FW: Re: CHARLES & CAMILLA - ITS OFFICIAL

Moderator: MOD_nyhetsgrupper

Svar
John Parsons

FW: Re: CHARLES & CAMILLA - ITS OFFICIAL

Legg inn av John Parsons » 11 feb 2005 12:11:01

They had the opportunity but according to most accounts Charles, who has
been compared to Hamlet in more than one sense, dithered and pottered and
hedged his bets until Millie threw up her hands and accepted Andrew Parker
Bowles, who by all accounts was an excellent catch. This is not impossible
as the PoW ruined his chances with other ladies (among them Lady Alexandra
Hay and Anna Wallace) by stringing them along forever w/o making a
commitment. According to well founded reports, Anna Wallace ended their
relationship by storming out of a ball b/c Charles had danced all evening
with Mrs Andrew Parker Bowles.

Other accounts have Louis Mountbatten, who somehow or other appointed
himself to vet Charles' love life, decreeing that Millie was "excellent
mistress material" and convincing other members of the Royal Family of his
own generation that she wasn't quite the thing for a future queen. There is
no doubt of Mountbatten's influence on his grandnephew, and it's not
impossible that his dictum did something to lead Charles to the
aforementioned dithering and pottering over Millie.

Regards

John P.




From: lostcooper@yahoo.com
To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
Subject: Re: CHARLES & CAMILLA - ITS OFFICIAL
Date: 10 Feb 2005 20:52:15 -0800

I've always thought it was tragic that Charles & Camilla were not able
to marry when they were much younger (perhaps instead of the people
they actually married at the time). Camilla gets a beating for not
*looking* like Diana which is really stretching for a story. Charles &
Camilla both deserve to be happy in their private lives; they have
always been friends as well as lovers. If only they hadn't had to
wait...sigh...Bronwen

D. Spencer Hines

Re: Re: CHARLES & CAMILLA - ITS OFFICIAL

Legg inn av D. Spencer Hines » 11 feb 2005 19:31:02

Which is not to say that Lord Louis Mountbatten [Earl Mountbatten of
Burma] (1900-1979) was not a Great Man in many other ways.

He too was a victim of terrorists in the end.

DSH

""John Parsons"" <carmi47@msn.com> wrote in message
news:BAY7-F75831F6A24CA15AF25508B2770@phx.gbl...

| They had the opportunity but according to most accounts Charles, who
has
| been compared to Hamlet in more than one sense, dithered and pottered
and
| hedged his bets until Millie threw up her hands and accepted Andrew
Parker
| Bowles, who by all accounts was an excellent catch. This is not
impossible
| as the PoW ruined his chances with other ladies (among them Lady
Alexandra
| Hay and Anna Wallace) by stringing them along forever w/o making a
| commitment. According to well founded reports, Anna Wallace ended
their
| relationship by storming out of a ball b/c Charles had danced all
evening
| with Mrs Andrew Parker Bowles.
|
| Other accounts have Louis Mountbatten, who somehow or other appointed
| himself to vet Charles' love life, decreeing that Millie was
"excellent
| mistress material" and convincing other members of the Royal Family of
his
| own generation that she wasn't quite the thing for a future queen.
There is
| no doubt of Mountbatten's influence on his grandnephew, and it's not
| impossible that his dictum did something to lead Charles to the
| aforementioned dithering and pottering over Millie.
|
| Regards
|
| John P.
|
| >From: lostcooper@yahoo.com
| >To: GEN-MEDIEVAL-L@rootsweb.com
| >Subject: Re: CHARLES & CAMILLA - ITS OFFICIAL
| >Date: 10 Feb 2005 20:52:15 -0800
| >
| >I've always thought it was tragic that Charles & Camilla were not
able
| >to marry when they were much younger (perhaps instead of the people
| >they actually married at the time). Camilla gets a beating for not
| >*looking* like Diana which is really stretching for a story. Charles
&
| >Camilla both deserve to be happy in their private lives; they have
| >always been friends as well as lovers. If only they hadn't had to
| >wait...sigh...Bronwen

Svar

Gå tilbake til «soc.genealogy.medieval»