Coronation of Prince Charles

Started by Windsor, January 14, 2012, 08:29:42 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

sandy

I agree Trudie. And William eventually stepping up  to do more royal duties is not the same as the Queen's heir having Coronation info "leaked" or people thinking ahead to Charles' Coronation as his mother celebrates 60 years on the throne. I don't think William should be mothballed nor find t offensive if he takes on more royal duties. I thnk the Queen likes to see her children and grandchildren pitch in and I don't see how she would mind if her grandson steps up royal duties. I wonder how Charles will feel if down the road his son puts out Coronation blurbs while Charles is still King. Charles Ii think likes being the center of attention

memememe

I have followed this thread, including the original link - which is to a piece of music used at George II's coronation with a comment
QuoteFrom the looks of things, the Coronation of Prince Charles will feature this piece of music


I haven't seen anything that says that this is Charles putting out information/plans about his coronation - which have been on the drawing board at the office of the Earl Marshal's since 1952 by the way - Elizabeth had enough of the oil made for her coronation made for Charles' as well - but only enough for two was made.  So Elizabeth, as early as her own coronation was planning and preparing for Charles'.

This is more about you, Sandy, reading more into the thread than is there - Windsor posted a link to music used at George II's coronation and suddenly this is Charles putting out information about his coronation.

Sure some details of what has been planned has come out in the past - but not in this thread.

In 2004 the Earl Marshal (the Dukes of Norfolk hold that position by hereditary right and they plan funerals, coronations etc) said that he was going to review the plans in early 2005 for the Queen's funeral and Charles' accession ceremonies - which have to be planned to come into force any day now or in 20 years time.  They will be reviewed a number more times and when Charles is King he will be doing his funeral and William's accession ceremonies and coronation.  It is the normal process within a family where every day is planned months, if not years, in advance. 

Lothwen

I agree mememememe (I may have put an extra "me" in there by mistake :teehee:)

All that's happened here is a suggestion of a song that may or may not play at Charles' coronation.  That's it.  And now suddenly we're saying things like "Long Live the Queen" and "Charles is selfish"?!  Where did that come from?

Charles has been the heir from the day he was born.  His coronation has probably been planned for decades.  Accepting that doesn't mean we want the Queen to die.  I personally hope she reaches her 100th birthday in as good of shape as she is in today.  But I also know that life happens and the royal family has to deal with the fact that when she passes there will be a new head of the family, and that will be Charles. 
You may think you're cool, but do you have a smiley named after you?
Harryite 12-005

Okay, fine.  Macrobug is now as cool as I am

Bensgal

^^How true, Lothwen. I've not found any published articles that detail Charles' coronation plans yet, it's common knowledge and common practice for future ceremonies, etc., to be planned and sometimes rehearsed by the RF.

wannable

Handel's music, opera and oratorio performances is lovely, his ties/relationship with the British Royals during his time -- making himself a legend, buried in Westminster Abbey, makes it even more fitting for a 'coronation'.

Windsor

Plans for the next coronation have been in place for years now. It is nothing new. :wink:

sandy

Quote from: memememe on January 19, 2012, 02:43:30 AM
I have followed this thread, including the original link - which is to a piece of music used at George II's coronation with a comment
QuoteFrom the looks of things, the Coronation of Prince Charles will feature this piece of music


I haven't seen anything that says that this is Charles putting out information/plans about his coronation - which have been on the drawing board at the office of the Earl Marshal's since 1952 by the way - Elizabeth had enough of the oil made for her coronation made for Charles' as well - but only enough for two was made.  So Elizabeth, as early as her own coronation was planning and preparing for Charles'.

This is more about you, Sandy, reading more into the thread than is there - Windsor posted a link to music used at George II's coronation and suddenly this is Charles putting out information about his coronation.

Sure some details of what has been planned has come out in the past - but not in this thread.

In 2004 the Earl Marshal (the Dukes of Norfolk hold that position by hereditary right and they plan funerals, coronations etc) said that he was going to review the plans in early 2005 for the Queen's funeral and Charles' accession ceremonies - which have to be planned to come into force any day now or in 20 years time.  They will be reviewed a number more times and when Charles is King he will be doing his funeral and William's accession ceremonies and coronation.  It is the normal process within a family where every day is planned months, if not years, in advance. 


Charles has given out his plans. He wants to be Defender of Faith for one thing came directly from him. And the various Coronation details from Charles as well. Check the literature and see for yourself.  Since Charles is hands on about the plans I think the 1952 plans have changed for obvious reasons. Charles wants his Coronation to have reps from "all faiths" and be known as Defender of the Faiths--which I very much doubt was part of the 1952 plans, but come from Charles himself.

Well Charles in future may  have to deal with the blurbs about William's coronation. There must be more oil ready for William, the monarchy won't stop with Charles.

Sandor

It seems only natural to me that there should be speculation about Charles' coronation.
As someone mentioned, it doesn't mean that anyone wishes the Queen to die.

But, realistically, she is in her mid-eighties, and, although she may prove as long-lived as her mother did, not many make it that long.
No one is immortal, and why wait until the inevitable happens and things are cast into chaos?
Naturally there must be a plan for a smooth transition.  JMO.

sandy

Nobody is saying that Coronation plans are not put in place. The point is that this is the Queen's Jubilee year and her year, not her son's. There are no signs of her being in ill health so let's leave it at that...

lilliann

I think Charles is doing nothing to steal his mother's spotlight. just because some piece of info is published about Charles (William/Kate/Harry/anyone else from the family) they are not trying to overshadow HM. or should everyone in the world forget royals other than the Queen even exist?

Eri

As usual some Diana fans take things to a whole new level let's face it they are only screaming "Long life the Queen" because they can't bare the thought of him being King not because they have any particular "love"for the woman ...they take things into a whole new level because they put words into your mouth and pretend to read your mind without even knowing you they don't realize that I couldn't care one way or the other and this doesn't effect me as much as it seems it does them I was just saying that no matter what we don't know when someone could die hell...William or Bea could die before their grandmother we don't know I didn't mean anything else other than the above and I would like for my words to not be twisted to create an argument thanks  :flower:.

sandy

Diana's name did not even come up. This is about Charles vis a vis the Queen during her Jubilee year.

Trudie

Quote from: Eri on January 19, 2012, 06:00:33 PM
As usual some Diana fans take things to a whole new level let's face it they are only screaming "Long life the Queen" because they can't bare the thought of him being King not because they have any particular "love"for the woman ...they take things into a whole new level because they put words into your mouth and pretend to read your mind without even knowing you they don't realize that I couldn't care one way or the other and this doesn't effect me as much as it seems it does them I was just saying that no matter what we don't know when someone could die hell...William or Bea could die before their grandmother we don't know I didn't mean anything else other than the above and I would like for my words to not be twisted to create an argument thanks  :flower:.

This has nothing to do with Diana or her fans no one has even brought up her name. Yes anyone could die tomorrow but the point here is that this is The Queens shining moment Her jubilee and talk about Charles coronation is not just a bit premature but HM is in good health until we have heard that she has taken ill speculation on Charles coronation whether it be music or how many will officiate and who from the COE besides the AOC is IMO distasteful. Everyone knows plans are always in place for Funerals, coronations etc. Even News broadcasters are advised to have a black tie on hand in case they have the unfortunate position of broadcasting the demise of a member of the RF especially the Monarch.

I would appreciate that Charles fans stop turning every post into those who loved Diana as those who twist things regarding Charles . We all know he will be crowned but we also want to rightfully celebrate the Queen and her fabulous long reign not her impending death we know she is mortal thank you very much.



Eri

^You said it  :shrug: plans are made in case of her death down to the tie the reporter who reports her death will wear and we don't know  when she is going to die so I don't see how this is disrespectful  plus how is this Charles fault people are interested how his Coronation will be given her age? People know the time nears and are interested just like when Charles will be 84 people will start thinking about King William it's NATURAL not DISRESPECTFUL it's obvious people all over the world LOVE The Queen but given her age it only comes natural to think of the feature beyond her.

Trudie

It is disrespectful IMO until the jubilee is over or as I have said HM has taken ill. I know it is natural to think of the future without her given her age but can we just at least get past her jubilee before satisfying those who's curiosity into a future coronation and all that goes into it are discussed. For all we know the next coronation will be Williams.



memememe

#40
Deleted

sandy

#41
I think when the time comes, people will be discussing Charles' Coronation and it will be in all the media and the press. But IMO why think about what he's going to do at this moment with the Queen alive and well.  Actually the Coronations of Elizabeth and George VI did not take place right after the respectve previous monarchs passed away or abdicated. George VI's was in May 1937 some months after his brother abdicated. Elizabeth became Queen in 1952 but her Coronation took place more than a year later. Giving ample time for stories about the coming Coronation. I expect Charles' would be planned some months later and there would be media saturation of the impending event. So what's the rush?

memememe

Ask Windsor, the original poster who posted a link to a piece of music.

Eri

I hope Prince Charles becomes King not because I am in love with or something :hehe: but because :

1.What went down in his private life has NOTHING to do with the fact he will be  great King .

2.William doesn't seem ready or willing to take that role he is a part time royal it would b horrible if he became King without any transition I think that given that Prince Charles will be an old King William as Prince of Wales will be a vice King anyway that role wold really help him.

sandy

#44
I don't think it would be ":horrible" if William became King early. His grandmother did and it wasn't "horrible." He went to Uni, he was born heir to the heir, he has the background and he is smart. If he doesn't become King early then he needs to support his father --as Prince of Wales and that's not exactly a free ride--he would be expected to work and give up the military stint. If there is something "lacking" in William's preparation it is up to his father and grandmother to help him get prepared and he could retire from being in the military sooner rather than later.  If William is not "ready" or "able" or doesn't like the prospect of it  then maybe he should turn over the franchise to Harry.  But I think this is what he was born to do and he's not "backward" or anything.  ANd not everybody adores Charles--they will accept him as King but I don't think people forget what happened. And it is in his backstory.

Trudie

I agree with you Sandy William in some form has been prepared. I remember reading that when he was a student at Eton every Sunday he would go to Windsor for tea with the Queen who would impart some history of the monarchy on him as well as seeing how he was getting on with his studies. William is close to the Queen and PP and Charles probably has prepared him for the role of Prince of Wales as well.



Eri

#46
I don't "love"  :lmao2: Prince Charles either I just think that at the time being if the Queen dies he would be a better King than William who just doesn't seem to even want to be a full time Royal let alone be a King I do blame The Queen and Prince Charles for it they both became Queen and Prince of Wales when they were 21 and worked very hard all their lives seems to me they didn't want that for William add that to the fact his mother died when he was 15 they pampered him and made him work shy seems to me he will stay in the shadows as long as he can not a good quality for a King but I do think that being Prince of Wales first would make it easier for him when he becomes King because that role has a lot of work and responsibilities and that would help him gear up for the "top job" ...as for Princess Elizabeth she was the HEIR of a sick man of course she was ready to become Queen  :wink: while William is heir TO THE HEIR two totally different situations .

sandy

Nobody at this stage knows how "good" either of them will be. I don't think either will  wreck the monarchy to put it mildly--each monarch has a different style. I wouldn't say William is "work shy"--he seems to have an aversion at times to press attention. Nobody knows at this point how this will all work out since the future can't be predicted. I don't think Elizabeth was exactly "ready" to become Queen--she went on a trip with Phlip and fully expected from what I read to return to see her father again (he died while she was away of course). She was fully prepared but George wasn't always sick (he was King for about 11 years before he had any health issues). He had a severe health issue ca. 1948 and seemingly was "cured" but a few years later his health deteriorated. As I mentioned William is 29 and logically should pick up some of the work from his grandmother and father even if Charles hasn't become King as yet.