because the Duchess of Cornwall would not have been having more children.

Jinglemum:

  1. I don't know why he wasn't allowed to marry Camilla, presumably her past was too racy (she isn't Catholic by the way, though her first husband was, and so are her children).
  1. Again, who knows - whatever love is! But there were no perceptible clues anything was awry at all in the early years.
  1. No, I doubt he was. He admitted adultery when the marriage had already irretrievably broken down. This is code for "only after she'd done it first", in terms of the actual physical act. But his undisputed closeness to Camilla throughout would of course have been a factor in the total dynamic.
everthebeliver · 29/04/2011 20:48

Camilla was the third person in the marriage. She let Charles marry Diana knowing she was in the sideline. YABU my opinion of course but cannot stand the woman and changing the subject slightly (we were talking about this today) it will come out in years to come that Diana was assasinated.

laInfanta · 29/04/2011 20:49

the Daily Express is here...

LunaticFringe · 29/04/2011 20:49

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Jaquelinehyde · 29/04/2011 20:49

I think she is great, I've always had a soft spot for her and when Charles becomes King (which will be soon) she should be Queen.

hocuspontas · 29/04/2011 20:51

It looks like Charlie didn't set his stall out before he went overseas and when he came back she had married Parker-Bowles. It could all have been so different...

NinkyNonker · 29/04/2011 20:52

I think I heard that the Royal Family felt she was too old, too much history. So he married Diana as instructed, and it was called off with Camilla. Only to resume again (to what degree I don't know) a while later.

I always kind of liked her despite having no real sympathy for adulterers. I think that the Royals kind of operated differently in that instance, but perhaps have learnt their lesson since in terms of meddling.

toddlerwrangler · 29/04/2011 20:52

Not a fan of anyone who has an affair. That said, Dianne managed to squeeze in one or two so I don't get the vitrol aimed at Camilla.

She keeps her head down and gets on with the job. Good one her I say.

laInfanta · 29/04/2011 20:53

It has always basically been a given in the aristocracy that it's fine to have an affair as long as you don't pollute the bloodline (i.e. get preg with a baby that's not your husband's). It was always just accepted that princes and kings had mistresses. Unfortunately no one explained this to poor Diana.

I'm sure they have learned their lesson about letting princes/princesses marry who they want.

foundwanting · 29/04/2011 20:55

I thought they weren't allowed to marry originally because she is Catholic. And that would have meant that any children wouldn't be allowed to inherit the throne.

Why did I think that? Hmm

Lilmeena · 29/04/2011 20:56

Camilla isn't catholic - her husband was.

hairylights · 29/04/2011 20:57

I think she's ok. I think the whole Charles/diana/Camilla thing was extraordinarily complicated. He was a nob for marrying Di when in love with Camilla, and they were both nobs for carrying it on afterwards but they are so tied up in weird expectation from others

Meglet · 29/04/2011 20:58

yanbu. Charles wasn't allowed to marry Camilla and it was an arranged marriage to Diana, who was also a national treasure IMO. Total nightmare for the lot of them.

Glad the royals have loosened up and let William marry someone he loves.