Many Royalists still have reservations about Camilla becoming Queen.
In their view, the idea of an adulterer who was around the scene at the time of the late Princess Diana taking a title they assume to be associated with the highest moral standards (not quite sure which history book they have been reading!) is beyond the pale.
And, of course, I understand where they are coming from.
Charles recognises those concerns too.
Ever mindful of the need to spend our public money appropriately (lol), he has on hand a high level committee working on this very problem.
They have an awkward constitutional difficulty to resolve over the legitimacy of his current marriage in the eyes of The Crown – but are also working hard on trying to win the public vote.
Which brings me conveniently to today’s Daily Mail serialising excerpts from a new book giving Camilla’s side of the love triangle story with Charles and Diana.
She has very wisely kept silent for many years and hasn’t officially broken her silence to co-operate with this volume, you understand, but clearly it is time approaching the 20th anniversary of the sacrificing of Diana to re-write history.
A clue is provided by the fact the book is written by Penny Junor, an author with blue blood racing through her veins. A well-established writer on Royal affairs – not the ones we’re really interested in but the boring issues of state – she is hardly likely to rock the boat.
They don’t lock truth-seeking Royal correspondents up in the Tower of London these days – just ensure they are former Royal correspondents who will never get a job with Rupert Murdoch.
In this work of fiction, Charles becomes more sinned against than sinner whilst Camilla is promoted to a paragon of virtue who only re-enters the Prince’s life in a noble bid to save him from a nervous breakdown.
The scene is set by the outrageous idea that Charles wept the night before the Royal Wedding because he knew he was making a big mistake. No mention, funnily enough, that he apparently spent that evening in the arms of Camilla.
Diana’s emotional problems are documented fairly enough, whilst claiming there was no reason for her jealous rages.
Camilla and Charles had split up long before Diana came on the scene; Camilla’s marriage to Andrew Parker Bowles was ‘real’ and she was a victim of his infidelities; Diana was just a silly girl imagining the worst.
It’s a story that might just appeal to the younger generation, many of whom will just be reading about Diana from history – but not us grizzlies who lived through it.
It was adultery pure and simple and given an extra dimension as it was planned even before Charles and Diana tied the knot. How’s that for forward thinking?
I do, however, despite all this, genuinely believe Camilla would fit the role of Queen perfectly well.
Add a machiavellian nature to an almost impossibly high sense of duty and public decorum – which Camilla undoubtedly has – and you have a typical Monarch.
Camilla is also clearly the true soul mate of Charles in a way Diana could never be .
In other circumstances, their on-off-on romance spreading four decades could almost be a touching human story – but I have no designs on taking Penny Junor’s place.
Even Camilla’s desire now to air brush history barely compares for audacity with the Windsors, aka Saxe-Coburgs who have somehow convinced us all they were never German after all. Note to editor: please delete that reference to Prince Philip’s brother being head of the SS.
It will do us no harm at all to have a more realistic view of the Monarchy when Charles takes to the throne, which he surely will.
Because The Queen and Philip are strictly off limits, we know very little about them and therefore it’s understandable some believe they do occupy the moral high ground. Note to editor 2: scrap those references to Philip being temporarily banished in the 1960s for his ‘friendships’ with actresses and that bit about The Queen’s son who looks nothing like the rest.
Instead the foibles of both Charles and Camilla are well known and documented and bring us closer to the truth that the Royal Family is nothing like its public image.