Tuesday, May 23, 2006

A MERRY WIFE FOR WINDSOR
Jerry Harkins

At long last it has been announced that Charley will make Camilla an honest woman. The happy couple will be married in a civil ceremony in April and she will henceforth and at long last be a Lady—actually Her Royal Highness, the Duchess of Cornwall. She may never be Queen but, when (and, of course, if) HRH Charley becomes King, she will be styled Prince’s Consort (or some such).[1] The Queen is said to be delighted (don’t ask me how you can tell) and the Archbishop of Canterbury has sent along his blessing with almost undetectable reservations. Said he, "I am pleased that Prince Charles and Mrs. Camilla Parker Bowles have decided to take this important step." The reservation is in his use of the title Mrs. Parker Bowles.  Which is to say they’ll no longer be living in sin.  He will bless the happy couple after the wedding in a private prayer service.

The Prince and his once and future consort have indeed been living in sin for many years. It is one of the enduring mysteries of our time what they see in each other but love is blind and lovers are said to be unable to see which might explain a lot. They do have some things in common: both love a rollicking good laugh and both have pretty knees. As it turns out, they have quite a lot more in common. It seems Camilla’s great grandmother, Alice Kepple, was the last mistress of Charley’s great-great-grandfather, the flamboyant royal pervert, Edward VII. His Majesty had at least fifteen other mistresses including Sarah Bernhardt, Lily Langtree and the redoubtable Lady Randolph Churchill, mother of Winston, and no slouch herself in the matter of extramarital affairs.

The mating rituals of British royalty have always been esoteric, involving such practices as incest [2], regicide [3], spousal abuse [4] and, of course, adultery. Quite right I say. It provides endless distraction to the commoners which helps them ignore the lousy weather. Still, one has to wonder why any adult with a modicum of intelligence would care about the marriage of a 56-year old man and a 57-year old woman. They will tell you that Charley is heir to the throne but they cannot for the life of them answer the next obvious question. So what? Since when has a scandalous sex life debarred somebody from the British throne? Look at the kings after whom Charley was named—the two other Charley’s, the six Georges and the eight Henrys. Of course there is also Arthur, the mythical cuckold who wound up sleeping with his mother or his sister or a fairy—take your pick.

I bow to no man in my appreciation of good gossip but this is old news. It was sordid ten years ago but now it’s merely leftovers. It was great fun when Charley was making an ass of himself on his cell phone. It was high melodrama when Diana’s brother was berating him and his family at the funeral. But by this time, all you can really say is that it’s so fifteen minutes ago. I know the Brits have a higher tolerance for boredom than most people which is why their newspapers are such amazing scandal sheets. (I even know why this is so but that’s another story.) It may be that royal watching is thought of as a patriotic duty, unpleasant but a necessary part of the stiff upper lip. It might also serve as a reminder that no matter how depressing things get in one’s life, they can be made worse by picking up the daily dispatches from the castle. Be that as it may, it is instructive to imagine the discussions held by serious men and women about the great issues surrounding the forthcoming marriage. What, for example, should HRH wear? A military uniform perhaps? He is, after all, Colonel-in-Chief of the 2nd King Edward VII's Own Gurkha Rifles. In the circumstance, however, we might want to avoid too explicit a reference to his great great grandfather. Yes, and the resplendent uniform might serve to remind people of his first wedding. Maybe, then, white tie and tails (with decorations) or morning suit depending on the time of day. [5] Seems a bit much for a visit to City Hall. Perhaps, then, Bermuda shorts to show off those knees. Brigadier Andrew Henry Parker Bowles who, for King and country, was happy to divest himself of Lady Camilla, will no doubt attend the private prayer service. You will recognize him by the big smile on his face.

The only one not smiling will be the Queen. Until now, every last one of her subjects has been praying she would live forever so they would not have to put up with King Charles III. Now a lot of them will be thinking about how much fun it would be to have Charlie and Camilla on the throne.

Notes

1. Subsequent events have brought this into question. Somebody with a really weird aristo title claims that, “…of course she will be the queen.” It’s never happened that the spouse of a king has not been a queen but neither Dear Bertie nor the current “prince consort” were styled “king.” Jay Leno interviewed the sitting Queen and asked her, “If Camilla is not to be Queen, what title do you have in mind for her?” The Queen answered, “Best in Show.”

2. Until very recently, it was practically required that a member of the royal family marry another royal. Today virtually all European royals, real and pretenders, are related through Queen Victoria and Dear Bertie. [Full disclosure: the writer is not related to Victoria but he is the Pretender to the throne of Donegal.]

3. Edward II was murdered at the instigation of his mother and her paramour in 1327 because she thought her son was gay. He died when they inserted a white hot iron rod up the royal rectum, a method known to have a high degree of success. They replaced him with his son, Edward III, who immediately imprisoned his grandmother and beheaded her lover. Henry II, the greatest of English kings, gained the throne by assassinating his brother, William II. Henry VI was deposed by his cousin Edward IV and then murdered in the Tower of London. Edward V, a teenager, was deposed by his uncle Richard III who immediately murdered him. Bloody Mary became queen by rebelling against the reigning nine-day-wonder queen, Lady Jane Grey, and having her beheaded.

4. The aforementioned Henry II imprisoned his wife, Eleanor of Aquitaine, for 14 years because she was smarter than he was. George I, the first of the Hanovers who still rule England, had his wife who was also his first cousin, Sophia Dorothea, imprisoned for life on a trumped up charge of infidelity. He did this so he could live a dissolute life with a harem of mistresses and prostitutes. Of course for sheer spousal abuse, one would be hard pressed to exceed the creative solutions of Henry VIII.

5. Additional Subsequent Event: Charlie did indeed choose a morning suit, albeit one with black piping edging the lapels and tails long enough for evening wear. Camilla wore white with a smashing white on white brocade coat and a sort of feathery confection where a hat would ordinarily go. She never looked better, God bless her. And, seriously, God save the Queen.

2 comments:

Kathryn Warner said...

Your information about Edward II is totally incorrect. He was deposed (and possibly murdered) in 1327 by his WIFE, not his mother - his mother died when he was 6. The deposition had little if anything to do with the 'fact' that he was 'gay'.

Edward III overthrew his mother and her lover, not his grandmother, and not immediately afterwards - he was only 14 when his father was deposed, and he waited till he was nearly 18.

Finally, it's by no means certain that Edward II was murdered in the manner you describe, and many historians doubt that he was murderd at all.

Jerry said...

Alianore is, of course, right—Isabella was Edward’s wife not his mother which I suppose makes her behavior marginally less horrifying. It’s no excuse but it is easy to be wrong about Edward II because of the perversity of English historians who can’t make up their minds about him. I understand there are even some who are now trying to rehabilitate his reputation. I wish them luck (and tenure). Maybe I have been guilty of choosing historians on the basis of wishful thinking instead of strict scholarship. My favorite source is Sir Richard Baker (A Chronicle of the Kings of England, London, 1643) but I freely admit he wrote it in Debtors’ Prison and was 75 at the time. As to the cause of Edward’s death, it is said that his jailers tried to suffocate him so there would be no marks on the body. When this failed, they resorted to more drastic measures of which there are several descriptions. I chose the most titillating one.