Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, Part II

[Michael HR]

George VII is much more agreeable than Charles III bearing in mind the history of the Stuarts. Over the years I have heard this more than once that he would use the style in respect of his Grandfather.

[TampaBay]

You are right the last coronation in Europe was in Roumania in 1920's. Althought most monarchies have an inauguration or swearing in. Only Westminster has the full glory of a ceremony that is over a thousand years old.

What about QEII's in 1952?

TampaBay

[Eric_Lowe]

Only in Britian...Even Juan Carlos of Spain wasn't crowned...I think if Camilla was proclaimed "Princess Consort", there will be lessof an issue. She wasn't a traditional consort after all...

[Norbert]

You are right the last coronation in Europe was in Roumania in 1920's. Althought most monarchies have an inauguration or swearing in. Only Westminster has the full glory of a ceremony that is over a thousand years old.

What about QEII's in 1952?

TampaBayYes, it was suggested that HM might take the style Mary III but she declined. Certainly Clarence wanted to be Henry IX until it was tactfully shown that it was the style of Cardinal Stuart

[Eric_Lowe]

It would be a great spectecle to see Charles crowned...George ?

[Robert_Hall]

It has already been announced that the ceremony is being "streamlined" and brought  in line with the modern times. It might not be quite the spectacle it has been in the past.

[Eric_Lowe]

Indeed...However Charles was a sticker to tradition. However Camillla may not be crowned. I don't think she personally cared about that.

[Grace]

Indeed...However Charles was a sticker to tradition. However Camillla may not be crowned. I don't think she personally cared about that.

I think it would be very strange if she didn't have a firm idea when she married Charles about whether or not she should be crowned alongside her husband when the time comes.  After all, that's his destiny. 

[Lucien]

But still I think the British people do not want her as Queen. It will be intresting what happens when Charles ascends as to her position. If she is crowned I can see a great outcry from the British people over this. The POW casts a long shadow down the years.

You see all that?You must be clairvoyant Michael,I don´t see that at all.All I see is a country that should stop nagging over a Lady that has done absolutely nothing wrong,not one step,since she became the Princess of Wales,never mind she doesn´t use that title,all previous ones are dead,vamos,gone,no use for false sentiments and this is what´s been the case for the past nearly 11 years now.Stop that nonsense!Get real!I think the British have to/can worry on a lot more issues then the if and what of HRH The Duchess of Cornwall in the near or distant future,depending on when dear HM QE II decides to leave us all,may that day be far away still,no mistake about that,but this constant nagging and fingerpointing towards HRH,in a country where 1 in 3 marriages break-up,people should absolutely stop projecting their own dirt/trash on her.

[Eric_Lowe]

True...unfortunately George VI and Elizabeth II upped the scale for family tradition that was unfortunately not attainable by the next generation. The Queen had "vowed"herself to serve the country her entire life (She took her vows quite seriously). The coronation in 1953 was a continuation of a long tradition which stressed the religious, spirtual element with nationalism (aspecially after George V, who put patroitism to one's country above family and dynasty). The idea of a divorced sovereign or wife of a sovereign is quite innovating to Royal Families. We have actually only one (the Spanish one. Mette Merrit wasn't married to the father of her child) apart from Camilla. However she was the ONLY mistress to wife situation (Felipe and even the Duke of Windsor wasn't married before). Her coronation would rehash a lot of resentment from Pro-Diana groups to those who are jealousy of her rise in stature. A proclaimation would remove any opprtunity for that to happen.

[Robert_Hall]

Mette Marit is crown princess of Norway, not Spain.

[Michael HR]

Hi Robert,

That would be a great shame. Of course if Tony Blair was still PM we might have had him placing the Crown on the Sovereigns head...

I hope they do not cut down the coronation and use the form used at the Queen's and thus a link with 1000 years of history although a lot of the modern day form was I recall invented for Edward VIII's but I may be wrong.

It has already been announced that the ceremony is being "streamlined" and brought  in line with the modern times. It might not be quite the spectacle it has been in the past.

[Adagietto]

I'm sure it won't be any less of a grand spectacle than it has been in the past. The high tide of 'modernization' is now receding, and even Blair didn't see much point in interfering with royal ritual. There will naturally be alterations, paricularly with regard to the composition of the audience (less centerd on the nobility), and representatives of other churches and faiths will have to be involved in some way.  But I suspect it won't be for some considerable time yet!

[Michael HR]

It was reported in the British press at the time of the death of the Queen Mother that Blair wanted to play a part in the funeral service but was refused by the Queen as I recall.

[Robert_Hall]

The coronation ceremony is a constantly evolving process. It changes with every  new sovereign.  See Roy Strong's CORONATION. It is not sacrilege to change things around. Eliminate arcane, superflulous and irrelevent language, rites and rituals.  What might have meant something in 1953 may not in the 21st century. Charles has said this several times in his interviews.  In any case, it is premature to talk about it now.