Question: Does Prince Charles own a yacht?

I read a news article that said prince charles and camilla rented a yacht to travel thru the caribbean some time ago but also read an article that said president bill clinton was on ' prince charles yacht in 1992 for Rio conference on enviromental protection '. so I was wondering if he owns a yacht or just rents one from time to time?

As far as I'm aware, Prince Charles does not own a yacht. The Royal Family did, at one point, have the use of the Royal Yacht Britannia to entertain dignitaries over the years including Sir Winston Churchill, Rajiv Ghandi, Nelson Mandela, Bill Clinton, Boris Yeltsin, Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. This yacht was decommissioned in 1997.

Prince Charles has chartered or been lent the use of a yacht in the past. In 1991 he was loaned the Alexandros by Greek shipping magnate John Latsis. This was for a reported 'second honeymoon' with his then wife, Diana Princess of Wales. He also used the yacht in 2002 for a cruise with Camilla Parker Bowles. In 2008 he chartered one of the most expensive private yachts, the £50 million, 245ft Leander from car parks tycoon Sir Donald Gosling for an official tour of the Carribean Islands. The first time since the Royal Yacht Britannia was scrapped in 1997 that a member of the Royal Family has hired a private vessel for an official overseas visit.

According to Clarence House, the Prince of Wales chartered the yacht not for reasons of comfort but but to minimize his carbon footprint. If you're going to be environmentally friendly, might as well do it in style.

© Marilyn Braun 2010

Question: Title of Queen

Would Camilla attain the title if Charles ascends to the throne? Would Diana have attained this title if she were still Charles wife? Who would ascend to the throne following Charles death?

At the time of their wedding in 2005 there was a lot of controversy over what Camilla's title would be upon her marriage to Charles. Legally she is entitled to be called Princess of Wales but because the title is so associated with Diana, decided to take the title Duchess of Cornwall instead. When Charles becomes king the official line is that she will be known as H.R.H. The Princess Consort. Legally she would be Queen but Camilla reportedly does not want the title of Queen. This move might also be to placate members of the public who would be against her being known as Queen Camilla.

Had Diana lived, and still been married to Charles, she would have become Queen Diana in due course.

Next in line to the throne following Charles' death would be his elder son Prince William. Should something happen to William then the next in line would become monarch - Prince Harry.

© Marilyn Braun 2009

When Sunday Best Isn't Available

When Michelle Obama arrives in London with her husband, President Obama, she will bring with her that unquestionable sheen of the extremely accomplished that can only make any woman standing next to her look inferior. In the presence of the most interesting First Lady in almost 50 years, the Queen herself may feel a momentary lapse in self-confidence. Having your image and face on stamps and currency cannot compete with the First Toned Arms.

While in the United Kingdom she will also meet with Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall. The woman who famously succeeded Britain's version of Michelle Obama, Diana, Princess of Wales. Diana, the one with the Royal Toned Limbs, the charisma, height and honorary degrees in dentistry that would have been more than a match for Mrs Obama. Alas we can only imagine Diana and Michelle sizing each other up so we're left with Camilla.

How embarassing to have to serve left-overs instead of Cordon Bleu.

© Marilyn Braun 2009

The Royal Romance Report for Sunday March 15th, 2009

Which minor royal is engaged to a blue movie actress? Is that Prince Harry with a Chelsy Davy look-alike? Why is Kate Middleton wearing a purple sweater? Better take two aspirins. You don't want to have a headache while listening to this episode.

You can listen to the episode here.

Publications mentioned

Hello! Canada No 121 March 23 2009

Websites mentioned

World of Royalty

Top Gear

Tune in to the next episode of The Royal Report on Sunday March 22, 2009 9:00PM EST (North America). The topic will be: Rumours are swirling that a Summer wedding is imminent for Prince William and Kate Middleton. Is this true? I have no idea but I'll discuss it on this episode.

© Marilyn Braun 2009

Royal News Generator

Recently we've had a slow news week. It happens at the best of times. The royals can't be interesting all the time and I'm sure that they relish the break from our unrelenting scrutiny. In the interim, while we're waiting for them to do something, I've decided to come up with a trusty royal news generator to create your own stories (just like the tabloids do). Hours upon hours of fun should ensue as you go through each interesting possibility. The royals had better watch their backs. With this tool nothing is sacred.

Enjoy!

Choose a Royal Prince Charles The Queen Prince Philip Prince William Prince Harry Princess Michael Prince Andrew Prince Edward
Princess Anne
Fergie


Is Has Wants Needs

Choose a Problem/Issue In Love
Furious
Jealous
Lonely Seething Parental Approval Disappointed Jealous Amused Not Amused Incandescent with rage Having an affair To be a Super Hero
Join the Circus



With In Because Because of

Choose a person Chelsy Davy Kate Middleton
Prince Harry
Prince William
Princess Michael
Prince Philip
Camilla The Ghost of Diana Mohammed Al Fayed Paul Burrell Ingrid Seward David Starkey
Nicholas Witchell
Penny Junor
James Whittaker

Of With
Is Because Because They Because they're
Has

Choose a reason Enjoy their writing Hate their writing Make better Jam Won't go away Hungry for power Desperate Curious Always harbored feelings
Extremely glossy hair Doesn't have enough hair Having a baby Getting engaged

Which will result in

Choose a result An epic Constitutional Crisis worse than Edward VIII in 1936 The Queen Abdicating A Shotgun Wedding The continuation of the Windsor Dynasty The End of the Monarchy
Interesting Reading
A make or break vacation
A Reality Show Conspiracy Theories A Media Field Day Nothing

Royal Watchers Are

Choose what they're doing In a tizzy Blogging Bemused Stunned Shocked Fervently Discussing

And Predicting

Choose a Prediction The End of the Monarchy

© Marilyn Braun 2008

The Changing Face of Royalty

When I was a little girl, my image of what a Princess should be came from Cinderella and Princess Diana. It would be easy to think that Disney's representation of Cinderella is the definitive image, but as I grew up and became more familiar with world royalty I realized that this is not the reality. Times have changed and now we see Princess Tiana, the first black Disney princess, in the upcoming film The Princess and the Frog.

There are many examples of how royalty has changed: Princess Maxima of the Netherlands is from Buenos Aires, Grand Duchess Maria Theresa of Luxembourg is from Cuba, When Lady Rose Windsor, daughter of the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester, married Gary Lewis, he became the first person of Māori descent to marry into the British royal family. Peter Phillips' bride, Autumn Kelly became the first Canadian to do so. Alexandra Manley, born in Hong Kong, became a significant addition to Denmark's ruling family when she married Prince Joachim in 1995. She was the first person of Asian heritage to marry into a sitting European ruling house. They have since divorced and Alexandra is now titled Alexandra, Countess of Frederiksborg. Another example, though lesser known, is Princess Angela of Liechtenstein, currently the only black princess in a reigning European house.

Royalty has come a long way from the times where they could only marry royalty. It was not considered proper for them to marry outside of their class. If they did so, it was usually without permission of the sovereign. Usually they were stripped of title, rank or the like and their marriages were known as morganatic. As the years went by, and many royal houses fell by the wayside, available royal spouses grew scarce. Therefore spouses were chosen from the aristocracy. Despite her pedigree, in 1923 Lady Elizabeth Bowes Lyon became the first commoner to marry into the royal family in several centuries. In 2001 Prince Haakon of Norway married Mette-Marit Tjessem Høiby, a single mother and former waitress. In 2004, Prince Felipe of Spain married Letizia Ortiz, who had been previously married in a civil ceremony. In 2005, Camilla Parker Bowles married Prince Charles. What once would never have been allowed, let alone considered, now seems to be commonplace. And even a reflection of reality.

The inspiration for this article came from an email I received about Princess Angela of Liechtenstein. That as the first black princess in a European dynasty, she received little media recognition. Indeed, prior to that email I wasn't even aware of her. Unfortunately I couldn't find enough unique information to do a royal profile but I had to wonder, what makes her so special? People may be proud to have their heritage represented in public figures, but marrying into royalty isn't necessarily an accomplishment. It's something few people can aspire to. Some might consider it a step backward. Or even an unrealistic goal better left to the imagination of Holllywood film-makers. The person who emailed wondered whether race was a factor in the lack of media coverage of her. I think this is less about race and more about the low profile of the royal family she married into. In fact, she isn't even mentioned on the official site. Read what you will into that.

I don't necessarily think that any of these women have changed the way people look at royalty. Meaning they haven't made royalty more accessible or promoted any greater understanding of civil marriages, single parenthood, divorce, race, or even their respective nationalites. It was inevitable for royalty to marry commoners but that doesn't make it remarkable. Autumn Kelly, as the first Canadian to marry into the British royal family, doesn't change anything for me. It doesn't fill me with any sense of national pride. Nor should it.

Cinderella and Princess Tiana are characters from a Disney film. Neither reflects reality. Royal women of today are accomplished, poised and multicultural. Regardless of their background, they have become assets to their respective royal dynasties.

Let's hope that never changes.

© Marilyn Braun 2008

Related articles:

A Cinderella Story
Royal Profile - Princess Battenberg

I Like Prince Charles

How many times have you heard someone say that?

Over the years my attitude towards him has mellowed somewhat. Despite the fact that I don't have a clue what he really does. I don't listen to his speeches. I only occasionally visit his website; if only to find out what's officially going on with Prince William and Prince Harry. I've also searched for Kate Middleton, to no avail. I did a Royal Report episode about him, using his site to research him so I could sound somewhat knowledgeable. Yes, it looks like he does a lot. He seems to care. And once he becomes king; if ever, I will feel sorry for him. He will lose the freedom that he has at present. The freedom to bravely wade into the foray and make a difference. Once he is monarch, he can only quietly make recommendations via carefully written memorandums to avoid public controversy. It's sad if you think about it.

What do I like about him? He exudes kindness. True, he will always have that remote royal quality, but in comparison to his mother, The Queen, he appears warm. Something, which in his particular position, means something. It's necessary. In fact, it has an impact that pales in comparison to other members of the royal family. Sure Prince Edward and Sophie can be pleasant. Princess Anne is dedicated to her causes. Prince Andrew does, whatever he does with a smile and a wave. The Dukes of Kent and Gloucester do what they do, working below the radar. Were it not for Majesty magazine, I wouldn't know they even exist.

After reading the following article on the World of Royalty website, to my surprise, I found myself logging in to Blogger and writing this article in intermittent spurts for the next two months. Leaping to his defense, begrudgingly admitting that he may have been ahead of his time, is not the thing to do. People may think that you're catering to him by doing so. Since my opinion means absolutely nothing, I don't have to worry about that.

Certainly I've taken my fair shots at him on this blog - but only in humour. He's the funniest member of the royal family. Which makes him all the more endearing to me. I don't know what I would do without him. Marrying Camilla was the smartest move he could have made - he looks like he's happy. After all these years, after all he's been though, he deserves it. Yet, if there's any doubt, he's paid a price for his happiness. He's made mistakes but life goes on.

Maybe his birthright has entrapped him. Maybe he never wanted it at all. We'll never truly know. You can wonder all you like. Pity him all you want. While he's Prince of Wales he's in a position to make a difference. Maybe an eternity of waiting isn't such a bad thing after all.

© Marilyn Braun 2008

Royal Review - Peter Phillips & Autumn Kelly Hello Wedding Issue

I've written several reviews for this blog but I don't believe I've ever written one about a magazine. Given the amount of interest in this issue, I've decided to do so.

I'll admit that when I saw the engagement interview that Autumn and Peter gave to Hello I was delighted with it. I couldn't get my hands on it fast enough. It was an interesting interview, no earth shattering revelations with lovely photos of the couple. But I found it curious that Peter would have done an interview given the privacy he has maintained so successfully for the last 30 years.

But I was further surprised when their wedding got the Hello treatment. Although it is referred to as a Royal Wedding, I find it rather difficult to call it that. Despite being the Queen's grandson, Peter is not royal in that he has no title nor does he carry out public duties. The only royal aspect of this wedding is the location and the guest list which included senior members of the royal family.

For a member of the royal family to sell their wedding to a magazine is somewhat unprecedented. There's nothing new about the royal family stage-managing photo-ops. But this type of interview is something you would see a celebrity couple do, not royalty. Can you imagine Charles and Camilla sharing their love on the cover of Hello? or the Queen and Prince Philip opening the doors to their fabulous Scottish retreat, as they reflect on the enduring love of their 60-year marriage? Royal PR in the 21st century.

Despite all the speculation and uproar surrounding the wedding issue, it's actually fairly tasteful. No one looks uncomfortable. As if anticipating the furor Hello points this out: "Royalty did not appear displeased", and "spontaneous applause from the guests - which did not appear to ruffle the Queen in the least". It's interesting to note that once the wedding photos have been taken that senior members of the royal family, save for Sophie, are not photographed at the reception. The focus on the younger generation, specifically Kate Middleton and Chelsy Davy. Photos show Kate laughing, Chelsy and Kate on the dance-floor, Sophie smiling and clapping enthusiastically, Chelsy and Harry sharing an intimate moment, and the bride laughing as she leaves the reception. This is obviously a joyous event; save for the historic location no different from the wedding reception of any young couple.

The photos during the ceremony are lovely, touching and in no way intrusive. With royal weddings reverting to private occasions, it is a privilege to be privy to this one. The special looks between the couple, the first kiss after being pronounced husband and wife, and the clear delight on Princess Anne's face, makes for a new style of royal wedding; intimate and real.

Does this herald a change for the next royal wedding? Hopefully we won't have to wait long to find out.

© Marilyn Braun 2008

Warning: Marrying into the royal family could be hazardous to your family's privacy

She's movie star beautiful. It's not difficult to see why people are interested in her. She's not a public figure, nor is she royal. Telma Ortiz is the sister of Crown Princess Letizia of Spain and she recently went to court to seek a restraining order against 50 media outlets covering her. A judge denied her request, stating that she was indeed a public figure. In effect, Telma lost her right to privacy.

She's not the first person in proximity to a royal to become the focus of media attention, nor will she be the last. Unfortunately the focus isn't normally on their accomplishments. The late Diana, Princess of Wales' brother, Earl Spencer became the subject of intense scrutiny, especially in the wake of his relationships, tumultuous first marriage and brief second one. His electrifying eulogy at Diana's funeral further raised his profile.

Sarah, Duchess of York's father, the late Major Ronald Ferguson became tabloid fodder for a visit to a massage parlour. He moved in royal circles for years as Prince Charles' polo manager. But it wasn't until his daughter married Prince Andrew in 1986 that he became public property.

Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall's son Tom Parker Bowles had a run in with the law after he was found in possession of cocaine. Kate Middleton's mother chewed gum at Prince William's passing out parade at Sandhurst. Suddenly she became a manipulative mother intent on getting her daughter to the royal altar by any means necessary. If she wasn't doing so already.

Now that the wedding is over, Autumn Kelly's family and friends have become casualties with revelations of her twin brother 'smoking a distinctly suspicious looking cigarette'. In the absence of any real controversy, publishing unflattering photos of one of her friends in the Daily Mail will suffice.

Telma Ortiz's request for a restraining order 'backfired' on her. According to a Time magazine article*: "She's going to get exactly what she didn't want, which is to become more famous." What did she do wrong? She tried to prevent coverage from all media outlets. Who does she think she is?

Someone who, like the examples above, didn't ask for this attention.

© Marilyn Braun 2008

This article was inspired by the following postings on the World of Royalty Blog:

Telma Ortiz wants privacy

* Telma Ortiz gets more famous

The Royal Report for Sunday April 27th, 2008 - Camilla, 3 years later

The next Royal Report will be on Sunday May 4th, 2008 at 9:00PM.

The topic will be: With the recent trip to Klosters and Kate attending William's RAF Wings ceremony, many have seen these events as signs that they will announce their engagement. But will they? Or are we reading too much into it?

Upcoming Royal Report - Sunday April 27, 2008

Join me for the next Royal Reporton Sunday April 27, 2008 at 9:00PM EST.

The topic will be: Camilla, 3 years later.

© Marilyn Braun 2008

Operation Heads Will Roll

The recent Diana Memorial service was turned into a debacle when Camilla, The Duchess of Cornwall bowed to public opinion and withdrew from attending the service. A furious Camilla took off for the Mediterranean, to plot her revenge. Beautifully tanned, Camilla has returned and is ready to strike. This mission, if you choose to accept it is indefinite and has no expiry date. Hang on to the tape just in case.

Location: A palace somewhere in London

The Queen, Prince Philip, Prince Charles and Camilla, sit at the table and open their dossiers. They pull out 8 x 10 glossies of the various courtiers, the famous grey men.

Camilla: (seething)My popularity has been set back five years because of the whole Diana memorial. These men make mistakes and then I end up paying for them. Well I've had enough.

Charles: What are you going to do darling?

Camilla: You tell me dear, or are you all out of good ideas?

The Queen: Pa and I tried to intervene, but it was too late.

Philip: (to Camilla) Never listen to Charles, he takes his advice from plants.

Charles: (to both his parents) You just don't understand me, you never have. Scientists have actually backed me up...

The Queen: (over-dramatically) Oh no one understands me...I'm so put upon....

Camilla: (indignant) Can we get back to me? I have an idea. I propose to take my revenge when they least expect it. When I'm Queen...

Philip: And when do you suppose that will be?

Camilla: When Charles ascends the throne

The Queen: I'm still in the room you know!

Camilla: Sorry Mama

Philip: When Charles comes to the throne, do you really think you'll be Queen? That people will accept that?

Camilla:(livid) Hasn't this been sorted out?

Charles: No, we're still working on Operation Queen Camilla. We sent William and Harry to infiltrate the offices of Majesty magazine..

The Queen: Where are those boys? It's been months, shouldn't they have rewritten Ingrid Seward's editorial by now?

Philip: Darling, they must choose their words carefully...

Camilla: Excuses, excuses..I want heads to roll..and when I'm Queen they will!

Philip: I guess the grey men will be waiting a long time then. They probably won't even remember what they've done..

Camilla: (furious) I don't care, I want revenge..I can't wait any longer..

Camilla picks one of the 8 x 10's from the pile

Camilla: I'll start with this one

To be continued

© Marilyn Braun 2007

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like royal books? Visit Marilyn's Royal Bookstore!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Prince William and Prince Harry get it right

Diana's Memorial service was held today. All of the controversy surrounding who should/shouldn't/wouldn't attend has evaporated. In its place, an atmosphere of forgiveness, conciliation, and love came through in the brightness of the Guards Chapel. It is only appropriate that for this day all petty frustrations be put aside.

For once, someone has gotten it right. And who better for it to be than her beloved boys?

In the run up to the service, many focused on who wasn't invited. The Prince's decision to invite Camila as wrong, as a mere nod to etiquette. And as a evidence of their naivete in a situation they were too young to understand. But their understanding should only be of their mother and commemorating her memory in the best way they possibly could.

Prince Harry's eulogy stands in sharp contrast to his uncle Earl Spencer's electrifying speech 10 years ago. It will not stand as a historical speech, but it doesn't have to. Untinged with bitterness, not trying to settle any scores, or defend her honor, it was filled with love. What the memorial should have stood for all along.

While we try to define her legacy, understand the outpouring of grief at her death, Prince William and Prince Harry remember her with love and affection. The service was not a time to be sad, but to be a celebration. The flowers laid at Kensington Palace focus on her death. Today is a day to remember her life. We were privileged to be allowed to watch a service which should have been a private occasion. But the Prince's, recognizing that they were not the only ones who loved her, let us join them. And for that we should be thankful.

© Marilyn Braun 2007

The sad day Camilla pandered to you

I'm mad.

I don't remember the last time I was this disappointed. I've just found out that Camilla is not attending the Diana Memorial service on Friday. And I just want to say to all of the people who were against her attending.

Are YOU happy now?

This is an article from CNN. According to Clarence House, Camilla has decided not to attend because it 'could divert attention from the purpose of the occasion'.

But who was accusing her of doing so? Princes William and Harry wanted Camilla to attend, they invited her. Shouldn't that have been good enough? No, obviously it wasn't. If William and Harry can live in the present, forgive Camilla and their father, why can't we?

Maybe you feel that you're defending Diana's memory. By your complaints, you actually did the opposite. In all the time spent making this a controversial issue, you ignored Diana's memory completely. Was it ever about that for you? Or was it just an excuse to channel your negativity?

I don't know who I'm more disappointed in. You or Camilla. She pandered to you. Gave in to your tantrum. Now what are you going to do? Are you going to remember Diana or are you going to savour your victory? Probably the latter. To quote one reveller, and hard-core Diana fan: "I couldn't be happier if I’d won the lottery." Enough said.

Camilla should have gone. There, I've said it. I don't live in the past. If Camilla wanted to honor Diana's memory, she was perfectly entitled to do so. Especially when Princes William and Harry personally invited her. That's what should have been important. Or are you forgetting that? Diana was their mother. They're planning the service. Not YOU.

But articles have called William and Harry naive. They can't possibly understand the problems Camilla caused their mother. That they had only invited Camilla, according to James Whittaker, because "she is the wife of their father, whom they adore." But who is blaming them for their lack of judgement in this matter? YOU are. Diana would be thrilled.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Okay, people didn't want her to go. Fair enough. But who ultimately threatened to make this about something other than Diana?

YOU did.

I hope you're proud of yourselves.

© Marilyn Braun 2007

The Royal Report for August 19, 2007 - Should Camilla attend the Diana memorial?

Join me live for my show next week - August 26, 2007 5:00pm Pacific time (8:00pm Eastern time). My topic will be: Diana's legacy - Does she have one?

Note: I seem to be having some difficulties with the widget for the show. To listen to it, please select detach and the player should come up for you.

© Marilyn Braun 2007

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like royal books? Visit Marilyn's Royal Bookstore!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Should Camilla attend the Diana memorial?

Maybe asking this question falls under the category of a lost cause. After all, according to a recent poll 54% say that Camilla should not attend the Diana memorial. If you ask women - 61% think she should not attend, that it would be completely innapropriate. How can you ask such a question in the face of such overwhelming opposition?

Yes, it should be a no-brainer. Camilla, stay home! Don't come out of the palace until we approve of you. When you married Prince Charles, you obviously snuck under our radar. Well, you're married now, so we can't do anything about it. The cheers when you arrived drowned out our hisses and boos. Even if 39% of people feel that you've strengthened the monarchy by marrying Charles. Notice that 37% feel that you've weakened it - so don't get too comfortable. We're recruiting the 25% 'Don't know' contingent as we speak. They'll come to their senses and agree with us, eventually.

Our negative attitude towards out should rightly become a 'string which will alarm supporters.' This should keep you from the Diana memorial, and becoming Queen, even if it doesn't impact our lives in any way whether you do or not. We can complain when you wear the family jewels; zoom in on photographs comparing it to ones Diana wore. We may not barricade the street the service will be held on, but we can participate in polls which have no real relevance to reality. Polls which still ask questions like 'When the Queen abdicates...should the throne pass to Prince Charles or Prince William?' Are we part of the 71% of people who buy into that lost cause?

Even if you do end up attending, make sure you wear a suitably morose, remorseful expression. Whatever you do, don't smile or wave at the crowds. Remember, this isn't your show. If we're lucky, the service will be televised and we can keep tabs on you during the hymns. When the phone rings with a new poll asking us how you behaved, you may just improve your results if you shed a tear or two.

If you don't attend, we'll probably hold it against you too. How can you show us penitence hiding in your palace? Clearly this is a no-win situation for you. But whatever you do, don't wait for us to make up our minds. Trust us, even if our opinions about you change like the weather. Even if the poll caught us during a particularly anti-Camilla mood. Who knows how we'll feel tomorrow. On our way to the service we'll stop at the supermarket and buy eggs to throw at you. If she knew her memory was being hijacked by our antics, Diana would be proud of us.

Maybe the question shouldn't be whether you should attend, but whether this question has made us lose sight of that point.

© Marilyn Braun 2007

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like royal books? Visit Marilyn's Royal Bookstore!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Is defending Camilla a lost cause?

I recently visited a message board that made a comment about my article The Camilla Non-issue, that said:

"it must be difficult defending lost causes, Marilyn?"

First off, I would just like to say that I welcome an open discussion of my articles from readers who don't hide behind the safety of a British royal message board. Especially when I'm addressed personally in the post.

After reading that, and posting a response, I started to think - is defending Camilla a lost cause? Shouldn't I just give up and go with all of the media reports that would have me believe that Camilla is evil, a home wrecker, and doesn't deserve happiness? I guess if I were someone who trusts the media to tell the truth, then maybe I should just spend my time living in the glory days of Charles and Diana's 1981 wedding when Camilla was described as a "trusted female confidante of Prince Charles".

At one point, if you'd asked me, say 10 years ago, about Camilla, I would have said that, while I don't hate her, she was a contributing factor in the break-up of Charles and Diana. I say contributing because each of the three parties had their own role to play in how the marriage ended. In hindsight, I haven't changed that opinion, but my view of Camilla as a person has evolved. If you'd asked me whether she would gain acceptance, I would have said, no way! To a degree, feeling this way, I felt I was extracting karmic revenge on behalf of Diana. When it was announced that Charles and Camilla were getting married, I thought I was hearing things. Even if they were meant to be together, I didn't think it was possible. I found myself being happy for them, and feeling as though I was betraying the memory of Diana by doing so. Media reports about the legal, constitutional, and religious issues of the situation made it seem as though, even if they were married, it wouldn't be legal. And that if it were legal, Charles couldn't be king. Ultimately these issues passed, only to be replaced by the non-issues in my recent article.

While I never expected myself to write positively about Camilla, the ultimate fact is, I don't know her. Does anyone really? And in order to be fair, I have to write about her in a balanced way. No one wants to hear about good/bad Camilla all the time. Not the saccharine reporting of quality royal magazines, nor the claw baring reporting of other publications. This blog is not in the same league but I can still do my part, if only for my own entertainment.

I don't believe in living in the past. I wish Charles and Diana could have had a happy ending, but they didn't. Maybe it was inevitable that they wouldn't. Today I can honestly say that I'm happy for Charles and Camilla. I didn't really have any pre-conceived notions but the fact that she's adapted so well to royal life is wonderful. For an outsider, it's not an easy thing to do.

Is defending Camilla a lost cause? No. That's my opinion. I would be interested in hearing other opinions though. Please feel free to have your say.

© Marilyn Braun 2007

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like royal books? Visit Marilyn's Royal Bookstore!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Will Kate Middleton become a royal footnote?

Recent reports indicate that Prince William and Kate Middleton are back together. Earlier in the year, speculation was rife that an engagement between the two was imminent and like pre-engagement Diana, Kate was hounded by the media. When the news broke on April 13th, 2007 that they were no longer an item, it sent shock waves through the media and royal message boards. There were many theories on why they broke-up, some of the reasons included: she wasn't aristocratic, the media pressure was too much, or that William wanted to concentrate on his military career and didn't want to settle down. Some even went as far as to theorize that they never broke up at all. That this was a clever ruse on their part to buy some time.

Despite this break-up, the media interest in Kate hasn't ended. And it's becoming increasingly apparent that, regardless of how she feels about it, Kate Middleton isn't going to join the royal-ex files anytime soon. But while Kate is hot now, will this always be the case? Looking at the romantic histories of royalty in the past century, some royal exes have been more famous, in their day, than others: Lilly Langtry, Alice Keppel (great-grandmother of Camilla), the actress Sarah Berhardt, Freda Dudley Ward, Lady Furness, Koo Stark, Roddy Llewellyn, and Peter Townsend. Ultimately, if Kate ends up there, she's in good company.

Included in this group are the ex-girlfriends of Prince Charles. In his heyday, Prince Charles was considered to be one of the most eligible bachelors in the world. He only had to stand beside a woman, or have a woman stand beside him, in order to be linked with her. The names of those he supposedly sowed his wild oats with seemed to go on and on: Sabrina Guinness, Lady Jane Welleslley, Anna Wallace, Camilla Shand (now his second wife), Amanda Knatchbull, Susan George, and Lady Sarah Spencer (sister of Diana, Princess of Wales). But unlike those other women, when Lady Diana Spencer showed up on the scene, the media fell in love with her - and so began our sixteen year love affair with her too. His previous girlfriends were summarily relegated to obscurity. With the exception of Camilla, where are they now?

Also regarded as one of the most eligible bachelors in the world, William doesn't seem to have had as many girlfriends, so Kate may have the advantage or disadvantage of being the first serious one. Ever since pictures of her appeared walking down a runway modelling a diaphanous outfit, she was news. During his university days, William and Kate were able to keep their relationship somewhat private. Certainly there were articles praising her fashion sense, Hello Magazine profiles, and photogenic pictures of her looking demure, yet with a knowing smile, but it was tame in comparison to what happened once they graduated.

So are they back together? What is so special about Kate? Why is she any more remarkable for her ordinariness than we are? Dating/Having dated a prince helps. But trying to pinpoint exactly what makes Kate unique is like trying to define ourselves in one word. Regardless of her future with William, does she have the staying power to become more than a royal footnote?

Time will tell.

© Marilyn Braun 2007

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Like royal books? Visit Marilyn's Royal Bookstore!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Question: Rank of the Royal Ladies

Thank you on your informative "Who is of Higher Rank?" article. However, what about the ladies? What are their ranks and how are they addressed (be they royal or non-royal)?

Thank you very much for your question.

I have written an article, called Meeting Royalty and Nobility, which may be helpful in terms of addressing them.

The ranking of the various royal ladies is a bit different. It goes by an order of precedence. In general you could say that the ranking, without taking into consideration the order of precedence, is as follows:

The Queen
Princess
Duchess (royal)
Countess (royal)

And then the noble titles would start, such as non-royal Duchess and Countesses. In the case of women in the royal family, the order of precedence is as follows:

The Queen
The Princess Royal
Princess Alexandra
The Duchess of Cornwall (unless accompanied by the Prince of Wales).

One would think, that because Camilla is the wife of the heir to the throne that she would automatically be the second lady in the land, but this is not the case. Because she chose to be known as the Duchess of Cornwall and not as The Princess of Wales, her position reflects the fact that she is a Duchess and not a princess. Were this the case she would outrank the Princess Royal, as Diana did when she was Princess of Wales.

I hope this answers your questions!

Thanks,

Marilyn

© Marilyn Braun 2007

A Rose by a Royal name

When royal ladies arrive at an engagement, it is customary to give a bouquet of flowers. Usually the royal lady will also receive flowers from the crowds, sometimes in abundance. Some of the flowers are kept and some are given to local hospitals for patients to enjoy. However, there are some flowers which, when received, royalty might hang on to.

Of the many accolades that royalty receives, whether having food, a building, or a street in their name, many have also had the honor of having a flower, usually a rose, named after them as well. Here are just a few of the flowers:

Princesse de Monaco: Named for Princess Grace of Monaco. Some of her hobbies included flower arranging and pressing. Her daughter also has a rose named after her called the Caroline de Monaco.



Crown Princess Mary - a rose named after Crown Princess Mary of Denmark and sold through the Heart foundation of Austrailia. Particularly appropriate as her late mother, who passed away from heart disease, was an avid rose gardener.




What could be more appropriate for someone known as 'England's Rose', than to have a flower named after her. This is actually not the first flower named in her honor. There's also one called the 'Lady Diana' and another called 'The Princess of Wales'. The one pictured is the 'Diana, Princess of Wales' and is being sold to raise money for her memorial foundation.



Royal William. Depending on which source you check, this rose is either named to commemorate the birth of Prince William or to mark King William III's arrival in England in 1688.





Duchess of Cornwall - named after Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall to raise funds for the National Osteoporosis Society, a disease her mother died of.







Princess Alice Rose. Queen Victoria's third child and second daughter. She was also the mother of Victoria, Marchioness of Milford Haven .

Other royals who have had flowers named after them:

Queen Elizabeth II
Queen Beatrix of The Netherlands
Princess Margaret
Princess Michael of Kent
Princess Marina and her daughter Princess Alexandra
Princess Michiko of Japan (now Empress Michiko)
Princess Alexandra of Denmark

© Marilyn Braun 2007