Camilla apparently leaning into “The Queen” title

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Team Diana

Yup. Just can't get behind Camilla. Sorry not sorry.

Same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I sometimes think it was kinder that Diana did not live to see all this.

Not for her sons and grandchildren! Diana would have still been a force in the monarch as mother/grandmother to heirs of the throne. Imagine how things would have played out for Meghan & Kate to have Diana as their MIL. So sad she missed out on happier decades to come.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And? She's Her Majesty the Queen. That's what she's called.

Queen Elizabeth said she shouldn’t be Queen. Charles made her queen. Charles’s dad wasn’t king. Same thing.

I believe queen Elizabeth gave the go ahead later.

She did, before she died. Very publicly. And Camilla has been using this title since shortly after the coronation. Keep up OP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sometimes think it was kinder that Diana did not live to see all this.

Not for her sons and grandchildren! Diana would have still been a force in the monarch as mother/grandmother to heirs of the throne. Imagine how things would have played out for Meghan & Kate to have Diana as their MIL. So sad she missed out on happier decades to come.

You can't be serious that things would play out exactly the same. If Diana had lived we probably never would have had Kate or Meghan. It wouldn't be an "all else equal but with Diana". All of it would have turned out differently.

[Anonymous]

Their website www.royal.uk was updated on the day of Charles's coronation, making the change from The Queen Consort to The Queen.

before:
https://web.archive.org/web/20230506012514/https://www.royal.uk/

after:
https://web.archive.org/web/20230506120449/https://www.royal.uk/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And? She's Her Majesty the Queen. That's what she's called.

Queen Elizabeth said she shouldn’t be Queen. Charles made her queen. Charles’s dad wasn’t king. Same thing.

I believe queen Elizabeth gave the go ahead later.

Nope. Once she died, Charles was like "I'm king, she's dead, Camilla is queen now." It's sort of the whole thing with being the monarch-- you get to do what you want.

You’re wrong. In 2022, Elizabeth gave her blessing. This was announced on the bbc and there are plenty of other sources to find this information.

Her blessing was for “Queen Consort”
https://nypost.com/2022/02/05/queen-elizabeth-backs-camilla-as-queen-consort/?_ga=2.233957406.1269693147.1655718344-225148805.1606918943

Does that automatically confer “Queen” status upon Charles’s coronation?

The fact that Charles decided to give her the title of Queen is what matters. Elizabeth doesn't control what titles the royal family uses after she dies. She's still a queen consort in the sense that's not a queen regnant, but the title is up to Charles now, not Elizabeth.

With this I absolutely agree - it's Charles's decision for better or worse.

My question is about the mechanics of the "Queen Consort" title granted by QEII. Does it automatically convert to "Queen" once Charles is coronated? If so, then QEII was implicitly acknowledging that she approved the use of "Queen" by assigning "Queen Consort" to Camilla.

I'm not sure there's an answer, because historically the use of "Queen Consort" as a title is pretty rare; most British Queens have been Queens Consort, but they're just called Queen. Consort just describes the type of queen they are. Queen Elizabeth II wasn't titled "Queen Regnant," she was just Queen. Her mother wasn't titled Queen Consort, she was was just the Queen.

(The husbands of Queens Regnant is a different matter, because of the fact that king as a title traditionally outranks queen. They're typically called princes for that reason, but even Phillip wasn't titled as Prince Consort, he was just "His Royal Highness The Prince Philip."

I can only speak to the way it was reported in the British press, but when QEII announced that she was blessing the "Queen Consort" title, this was seen as both a kindness and a rebuke.

A kindness because there was a loooooong time, both before and after Charles and Camilla marrying, when people questioned whether Camilla would ever get anything resembling a "queen" title, due to to complications with Charles' divorce from Diana and the circumstances under which he wed Camilla. The divorce was a huge deal, and it took a long time to grant because both the family and the government recalled that, oh hey, divorce was the reason the Duke of Windsor abdicated the throne. So to have the heir divorce and remarry was a HUGE deal. And then when Charles and Camilla married, their wedding vows literally included a section where they had to publicly atone for their affair and the fact that it destroyed Charles' marriage to Diana, who was the one who was "selected" (both by the Queen's approval and by the government's agreement) to be the future queen. So it was not a give that QEII would ever give her blessing for Camilla to be styled Queen Consort. They might have forced a title like Philip's on her, even though the reasoning would have been different.

So when QEII said in 2022 that Camilla would be Queen Consort, it was viewed as QEII consenting to give Camilla some kind of queen title, a big deal, but also people noted that she was specific that it was Queen *Consort*, not queen. And this was viewed as a bit of a rebuke, akin to the special vows Charles and Camilla had to do, to show that Camilla was NOT the chosen queen, she was not mother to the heir, and she would not have the same status as Diana would have had if they had not divorced and Diana had not been killed.

I mean, yeah, it all seems silly. It is. But the way that announcement was made and reported on, it seemed pretty clear that QEII was saying okay, Camilla can be a kind of queen but it needs to be clear that she's a different kind of queen than someone who married the heir and bore his children, with no divorce and affair, because we actually have all these very specific rules about this stuff thanks to the Church of England and the unique role the monarchy plays in British government and society since Henry VIII.

So it is kind of a big deal that Camilla is just going by "The Queen" now, at least based on how most people interpret QEII's announcement about the title Queen Consort.

Great post. I totally forgot about all the context when QEII assigned the "Queen Consort" title!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And? She's Her Majesty the Queen. That's what she's called.

Queen Elizabeth said she shouldn’t be Queen. Charles made her queen. Charles’s dad wasn’t king. Same thing.

I believe queen Elizabeth gave the go ahead later.

Nope. Once she died, Charles was like "I'm king, she's dead, Camilla is queen now." It's sort of the whole thing with being the monarch-- you get to do what you want.

You’re wrong. In 2022, Elizabeth gave her blessing. This was announced on the bbc and there are plenty of other sources to find this information.

Her blessing was for “Queen Consort”
https://nypost.com/2022/02/05/queen-elizabeth-backs-camilla-as-queen-consort/?_ga=2.233957406.1269693147.1655718344-225148805.1606918943

Does that automatically confer “Queen” status upon Charles’s coronation?

The fact that Charles decided to give her the title of Queen is what matters. Elizabeth doesn't control what titles the royal family uses after she dies. She's still a queen consort in the sense that's not a queen regnant, but the title is up to Charles now, not Elizabeth.

With this I absolutely agree - it's Charles's decision for better or worse.

My question is about the mechanics of the "Queen Consort" title granted by QEII. Does it automatically convert to "Queen" once Charles is coronated? If so, then QEII was implicitly acknowledging that she approved the use of "Queen" by assigning "Queen Consort" to Camilla.

I'm not sure there's an answer, because historically the use of "Queen Consort" as a title is pretty rare; most British Queens have been Queens Consort, but they're just called Queen. Consort just describes the type of queen they are. Queen Elizabeth II wasn't titled "Queen Regnant," she was just Queen. Her mother wasn't titled Queen Consort, she was was just the Queen.

(The husbands of Queens Regnant is a different matter, because of the fact that king as a title traditionally outranks queen. They're typically called princes for that reason, but even Phillip wasn't titled as Prince Consort, he was just "His Royal Highness The Prince Philip."

I can only speak to the way it was reported in the British press, but when QEII announced that she was blessing the "Queen Consort" title, this was seen as both a kindness and a rebuke.

A kindness because there was a loooooong time, both before and after Charles and Camilla marrying, when people questioned whether Camilla would ever get anything resembling a "queen" title, due to to complications with Charles' divorce from Diana and the circumstances under which he wed Camilla. The divorce was a huge deal, and it took a long time to grant because both the family and the government recalled that, oh hey, divorce was the reason the Duke of Windsor abdicated the throne. So to have the heir divorce and remarry was a HUGE deal. And then when Charles and Camilla married, their wedding vows literally included a section where they had to publicly atone for their affair and the fact that it destroyed Charles' marriage to Diana, who was the one who was "selected" (both by the Queen's approval and by the government's agreement) to be the future queen. So it was not a give that QEII would ever give her blessing for Camilla to be styled Queen Consort. They might have forced a title like Philip's on her, even though the reasoning would have been different.

So when QEII said in 2022 that Camilla would be Queen Consort, it was viewed as QEII consenting to give Camilla some kind of queen title, a big deal, but also people noted that she was specific that it was Queen *Consort*, not queen. And this was viewed as a bit of a rebuke, akin to the special vows Charles and Camilla had to do, to show that Camilla was NOT the chosen queen, she was not mother to the heir, and she would not have the same status as Diana would have had if they had not divorced and Diana had not been killed.

I mean, yeah, it all seems silly. It is. But the way that announcement was made and reported on, it seemed pretty clear that QEII was saying okay, Camilla can be a kind of queen but it needs to be clear that she's a different kind of queen than someone who married the heir and bore his children, with no divorce and affair, because we actually have all these very specific rules about this stuff thanks to the Church of England and the unique role the monarchy plays in British government and society since Henry VIII.

So it is kind of a big deal that Camilla is just going by "The Queen" now, at least based on how most people interpret QEII's announcement about the title Queen Consort.

Great post. I totally forgot about all the context when QEII assigned the "Queen Consort" title!

Since when has a monarch ruled with every decision guided by what the previous monarch wanted? It's one of the perks of being monarch, you get to make the rules.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I sometimes think it was kinder that Diana did not live to see all this.

I would actually LOVE if Diana were still alive and could weigh in on these shenanigans. First because it was a tragedy she died and so horrible for her children, plus her grandchildren who never knew her. But second because it would be hilarious to watch as an outsider.

If Diana were alive, all of this would be much more complicated because she would be the mother to the heir and the grandmother to the next heirs. She'd presumably be in William and Harrys' lives, and in the grand kids lives, and that would create all these issues with security and titles and what events she might be included in and not included in.

I think it would be awful for her to see what has happened between Harry and William, but I also sometimes wonder if she was still alive, if the falling out would have happened. Diana was deeply flawed, and was flawed as a mother, but she had real and open affection for her children and I think losing her and losing that openness and affection at a young age really screwed up those boys. If they still had her in their lives, loving them and reflecting their best selves back at them, I tend to think they would have a better shot at figuring out how to maintain their relationship.

I'm convinced the entire world would be different if Diana was still alive. Hearts collectively hardened after that. It also showed the power of news media, which people like Rupert Murdoch further exploited after Diana's death - if you can control what people see/hear, you can change history from the top-down. The UK would certainly be different - good chance Brexit would not happen.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And? She's Her Majesty the Queen. That's what she's called.

Queen Elizabeth said she shouldn’t be Queen. Charles made her queen. Charles’s dad wasn’t king. Same thing.

I believe queen Elizabeth gave the go ahead later.

Nope. Once she died, Charles was like "I'm king, she's dead, Camilla is queen now." It's sort of the whole thing with being the monarch-- you get to do what you want.

You’re wrong. In 2022, Elizabeth gave her blessing. This was announced on the bbc and there are plenty of other sources to find this information.

Her blessing was for “Queen Consort”
https://nypost.com/2022/02/05/queen-elizabeth-backs-camilla-as-queen-consort/?_ga=2.233957406.1269693147.1655718344-225148805.1606918943

Does that automatically confer “Queen” status upon Charles’s coronation?

The fact that Charles decided to give her the title of Queen is what matters. Elizabeth doesn't control what titles the royal family uses after she dies. She's still a queen consort in the sense that's not a queen regnant, but the title is up to Charles now, not Elizabeth.

With this I absolutely agree - it's Charles's decision for better or worse.

My question is about the mechanics of the "Queen Consort" title granted by QEII. Does it automatically convert to "Queen" once Charles is coronated? If so, then QEII was implicitly acknowledging that she approved the use of "Queen" by assigning "Queen Consort" to Camilla.

I'm not sure there's an answer, because historically the use of "Queen Consort" as a title is pretty rare; most British Queens have been Queens Consort, but they're just called Queen. Consort just describes the type of queen they are. Queen Elizabeth II wasn't titled "Queen Regnant," she was just Queen. Her mother wasn't titled Queen Consort, she was was just the Queen.

(The husbands of Queens Regnant is a different matter, because of the fact that king as a title traditionally outranks queen. They're typically called princes for that reason, but even Phillip wasn't titled as Prince Consort, he was just "His Royal Highness The Prince Philip."

I can only speak to the way it was reported in the British press, but when QEII announced that she was blessing the "Queen Consort" title, this was seen as both a kindness and a rebuke.

A kindness because there was a loooooong time, both before and after Charles and Camilla marrying, when people questioned whether Camilla would ever get anything resembling a "queen" title, due to to complications with Charles' divorce from Diana and the circumstances under which he wed Camilla. The divorce was a huge deal, and it took a long time to grant because both the family and the government recalled that, oh hey, divorce was the reason the Duke of Windsor abdicated the throne. So to have the heir divorce and remarry was a HUGE deal. And then when Charles and Camilla married, their wedding vows literally included a section where they had to publicly atone for their affair and the fact that it destroyed Charles' marriage to Diana, who was the one who was "selected" (both by the Queen's approval and by the government's agreement) to be the future queen. So it was not a give that QEII would ever give her blessing for Camilla to be styled Queen Consort. They might have forced a title like Philip's on her, even though the reasoning would have been different.

So when QEII said in 2022 that Camilla would be Queen Consort, it was viewed as QEII consenting to give Camilla some kind of queen title, a big deal, but also people noted that she was specific that it was Queen *Consort*, not queen. And this was viewed as a bit of a rebuke, akin to the special vows Charles and Camilla had to do, to show that Camilla was NOT the chosen queen, she was not mother to the heir, and she would not have the same status as Diana would have had if they had not divorced and Diana had not been killed.

I mean, yeah, it all seems silly. It is. But the way that announcement was made and reported on, it seemed pretty clear that QEII was saying okay, Camilla can be a kind of queen but it needs to be clear that she's a different kind of queen than someone who married the heir and bore his children, with no divorce and affair, because we actually have all these very specific rules about this stuff thanks to the Church of England and the unique role the monarchy plays in British government and society since Henry VIII.

So it is kind of a big deal that Camilla is just going by "The Queen" now, at least based on how most people interpret QEII's announcement about the title Queen Consort.

Great post. I totally forgot about all the context when QEII assigned the "Queen Consort" title!

Since when has a monarch ruled with every decision guided by what the previous monarch wanted? It's one of the perks of being monarch, you get to make the rules.

This is true, and many people speculated that once QEII died and he became king, Charles would get rid of "Consort" and make Camilla just "the Queen." And he did, which is within his rights.

However, the reasoning behind QEII settling on "Queen Consort" to grant her blessing too, and likely the reason it took her time to come around to even allowing Charles and Camilla to get married, is that the British Royal Family has a dicy (at best) history with monarchs divorcing and remarrying, and the impact it has in particular on the line of succession. The last time it happened, it was a whole crisis that threatened the crown fundamentally, and that was in an era when the monarch was actually the ruler of Britain and had a freaking army at their disposal.

So yes, on the one hand, Charles is king and on this specific point he can do what he wants. On the other hand, he is also subject to a bunch of norms and expectations put in place by the British government and the Church of England, and he doesn't actually have absolute power like the British monarchs once had. QEII was and is enormously popular, and one thing she had that Charles does not have was a lot of faith in her judgment on what was right and appropriate. And even that had to be earned over the course of decades.

Not sure this is going over so great, though things may be so chaotic with the royals right now that people don't have the energy to get worked up about it. But there are people who notice and don't love it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And? She's Her Majesty the Queen. That's what she's called.

Queen Elizabeth said she shouldn’t be Queen. Charles made her queen. Charles’s dad wasn’t king. Same thing.

I believe queen Elizabeth gave the go ahead later.

Nope. Once she died, Charles was like "I'm king, she's dead, Camilla is queen now." It's sort of the whole thing with being the monarch-- you get to do what you want.

You’re wrong. In 2022, Elizabeth gave her blessing. This was announced on the bbc and there are plenty of other sources to find this information.

Her blessing was for “Queen Consort”
https://nypost.com/2022/02/05/queen-elizabeth-backs-camilla-as-queen-consort/?_ga=2.233957406.1269693147.1655718344-225148805.1606918943

Does that automatically confer “Queen” status upon Charles’s coronation?

The fact that Charles decided to give her the title of Queen is what matters. Elizabeth doesn't control what titles the royal family uses after she dies. She's still a queen consort in the sense that's not a queen regnant, but the title is up to Charles now, not Elizabeth.

With this I absolutely agree - it's Charles's decision for better or worse.

My question is about the mechanics of the "Queen Consort" title granted by QEII. Does it automatically convert to "Queen" once Charles is coronated? If so, then QEII was implicitly acknowledging that she approved the use of "Queen" by assigning "Queen Consort" to Camilla.

I'm not sure there's an answer, because historically the use of "Queen Consort" as a title is pretty rare; most British Queens have been Queens Consort, but they're just called Queen. Consort just describes the type of queen they are. Queen Elizabeth II wasn't titled "Queen Regnant," she was just Queen. Her mother wasn't titled Queen Consort, she was was just the Queen.

(The husbands of Queens Regnant is a different matter, because of the fact that king as a title traditionally outranks queen. They're typically called princes for that reason, but even Phillip wasn't titled as Prince Consort, he was just "His Royal Highness The Prince Philip."

I can only speak to the way it was reported in the British press, but when QEII announced that she was blessing the "Queen Consort" title, this was seen as both a kindness and a rebuke.

A kindness because there was a loooooong time, both before and after Charles and Camilla marrying, when people questioned whether Camilla would ever get anything resembling a "queen" title, due to to complications with Charles' divorce from Diana and the circumstances under which he wed Camilla. The divorce was a huge deal, and it took a long time to grant because both the family and the government recalled that, oh hey, divorce was the reason the Duke of Windsor abdicated the throne. So to have the heir divorce and remarry was a HUGE deal. And then when Charles and Camilla married, their wedding vows literally included a section where they had to publicly atone for their affair and the fact that it destroyed Charles' marriage to Diana, who was the one who was "selected" (both by the Queen's approval and by the government's agreement) to be the future queen. So it was not a give that QEII would ever give her blessing for Camilla to be styled Queen Consort. They might have forced a title like Philip's on her, even though the reasoning would have been different.

So when QEII said in 2022 that Camilla would be Queen Consort, it was viewed as QEII consenting to give Camilla some kind of queen title, a big deal, but also people noted that she was specific that it was Queen *Consort*, not queen. And this was viewed as a bit of a rebuke, akin to the special vows Charles and Camilla had to do, to show that Camilla was NOT the chosen queen, she was not mother to the heir, and she would not have the same status as Diana would have had if they had not divorced and Diana had not been killed.

I mean, yeah, it all seems silly. It is. But the way that announcement was made and reported on, it seemed pretty clear that QEII was saying okay, Camilla can be a kind of queen but it needs to be clear that she's a different kind of queen than someone who married the heir and bore his children, with no divorce and affair, because we actually have all these very specific rules about this stuff thanks to the Church of England and the unique role the monarchy plays in British government and society since Henry VIII.

So it is kind of a big deal that Camilla is just going by "The Queen" now, at least based on how most people interpret QEII's announcement about the title Queen Consort.

Great post. I totally forgot about all the context when QEII assigned the "Queen Consort" title!

Since when has a monarch ruled with every decision guided by what the previous monarch wanted? It's one of the perks of being monarch, you get to make the rules.

This is true, and many people speculated that once QEII died and he became king, Charles would get rid of "Consort" and make Camilla just "the Queen." And he did, which is within his rights.

However, the reasoning behind QEII settling on "Queen Consort" to grant her blessing too, and likely the reason it took her time to come around to even allowing Charles and Camilla to get married, is that the British Royal Family has a dicy (at best) history with monarchs divorcing and remarrying, and the impact it has in particular on the line of succession. The last time it happened, it was a whole crisis that threatened the crown fundamentally, and that was in an era when the monarch was actually the ruler of Britain and had a freaking army at their disposal.

So yes, on the one hand, Charles is king and on this specific point he can do what he wants. On the other hand, he is also subject to a bunch of norms and expectations put in place by the British government and the Church of England, and he doesn't actually have absolute power like the British monarchs once had. QEII was and is enormously popular, and one thing she had that Charles does not have was a lot of faith in her judgment on what was right and appropriate. And even that had to be earned over the course of decades.

Not sure this is going over so great, though things may be so chaotic with the royals right now that people don't have the energy to get worked up about it. But there are people who notice and don't love it.

Camilla's popularity is only growing. Not many people are too worried that a few Diana crazies will never come around.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I guess “Queen Consort” is done 🤷🏼‍♂️

Feels very weird (duplicitous?) to use International Women’s Day to roll out “The Queen” title

Showing other mistresses how to play the long game!

Exactly! Witch is partly responsible for Diana's death. So gross that OW gets to be Queen.

[Anonymous]

I will never forget the gross phone calls between the two of them from the 90s *vomit*

And now she is "Queen"

As others said, luckily we aren't responsible and it is just gossip to those of us in the US of A

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I will never forget the gross phone calls between the two of them from the 90s *vomit*

And now she is "Queen"

As others said, luckily we aren't responsible and it is just gossip to those of us in the US of A

I too am reminded of tampons

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I guess “Queen Consort” is done 🤷🏼‍♂️

Feels very weird (duplicitous?) to use International Women’s Day to roll out “The Queen” title

Showing other mistresses how to play the long game!

Again, Camilla's official title is "Her Majesty the Queen"

That is exactly what it says on the graphic. Where is the conflict?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:And? She's Her Majesty the Queen. That's what she's called.

Queen Elizabeth said she shouldn’t be Queen. Charles made her queen. Charles’s dad wasn’t king. Same thing.

I believe queen Elizabeth gave the go ahead later.

She did, before she died. Very publicly. And Camilla has been using this title since shortly after the coronation. Keep up OP.

Gave the go in exchange for Charles promising not to throw out Andrew. A deal with the devil if you will.