Californian Reacts | The Coronation of King Charles III
Vložit
- čas přidán 4. 05. 2023
- Breakdown the history to the coronation of King Charles III.
- The Coronation -
The symbolic high point of the accession will be the Coronation, when Charles is formally crowned. Because of the preparation needed, the Coronation is not likely to happen very soon after Charles's accession - Queen Elizabeth succeeded to the throne in February 1952, but was not crowned until June 1953.
For the past 900 years the coronation has been held in Westminster Abbey - William the Conqueror was the first monarch to be crowned there, and Charles will be the 40th.
It is an Anglican religious service, carried out by the Archbishop of Canterbury. At the climax of the ceremony, he will place St Edward's Crown on Charles's head - a solid gold crown, dating from 1661.
This is the centrepiece of the Crown Jewels at the Tower of London, and is only worn by the monarch at the moment of coronation itself (not least because it weighs a hefty 2.23kg - almost 5lbs).
Unlike royal weddings, the coronation is a state occasion - the government pays for it, and ultimately decides the guest list.
There will be music, readings and the ritual of anointing the new monarch, using oils of orange, roses, cinnamon, musk and ambergris.
The new King will take the Coronation oath in front of the watching world. During this elaborate ceremony he will receive the orb and sceptre as symbols of his new role and the Archbishop of Canterbury will place the solid gold crown on his head.
- Head of the Commonwealth -
Charles has become head of the Commonwealth, an association of 56 independent countries and 2.5 billion people. For 14 of these countries, as well as the UK, the King is head of state.
These countries, known as the Commonwealth realms, are: Australia, Antigua and Barbuda, the Bahamas, Belize, Canada, Grenada, Jamaica, Papua New Guinea, St Christopher and Nevis, St Lucia, St Vincent and the Grenadines, New Zealand, Solomon Islands, Tuvalu.
Source - www.bbc.com/news/uk-59135132
Original video by NBC News - • The Coronation of King...
#coronation #britain #kingcharles
As a Brit, we’ve moved on. Camilla and Charles are clearly devoted and in love and always were. Diana wasn’t an angel and knew how to work the media, then cried wolf. I think Harry has that trait. Most people here are very happy for them. She’s a lovely lady, I met her a few years ago.
Yes, Iv always said Charles and Camilla just should have been allowed in the very first place, but, that was 1970’s Britain and Church of England for you.
My sentiments exactly. God Save the King!
Exactly. Charles and Camilla were always the love match, but the Firm pushed him to marry Diana because they wanted to promote a fairy-tale wedding. Diana was originally OK with putting up a front in return for the royal lifestyle (including, to her credit, the power to promote charities), but it turned out tougher than she expected. She had some fundamental character flaws that eventually cracked.
Well said.
@@robertadavies4236
It's my view that Harry has inherited his mother's temperament. Her personal loyalties were fickle, friends had to 100% non critical or they were out.
Camilla took some serious abuse from all directions. She took it, kept her head down worked hard, never complained never played the victim and so has earned the respect of the people. Perhaps other royals could take her example.
She didnt have alot of choice.
Exactly, and I think she’s a very suitable Queen, she does a lot of good works and is patron of numerous charities one of them being Battersea which I love.
@@jilla.1246 It took courage, a lesser woman would have bolted. Camilla has proved herself and she is reaping her reward.
I like camilla. She has always kept her mouth shut and works really hard with charities and the King seems to really be happy with her.
Camilla, What's not to like she makes the king happy.
Exactly!
how about not liking her for being a home wrecker and not liking Charlie for cheating on his wife. Our national anthem says "God save our gracious King
Long live our noble King", There is nothing gracious and noble about Charlie
Totally 😊
I like her now . She has not drama . She just get to work and never try and compete with the king 👑
@@derekdelboytrotter8881 We didn't know at the time what Diana was doing , did we? 11 affairs, breaking up Two Marriages.
I'm a Brit and in answer to your question regarding Camilla. I would say 60-70% of us over here have no problem with her being crowned Queen. The rest blame her for the Diana split and have never quite accepted her. However, that split would have happened regardless. Charles never loved Diana and was under enormous pressure to marry at the time. He always loved Camilla, but she was married at the time. Camilla has kept a very low profile and not drawn any attention to herself since marrying Charles. She has carried out her royal duties flawlessly and I for one am happy that they are now together and tomorrow she will be crowned Queen.
Plus cammila wouldn't have given him the heirs he needed
There is so much more to the story from what I remember ( I was in my late 30s when Diana died). I have read 'stories' about Camilla's early years and her character at that time. Also that Andrew Parker Bowles was her real true love but not good husband material.
I think also, time has worked in her favour. She might never be the object of adoration, but her relatively unpretentious, low key conduct in the last 20 odd years has at least taken the edge of the most bitter dislike
I agree I'm happy for the couple
@@fattwat1she is not barren,why you think that ??
It was a fantastic day for the nation, it will never diminish the sadness of losing Queen Elizabeth, but I do think King Charles will make us all proud. Harry is now a footnote in history.
Long live the King.
I've always believed that Diana wasn't as innocent or an angel people make out.
i agree she used the media for her own gain .. she was a troubled person ...
Charles's marriage to Diana Spencer was arranged, mainly be the Queen Mother (Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon). Charles was always in love with Camilla. After all the trouble they manage now to be happy together and Camilla will make an excellent Queen. Another great tragedy is that Harry didn't choose an decent American lady (with a capital L) to marry!
@@romo9802 She was "troubled" before she met any member of the royal family
@@alalder1533 hear hear Sir
I don’t have any serious beef about Diana, except the tell all book and Panarama interview which I guess she got tricked into, but I agree I always found the hysteria around her to be a bit over the top. Yes, she was young and pretty, and yes she had a certain charm and was compassionate about her charities, but Charles has always been, also, and now so is Camilla. I just think if people were honest, they’d have to admit that they were blinded by the superficial aspects of who she was, and can’t seem to see past that. It was a tragedy all around for everyone, and even worse when she died, but Charles should have been allowed to marry Camilla from the beginning. It’s just sad
Diana had a dark side that we didn't see. A troubled childhood when her mother left her father and her children to be with another man; very jealous when her father remarried; was very needy and needed to be 'most loved' which is why she chose her charity patronages very astutely and forewarned the Press if she was going to the gymn or to Thorpe Park with her children so to ensure front page headlines. People are easily fooled by a pretty face. Had she obeyed the law and worn a seatbelt she would be alive today - and in her 60s.
Gather you didn't like Diana remember Charles only married her to get a heir to the throne soon has the boys were born that was it has far as Charles
was concerned
@@fattwat1 I think you will find that being a Princess and then a Queen of England one day might also tempt a young woman to marry. Both their Grandmothers got together and arranged the so called suitable marriage between themselves and then put pressure on their respective grandchildren. All Charles and Diana had to do was nod their heads. Diana had second thoughts before the marriage. Charles as the man couldn't honourably break the betrothal. So both were well and truly caught.
@@fattwat1it doesn't matter like or not it's about been realistic and lots of her supporters are deluded about her. Almost a god like worship. There is no one who as ever lived that is without some sort of faults. Yet you talk to her supporters and you have found that person
@karl wright are you American we all knew Diana had her faults so did she
@@pcvn214 simple question so I gather your not then
Everything you stated about Diana, why everyone loved her is true. People need to stop and remember, Camilla was and has always been the love of Charles' life. The Queen was very religious and was of a different time. The Queen, as crazy as it is to me, wouldn't allow Charles to marry Camilla because she wasn't a virgin. Charles is happy with Camilla and she's the only woman he ever wanted in his life and she's always putting Charles and his best interest first. They will be a great King and Queen.
I was so proud to see the King arrive in his Australian coach to his coronation at Westminster Abbey. Shows so much love and respect to my nation. God bless our King. Charles the third may he resign over us at Gods will.
Camilla is a very nice person and she makes Charles happy. People who don't like her are childish.
@@romo9802 Nonsense. What about Diana breaking Will Carling's .marriage? She did , after messing around with Will his wife left him. Diana had lots of affairs.
@@romo9802 You do not know that. I notice you do not answer the fact that Diana had several affairs. I think Diana was a nightmare with her Bulimia problems. A mental illness. She had Bulimia before Charles even knew her.
She was not a normal person.
Apparently one of Diana's sister also had bullimia,it was a very fractured childhood because of the break up of Diana 's parents.
Maybe not childish, but some people just want to remain resentful. The media were horrific to Camilla and that played a huge part in people's perception and then some just get stuck with that. I remember when Diana died.. before that I honestly didn't give her much thought and I bet many others didn't either, but her sudden tragic death it made her to be this Goddess like character. Now of course it was sad, and I wouldn't have wished that on anyone but its stupid to suddenly turn her into some god like creature. That character of Diana still remains with some people.
It is drama that isn't very Kingly but its confirms he's human.
Camilla is the person that he should have always married. It’s obvious that they are a very happy couple and I think she is the one person that he always really loved. He married Diana when he thought he had lost Camilla and while I’m sure he was absolutely committed to making his marriage with Diana work it was obvious to everyone that they really didn’t have anything in common. Personally I have never understood peoples obsession with Diana and while I’m sure she was a very kind caring person very few people really knew her and I think it was her image that people really fell in love with.
I absolutely agree with your analysis @Cjbx11. By all accounts Diana was a complex person, and I too never understood peoples obsession with her. I think people fell in love with the idea of her. I was disturbed by the mass hysteria of grief that broke out at her death. I couldn't quite understand why one would feel such grief at a person one has not personally known.
Camilla has worked her socks off for the RF and country. Despite weird comments from one of her step sons saying there were bodies in the street, sacrificed to make her popular. I really have no clue what that's supposed to mean. She seems down to earth and humble to me. She makes our King happy and that's all that matters. He's so earnest and desperate to do his best, I am so rooting for him.
The bit I am most looking forward to is hearing Zadok the Priest by Handel sung in the setting it was intended for. I bet that moment will give people in the Abbey goosebumps. I love history and to see a Coronation play out in real time is amazing. For me one of the biggest moment's of Queen Elizabeth's funeral was the removing of the regalia from her coffin and tomorrow we will see it being passed on and given to King Charles.
I doubt very much that we will see Harry interact with the vast majority of his family. I don't think many of the British Public care at all if he is there or not.
Personally, I really like Camilla. She has endured so much when it comes to the media and public opinion and has just got on with things. She makes the King happy. You can see from clips of her talking to people that she is a funny lady.
I totally agree and I am really looking forward to Zadok the Priest.
As am I looking forward to zadok the priest
Zadok the Priest is a highlight I agree. I've heard the King has commissioned (is that the right word?) several new pieces of music which will be played in public for the first time at the Coronation. I am afraid I am one of those people who would prefer Harry didn't come, and don't care if we never see him again - but then I think of his dad, and although I will 'grumble in my beard', I will accept Harry the Cad for King Charles' sake....just about - mean body that I am!
I was overwhelmed by the Anointment. I was in tears. It was so powerful.
Zadoc the Priest was certainly a major highlight for me. It was wonderful. I replay it on CZcams regularly.
For what it's worth i think he'll make a good king. I'll be showing my support by going tomorrow. 🍾🥂
I think he will make a great king. I have seen a few documentaries about Charles over the last few years on the work that he does and as a result I have a huge amount of time for the man. With regard to Diana, he was as much a victim as she was. More than just a great king he is a great human being.
I forgot to say that it is irrelevant that he is not elected. Could any politician do a better job? Make up you own minds.
These People Make Me Feel So Proud To Be British I And Cant Wait For The New King
That spoon is 3 times as old as the US 😂
I'm sure that native Americans would disagree! Also, geologists would disagree!!
@@stephenthorpe3591 the US has only existed since 1776 😂 I'm aware the continent is far older
@@samnemeth-smyth6109 Yes, but the mistake of the bigoted Western white guy (arguably) is to think that history starts when they create a political entity.
Long live the king 🏴🇬🇧
I like many Brits knew that the marriage of Prince Charles and Diana Spencer was somewhat flawed. Prince Charles loved Camilla and I think he was "forced" into marriage. I can honestly say that I have not had any reason to dislike Camilla and I hope that they live a long and happy life. He will make a good King with the full support of his wife Queen Camilla.
Indeed. A lot of people don't acknowledge or perhaps even know that Charles was coerced and strongarmed into marriage with Diana Spencer by his great uncle Lord Mountbatten. Charles was in a unique position within the social norms of the time to find it really rather difficult to refuse in the face of his great uncle, his mother and his father's entreaties to marry.
Harry was vicious about Camilla and completely wide of the mark. I'm very happy for her to be Queen and she will be vital in supporting the King. It was an OK piece but didn't in any way show you anything about Charles the man. Suggest you seek out videos on the Prince's Trust, or Dumfries House, or Poundbury to get more of a sense of him. He is incredibly knowledgeable about sustainability, farming, nature, the environment, and much much more.
It is strange that Harry turned against Camilla since he was very accepting of Camilla before Charles married her. Meghan has turned him against her. And the zoo in Sydney was Tooronga.
They run apprenticeships at Dumfries House in the crafts that are dying out. Charles did a lot of good as the Prince of Wales taking the Princes Trust into Young Offenders Prisons where a lot of them learnt a trade. God bless him and the rest of the royal family
I would say what made Diana so popular is she had this aura about her. Something that is very hard to put into words. She was kinda other worldy in how she carried her persona. Very much like a fairytale princess. She just resonated with people.
Agree she had the personality that literally light up any room she is in and she was down to earth and connected with the common ppl ❤️
It is the same thing Catherine has the ability to connect to anyone
I think Charles and Camilla will be a very good King and Queen for this country. As Prince Charles he created the Princes Trust using his Navy Pension to do so. He has helped millions of people by investing money in those down on their luck, people with a great idea but no capital to start a business or just youngsters needing money for courses or starting out and needing to get a foot hold on their journey. It has been so successful that he has Prince's Trusts in the Commonwealth and, now in America. Just like his Father's Duke of Edinburgh Award Scheme - which is still going strong BTW.
He made a great success of the Duchy of Cornwall, also when he was Prince of Wales. His Estate and the many farms on it produce fine foods, organic of course, successful enough for his tenants to sell to major supermarkets throughout the UK. He has spent many years trying to boost the incomes of the people in Cornwall - even building a complete new town to attract new businesses into the area. There are plans for a second town, or maybe its underway I don't know: he has campaigned since the sixties/seventies for us to be kinder to the planet. He is one of the hardest working Royals. (Princess Anne just pips him at the top.) Yet as Prince Charles he worked his own land himself. There's a candid film clip somewhere of him atop a tractor, working late into the evening trying to get his field ploughed before it gets too dark. He supports the countryside crafts - like hedging which he is a dab hand at. He raised money to save the Scottish Dunfries House from dereliction now considered to be a very and beautiful treasure which taught the next generation restoration skills to help get them work. In fact since he was given the title of Prince Charles he has raised, give or take, £140 million EACH YEAR for Charity. He recently donated almost £1bn which can ONLY be used to help people in this time of financial crisis. Now he is King he has to step away from the Causes he has supported and hand them over to William. So, he knows his way around the block, is kind, devoted to Service, like his mother The Queen before him, and Camilla, the love of his life since a young man, who will continue to give him the help and support he has not always received throughout his life. So yes, I think he will be a good King - given the chance.
Well said, I'm getting sick of the people that put him down. And not noticing on the good that he's done and helped so many people. I think the change he's making is good keeping up with modern times and recognising other religions and helping everyone come together that is the king you need in these modern times. Yes may not be perfect but he's our King and can only get Stronger. The monarchy is Britain, and the min people try to abolish it is the time there kissing goodbye to history, if history can proceed and adapt to the times which he's trying to do. This is what we need. God Save the King.
Well Said. 👍👍👍🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧👑
Its our traditions and history , old buildings , palaces , castles that bring in the tourists , local businesses and hotels etc do well due to money coming in from around the world , and thats partly due to us having a royal family .
Absolutely is! My family visited to see everything you listed. Keeping these traditions and history going is so wonderful and interesting to us. Keeps us wanting to come back, that's for sure! Nothing even close to any of those here in the US.
King Charles I do really like With the charities and princes trust and with his strong views on the Environment and future changes he's made keeping tradition I say Love it and can't wait. God save the King.
Many seem to have missed the generous gift to the Treasury.( Taxes) from King Charles III,,a Wind Farm that was worth 2.1 Billion pounds and a help to the environment.
@@californianreacts His affair with Queen Camilla started well before his Marriage, marriage was refused , a marriage was arranged between Prince Charles and Lady Diana by their two Grandmothers, Elizabeth the Queen Mother, and Lady Fermoy the Grandmother of Diana, the age discrepancy was far too much, as their personalities were so different. I always felt sorry for Prince Charles. He has finally found happiness with the woman he loves.That's what matters .
Katy Perry was invited to the concert because of the work she has done for the Prince's Trust.
Ditto Lionel Ritchie ❤
@@romo9802 hello troll.
Edward VII, who succeeded Queen Victoria after a similarly long reign as Queen Elizabeth II, was not well liked when he was the heir to the throne but when he became king he went on to be a much loved and successful monarch. Charles III will be just the same. Btw, it's pronounced monerk not monark.
@@irene3196 No more than correct than Americans saying Bucking Ham Palace, which is incorrect!
@@B-A-L The best one is Edin Burrow for Edinburgh!
@@dlanodsknib The best one of all is LYSESTER SQUARE in London. Honestly that did happen an American family asked me for directions. I couldn't stop laughing!
Background to the Sussex spat
The monarchy works for the people. You either work for it full-time or not at all. Meghan came in thinking she could modernise the monarchy. Her idea of modernising it was to celebritise it and make it a global brand and also to make money from it. She did not realise that it was already a global brand. We can see this from the recent Jubilee celebrations and now the Coronation.
By law, the monarchy is not ALLOWED to make money. Otherwise, the individuals would be susceptible to corrupt influence by outside forces. Today, we can now see the influence of these corrupt forces in action in the Presidential and governmental offices and organisations in many many countries. Hence, by law, the monarchy is not allowed to monetise itself. So the monarchy gets a sovereign grant from the government (ie; taxpayers);to cover the cost of representing the country and the people of the UK.
The head of the monarchy (King Charles) is our Head of State just like President Biden is the Head of State of the USA.
Meghan did not move all her belongings from Toronto & the USA when she married Prince Harry. She was however making back-door deals to advertise high end designer clothing and jewellery when she went out on Royal duties, which is not allowed. There were also attempts to make deals with streaming companies and it became fairly obvious to the Firm that she was hell-bent on using her royal status to make money for herself and her intention was always to go back to Hollywood and merchandise her Royal status for as much money as possible.
And we can now see this with the Netflix and Book deals as well as the the recent news of resurrecting her blog ‘The Tig’ through which she intends to make more money by promoting products.
I can tell this is from an American perspective as some details are incorrect. Especially about King Charles telling H he couldn't afford them. Harry wanted to leave the Monarchy and offered his title in exchange for money ( selling his title). Charles said NO and the Queen agreed. I will never forgive him, and as for that she devil, I'm glad she's staying away. Harry will only stay 24 hrs by the way (24 hrs too much in my opinion). He should be in the tower!!
I just miss happy Harry. He used to love his work in Africa and his mates. He just looks miserable.just hope their kids do not end up as pawns for his wife
@@romo9802 that's simpley not true. They work really hard, it might not be the same kind of work the common man has to endure, but they put in their hours. More hours then most, I might add 😉
@@romo9802 The taxpayers don’t keep the Monarchy. The Monarchy pays for its own upkeep. You could say that the Monarchy keeps the keeps the taxpayers, to some extent.
They OWN the assets in the CROWN ESTATES. These were originally THEIR assets put into a Trust called the CROWN ESTATES with the agreement of the Government of the day when the deal was done.
The Crown Estate. Assets by managed by an independent Board of members to make sure that they generate income for the expenses of the monarchy.
All the profits from the Crown Estates go to the UK Treasury. The Treasury then takes 15% of these profits and gives it to the Monarchy for its running expenses.
Which Firm/Company/Institution/Individual do you know pays, what is virtually, 85% tax.
But then, that fact wouldn’t agree with your agenda and rhetoric. 🧐🙄
@@romo9802 I guess you don’t like inconvenient truths. 😂 But facts are facts! And they don’t fit your agenda. 🤷🏽♀️
I love it, King Charles lll will make a great King, hes set up so many Charities and is so strong on the Environment, Im all for it. I think Prince William I do prefer but I think King Charles will do what he said in the Kings Speech. I love being British
Lady Diana Spencer was "a shy kindergarten teacher". From a family that had been aristocrats since the 1400s. And not a poor, minor branch of the family either, her father (and now her brother) were/are Earl of Sunderland and Spencer and very, very wealthy.
The commentators got it all wrong about Harry and Markle from 20 mins onwards. To use an Americanism, their name is Mudd. We see her for what she is and she shouldn't be allowed to distract from a wonderful day. It's the nation's day and Charles will be a good King and Head of State.
I agree 100%. All this nonsense about Archy's birthday party - Harry wasn't particularly interested last year - he went off and played polo.
@@gordonsmith8899 Camilla will advise her husband to remove the Sussex's from their titles. She's been in charge since the 70's.
@@tmac160
I very much doubt it T Mac.
I was born during the reign of Queen Elizabeth's father, King George VI so I have had 3 monarchs.
Princess Diana was not what many think she was. She had many affairs as well, with married man also, even harassing her boyfriend’s wife.
For me the personality of the Monarch is not important for the existence of the institution of the crown.
Constitutional Monarchy protects democracy by preventing a self serving politician from becoming Head of State. The duty on the Monarch is to sign Bills into law only if the proper democratic procedure has been followed. The Monarch will fire a Prime Minister if he losses the confidence of parliament.
The will of parliament is paramount and just by existing the Monarchy ensures that, and provides the stability we have enjoyed for centuries.
I'm from a forces family and that is more or less how I look at it. It's a form of government that has evolved and works very well and you don't tear something down unless you have something to replace it. Charles is a warm, kind man and if he just concentrates on projecting that then he will be fine as king.
@@hilarymiseroy, I agree- we chopped one king's head off in the 1640s and look where that got us - a republic with a non-democratic 'Lord Protector' who tried to enforce Puritanism on to everyone :banning music, dancing, immodest dress, games, Christmas celebrations etc...
We were begging Charles II to come back as king in 1660.
I do not think anyone in royal family will talk to harry for fear of him gping public
There's a lot of things people didn't know, because the concert touched on and showed him acting he wrote, acted and narrated a kids book which was turned into an animation, painting, playing the cello, piano and other instrument, trumpet I think, he also flew fighter jets and combat helicopters as well as being a para doing numerous jumps out of planes and went on SAS training
most of the UK well boo Harry lol like they did when they both came before. There won't be long conversations because everyone will be worried about him recording it and using it to lie about them more in his books and Netflix shows. Sorry for the long comments
It's always the polite or 'right' thing to say that Diana was popular because of things she did, or because she was nice etc. These are all true, but really she was just very beguiling to look at it, mesmerising even; she was tall, slim, beautiful, fashionable, after a shaky start, a real-life fairy princess, you just found yourself wanting to look at her, regardless of anything else.
She jumped on the celebrity band waggon.
We're getting to know a lot more about the Diana behind the palace walls.
I can remember the late Queens coronation it went on all day! This is going to be shorter but I think thats for the better! As far as Harry goes most people I know didnt care whether he came or not as he as let the family down in so many ways! Camilla seems to be very down to earth and genuine and people have certainly warmed to her!
Couldn't agree more about Harry and, yes, Camilla seems just right to be our Queen and a great support for King Charles.
Camilla and Charles seem to love each other very much, I don’t see why people have such a issue, live and let live
I as many people did loved Diana and still do. However any person with sense and a degree of empathy can see Camilla and Charles are made for each other. Camilla is a good woman who does a lot for different causes particularly Osteoporosis and animal charities. Interestingly Harry spoke in very good terms of her from her joining the Royals until this past 2 years.
Talking about Katie Perry she is one of the Kings ambassadors.
Its hard to explain to a person who hasn't been born and raised in a country steeped in history and tradition. The pride a Brt has in the country's past and preservation in pomp and ceremony is what makes a Brit a Brit.
We personally may believe Charles can never replace Elizabeth, but our loyalty to crown will not waiver. Our traditions are based upon Monarchy so without Monarchy we would lose our identity. Pomp and ceremony reminds us of our historical past and reinforces our sense of patriotism.
We will accept King Charles and Queen Camilla as our rightful monarchs, serving them and protecting them as the Kng swore to protect us.
Still miss the Queen!
I was 11 years old when Princess Diana died. As a kid, seeing her living a normal (as could be) life with her sons made her very relatable. She broke down the barriers, if you like, between the people and the Royals. They are human, they have their flaws and their fall-outs just like every other family. Diana's death ultimately caused the Royal family to change their ways to an extent and it's been for the better.
With regards to Camilla, the homewrecker, wicked witch stuff is a media construct. She was in love with Charles and he loved her but circumstances, unfairly, dictated a different fate for their earlier relationship. Camilla did not choose to be portrayed the way she was and the "rehabilitated" comment in the video is unfair to her. I'll add that I wasn't sure about Charles, probably because of the portrayal of him in the media in the situation. However in recent years we have seen him come to the fore when The Queen started to scale back on her public appearances and he (and Camilla) have come across very well and have largely been well received.
Ultimately, Charles has to be his own monarch and not attempt to emulate the late Queen. I do believe he will be the former.
"... people are delighted that Harry's coming ..." What? Both of them? The people that are delighted that is! Most couldn't give a continental fig that he's coming!
Camilla was his first and only love, unfortunately his parents sent him away to Sea for two years, when he came home she had married someone else , he was heart broken.
I had great respect for Princess Diana and their two sons which they both loved very much , I am sure the King and Queen will be very happy.
The King since the 1970's has always been a leader above the inviorerment.
We sre having a garden party on Sunday we do have a lovely Garden Shed if we have any rain and we have all our flags out in our village .
Princess Diana was someone who was able to connect with ordinary people - she was once photographed shaking hands with an AIDS patient when she visited a hospital back in the 80s, which was completely unheard of back then. I still to this day remember where I was when I heard the news that she died - I’ll never forget it.
GOD SAVE THE KING.
LONG LIVE THE KING.
I really enjoy your posts.
Great reaction, thank you. Hopefully it will encourage visitors to our wonderful county and to see our amazing countryside
So, actually, this had nothing to do with the coronation itself, but all the gossip and drama over the months and years preceding it. We've gone this route time and time again through our UK social media. Gave this a thumbs-up only because I like your channel.
Catherine not Kate, which was a derogatory name given to Catherine by the media when being courted by Prince William.
I was so proud to be British what an amazing day just perfect god save the king and god bless all our loyal royals how beautiful was Cathrine and Charlotte they are our true princesses our handsome prince William while harry sat and pulled faces like a child truly the only naughty child there ohh he does look like his father shame he never gained his gentleness and his sense of duty what a true man looks like 🐝🏴🇬🇧🐝🏴🇬🇧
they are happy together...thats all that matters
I don't know why Harry bothered to turn up at all.
God Bless King Charles the III of Great Britain & Northern Ireland.
I am worried about the protests that will inevitably occur. I have never been a monarchist, I believe that unearned privilege is an ugly part of any culture. I do, however realise that the Royal Family are the primary reason for millions of tourists visiting the UK every year and are therefore responsible for thousands if not millions of jobs in this country. I do also know that a lot of charities would not even exist without their patronage. I also know that the Queen was instrumental in paring down the amount of members who were allowed to take from the Royal "income" which is paid through taxes (I read somewhere that the modern Royals cost less than £1 per person per year). Even the Senior Royals are expected to supplement their incomes from private means. Most of the properties they use are owned by The Crown Estate so are actually owned by the people of the UK as are the many crowns etc. Charlie is determined to cut that down even more. I wish people would realise that these people have no real power and have been put in an untenable position by an accident of birth. They are a focal point for diplomatic relations and a tourist attraction, a job they do marvellously. OK some people still have a royalist mentality and that is fine, royal occasions can bring people together. The real spongers in this country are the MPs, they are paid massive amounts of money, are able to claim ridiculous sums for "expenses" and still get subsidised meals and drinks in the House of Commons.They are the ones making masses of money off the backs of the working people, they are the ones that deserve your real anger and disgust.
I think the cost of the monarchy is about $1.50 per year per UK citizen - but as that money comes from the Crown Estate which hands significantly more than that over to the Exchequer, we actually make a profit from them - and that's before calculating the income from tourism. So, if we assume that they didn't get my $1.50 but instead I got it added to my annual pension, what could I get with it, a chocolate bar? Cadburys corrupted by Kraft? Much as I love chocolate, I'll keep the King.
Regarding "unearned privilege", that is a bit unclear. Sure, the Monarch does have privileges, but they also have duties, so are the privileges "unearned"? Perhaps not. What you really mean, perhaps, is "inherited privilege". However, with the privilege comes inherited duties, as previously noted. Also, when rich people die, they typically leave their wealth to their children and it gets passed down the generations. Isn't this the real "unearned privilege"? If you are the son of a billionaire, you don't have to work, at least not after you inherit the fortune. So, I think you might be pointing the finger at monarchy rather unfairly.
I am glad you are not a monarchist. If you were you would be able to fight their corner on your own I think. In addition to all you have said I would add that a Monarchy, based on service to the people, creates enormous stability. We are recognised as one of the most stable democracies in the World. Stability invites capital investments and our Financial Services Industry rely totally on that Stability and so do we as a country. At the present time most of our wealth comes from being a safe pair of hands when looking after other peoples capital from around the world. It keeps us going as a country especially now that our manufacturing base is sorely reduced. Take away the Monarchy and that stability will be in immediate doubt and our 'safety' rating will slide down the slippery slope before we can shout 'Help'.
At the moment we have separate branches of Government each curbing the other's power. No one is able to be too powerful so we have a brake system if you like. Everyone knows who is going to be the next Monarch, who is next in line so there's no kerfuffle just a smooth, slick change. So no ruffles in the world of finance. No wringing of hands, no arguing about who is better than. The fact the Monarchy is 'A' political too means World leaders of any stripe can feel comfortable meeting with us. There's no 'I won't meet with the Queen because I don't agree with her point of view on this or that issue', so the Monarchy helps us in Diplomatic Circles in many ways we will, probably, never fully understand. Finally the ugly part of culture. The great works in music, in art, in traditions, in architecture are brought about usually by people who have wealth. Inherited wealth sometimes too. The King has commissioned 9 new pieces of Music which will highlight our composers.
People from every level of society benefit from visiting beautiful spaces and National Trust houses and gardens created by Britain's wealthy ancestors. Seeing our history if you like. The Crown Estates are just that, once owned outright by our Royal Families and handed over to the State. The Crown Estates, often run by the Royal Family, bring in considerable incomes 75% of which is used for the benefit of the whole Country. The Government then decides how much the Monarchy needs to sustain itself, its buildings, staff etc and allots about 25% back to the Monarchy to pay its costs. So for just over a £1 a year, you say, from each of us we get everything we currently have. Just last year it was about 13p I believe. COVID costs I suppose. These, so called privileged people who live off the fat of the land get up almost everyday of their lives, whether they want to or not and go out to visit this, that or the other - no rolling over and wanting another half hour in bed - just up and at it because their diary is full over a six month period. No ducking the duty just because you have a headache or feel a bit queasy. Not only that, but the whole immediate family is roped in to do duties and there's no retirement age either. Yes they are privileged indeed.
@@romo9802 The only royal that doesn't pay inheritance tax. Is the monarch when assets are transferred from the deceased monarch to the replacement.
@@romo9802 No, not everyone else pays it. Inheritance Tax was initially introduced as a tax on the property of the very rich. Over the decades, the price of property has increased to the extent that what was initially aimed at the owners of stately homes. now applies to the owners of ugly semi-detached houses in the suburbs of London, while similar property in, say, Leicester would not attract the tax.
Camilla is lovely and kind. I don’t understand how people hate her. Most people divorce and have affairs these days. Diana was no angel. They are happy and in love that’s all that matters. As a British person it still feels incredibly strange and sad still that our beloved Queen isn’t with us anymore.
Just prior to her death Princess Diana was becoming less popular with newspaper headlines asking if her private life was becoming to that of the mother of a future King. After her tragic early death and how it happened the mood of the the press particularly the red top tabloids changed along with that of some of the British population.
Who was delighted about Harry coming ? Not the uk
Diana and Charles married out of duty he always loved Camilla.Diana had multiple affairs Charles just the one. When it was announced him and Camilla were dating people and the press were disgusting at the way they treated her it has calmed down a little by a little i mean people don't throw stuff at her any more . People have a warped sense of Diana because of Books, TV programs, documentaries, press and obsessed fans have painted her as a saint that could do no wrong so Camille was seen still is by some as an evil women who caused it all . The car crash happened because the french press was chasing her and her boyfriend and the driver lost control. some people don't know how to let go even americans are saying it should be Queen Diana, if Camilla was't a thing they would still have spelt
If you did not know about the Investiture of the Prince of Wales, I suggest you start by reacting to some quite interesting videos relating to Welsh history and the people.
I want to put into perspective, Diana was not jusy a shy kindergarten teacher. She was born a noble with a title who lived at three big palaces snd stayed at Sandringham where the royal family goes for Christmas, long before she met Charles. Diana was a aristocrat.
Because of the time difference, Harry would have been able to arrive back in LA on the same day, and there fore not miss Archie’s birthday. I think that was the right decision, the actual sevice in London was over by 1.30, and H. Left straight away afterwards.
I like cammila, she's not deserved some of the awful things that have been thrown at her over the years, she makes king Charles happy, I personally think they should have been allowed to marry back in the seventies. Can't wait for Saturday all the bunting and flags are up its gonna be amazing. 😊. Nope would rather Harry wasn't coming can't forgive the terrible lies he's told about his family and us the British public, he didn't give a monkeys even when both his grandparents were on their deathbeds. He's a traitor full stop!
William I (which the conqueror was effectively) was the Duke of Normandy, is why English changed a lot to (though has had of course modifications since then) what it's like now. He was French, why probably a lot of the Scottish Nobility was French by origin as well for many 100s of years later.
Even Mary Queen of Scots married the French Monarch at the time (hence the respelling of the name Stewart to Stuart) Francis II of France, he later died, when Mary had married him Scotland was catholic though when she returned to Scotland after Francis death was protestant.
Is why quite essentially ever since then (William I) every English Monarch has seen their right to some French land, which is what Joan of Arc least partially put an end to.
We loved Dianna and its still hard now when we think of what could it have been if they hadn't fallen out of love. I never thought I would except her as Queen but I do now. GOD SAVE OUR KING.
We love the british.
The way I see it is that before the 1960's the royal family and aristocracy in general was more about alliances and spectacle instead of real love. (Exceptions of course) married couples may not even have seen each other more than once or twice a day.
I think also at the time the government in the UK was very stiff and formal and conservative - Diana was fun and liked fashion and spectacle. I dont think that she was horrible. The whole situation was horrible. If this had been 1903, they could have lived separate lives and just gotten on with it.
Brit here: I think most royalists tolerate Camilla and had long accepted she would be 'Princess Consort' upon the late Queens' death, after all it would be very improper for a king to be married to a duchess. I had always dispised the prospect of her becoming a 'Queen Consort' until the late Queen announced that it would be her wish to make Camila Queen' rather than Princess Consort in her Platinum Jubilee message last year. My love and respect for her late majesty is the only reason myself and many others accept the situation because the late Queen had explicitly expressed this as what she desired. I feel it would be an insult to her memory to disrespect this wish. She is the first divorced Queen Consort in British history.
As a Canadian I think that Charles was in fault. He was the one who maintained a relationship with Camilla even though he was married.
She does the work and the King loves her I have no problem with her being Queen. It’s a big job and have the belief that the King should have the comfort of a loving wife.
With Charles and Camilla they were in many ways ahead of the times.
When Charles married Diana marrying a divorcee was unthinkable for the royals. Remembering the horrendous situation around the Duke of Windsor (former King Edward VIII)
But public attitude has moved on significantly since then, after all he is only the second king to be a divorcee and the first to be divorced and remarried before taking the throne.
The Camilla 'thing' should never have happened & we all wish we could wave a wand and that Diana would reappear, but that's not going to happen. So, we must move on, Camilla makes The King very happy and to all reports, she's fun, nice and a very engaging person. For the good of the country we must just put everything else aside and I'm just happy to have a Queen back. I shall be pledging my allegiance to them both.
There's another video called "Coronation of King Charles III - Order of Service Explained" by Usefulcharts it explains some other stuff.
Camilla was always Charles first love and the insinuation was that Diana was picked for him as a wife because she had Scottish royal blood and the current royal family is actually German. So of course his 1st marriage was never going to work but when it all blew up, Charles and Camilla were made out to be the only villains, which is rubbish, divorce happens every day and people should accept that its just a fact of life. Life is not black and white, life is a dirty shade of grey and the uproar about it was in my opinion too much and the press and the public reduced it and simplified it to almost evil versus good, which was and is childish. It was also said that Camilla married her first husband in a fit of pique because Charles was basically directed to marry Diana. Rumours of course but there is no smoke without a fire?
I believe it was not a fit of pique as someone has said. While Charles was away at sea on naval duties, Camilla was told she would not be allowed to marry Charles and, I believe, she was 'encouraged' to wed Andrew Parker-Bowles, a previous boy friend.
I read that Andrew Parker Bowles was her true love but he was not good husband material.
Camilla is the woman Charles married for love as opposed to Diana who he married because she was seen as "appropriate" at the time.
No hate to Diana of course. She was also a victim of an arranged marriage.
Well I'm English so be careful that's my king she was a beautiful woman she had a heart of gold. She not liked of me not happy I loved Diana not by me no matter what I personally think of Charles he is still my king I felt for him when his mother died he was so brave she was there all my life from birth. I love William Katie and there children
22:00 "For this country that stills adores those brothers" I can only presume the commentator is speaking of the US rather than the UK as Harry is far from 'adored' here in the UK by most people.
that whole "balcony is only for working royals" thing did not apply to Camilla's grandkids, did it now?
We have Maggot and pals, who attended her wedding who daily share their American opinions for a buck or two.😂🎉
You the crown jewels arnt just the crown. They have like golden plates golden everything, theres about 2000 items in the crown jewels
Diana was popular, at least in part because she was young and pretty. She was also a very adept at manipulating the media to build a particular image.
Camilla has proven her worth both in her quiet and unobtrusive work in supporting Charles and in the marked change on Charles' demeanor; since their marriage not only has Charles clearly been much happier but has also seemed much more relaxed in his meetings with the public.
As a Brit I have warmed
to Camilla over the years, she makes him happy. Never really liked Diana if she hadn't died then everyone would have just watched as she married some rich bloke and left the spotlight. Instead she is elevated to be some kind of saint, unfortunately Harry seems to have inherited her lack of brains
This will be unpopular, but I did not like Diana. The media made her popular. She was I would call crafty, the shy downcast eyes etc. I was basically and arranged marriage and was unlikely to work. Of course Charles and Diana were as guilty as each other of playing around. I quite like Camilla. At least the relationship between Charles and Camilla seems to be based on a genuine love for each other.
Camilla has earned her place. She is practical, hard-working, and makes the King laugh. They work well together. It was an arranged married with Diana because she checked all the boxes and Camilla didn’t. Charles and Diana had nothing in common except aristocratic lineage.
I loathed Diana from the beginning, as did many others. She was incredibly popular with women's magazines and tabloid newspapers. Fameous for her dresses and jewels, all bought by the various men in her life.
Charles should have married Camilla from the start. The marriage to Diana, was arranged.
It's been more than 7 decades? It's been exactly 7 decades.
You asked why Diana was popular. I can remember this being discussed at the time, and it seemed (to the public) that Charles had been told to get married pretty sharp, because if he didn't produce an heir, then Andrew would eventually become king - and this was already viewed as horrific.
Diana was thought to be the best-behaved and eligible British-born bride available for Charles - foreign princesses were ruled out because of political implications.
And of course, it was an open secret that Camilla was ineligible because she was married and a Catholic at that time, so Charles would have had to give up his claim to the throne, leading to Andrew becoming Prince of Wales right away. And that would be the end of the monarchy.
Unfortunately, the one person in the country who wasn't aware of this, turned out to be the not-overly-bright Diana, which proved disastrous all round - but at least we don't have to contemplate Andrew as our future King.
Seriously though, would you want to marry someone with so much drama tagging along? Diana didn't have the support that she craves. She knew marrying Charles would be against the grain. She would have to give up a lot of her freedom. The public might love her friendliness and being relatable, but those also can be dangerous to some who can use that as a tool to bring down the monarchy. She had to learn how to navigate those waters. She was 19 and very young when she married Charles. She thought marrying him would be her salvation but instead it was her downfall. She was the first one to invite the media in and once they're in (they weren't before = one has to get the palace approval) they wanted more and they pursued...
Camilla and Charles, they knew each other a decade before so they had history so she knew how to support Charles. Diana would have been around 7y and a child. I think Camilla is better suited to Charles than Diana. They know what to expect of each other's needs and wants.
And thats what you want in a life partner... no drama, support of one another, interest in each other's passion and love to one another.
The opening remarks are completely innacurate - the Coronation ceremony predates the British Empire by almost 1,000 years. Not a great start...
I remember when Camilla was pelted with bread rolls in a Sainsbury’s supermarket car park, which at that point, I felt she deserved it. But now, since she has shown her worth in her duties, I have come to accept her. And I really hope that I’m still around when Prince William and Princess Kate, accede the throne. RIP HLMTQ
I`d go to Westminster today, but alas am not invited. Ah, well ! Westminster is two hours away from where I live and it shall be the same tomorrow as it is today. Only a day older. Having said that, I shall be going into town today, as likely as not, and raising a glass to their Majesties.
I don`t dislike Charles nor Camilla. The man has stepped up, in my opinion, since the death of Queen Elisabeth II.
I once saw that chap, along with his then wife ( Diana, Princess of Wales ) whilst they were on a barge in a Dock in Kingston upon Hull. She was prettier than he was. As to Camilla, I can see why Charles fancied her in the 1970`s. I was a lad and I`d have fancied her in the `70,s. `tis true that we have become accepting of Queen Camilla - not least by being persuaded by Her Late Majesty, such is the affection we in general had for her, that as Charlels should become King Camilla should become Queen.
Andrew Lloyd Webber is a genius in possession of none but himself whilst we should all claim him as one of us.
RIP, your Majesty QE II. Long Live The King.
Actually, if you want a detailed video on the coronation of King Charles, may I suggest watch Vlogging Through History's video of it.
No other ceremony on earth comes close to this. Largely made up of Victorian bells and whistle theatre but with core elements from the old pre reformation Latin high church coronation mass translated to the national language. This then dipped in high church Anglicanism creating a melting pot of mystery. Legitimised by history
Echoing down the ages
in a building used for the same ceremony near enough as in 1066 AD.
unequalled
unrivalled
unsurpassed …..anywhere in the world.
Enough of the two traitors. So glad Harold was positioned behind the Feather!!!!. Done on purpose as only the British can subtly ( Meghan behind the candle at our dear late Queens Windsor service).
MOST FOLKS COULD’NT CARE A TOSS ABOUT HARRY.
Harry hmm i was on The Mall to watch the coronation if i had seen Harry i would have turned around to have my back to him
A King is better than a President.
1. Does US Presidents have a massive religious ceremony? Nope.
2. Does US President represent the people or a political party? A Political party.
3. Does the US President get a crown, sword and bathed in holly oil? Nope.
4. Does the US President learn to be a leader and a diplomatic envoy for over 50 years before taking office? Nope.
5. Does a US President have the ability to declare war and peace? The King does without Parliament or PM permission.
The power the King is a built in safety switch in case the UK get a PM that is a fascist or a communist.
The powers were thoughtful and prepared for extreme situations that we all hope never happens.
the american's really miss the pomp and pagentry hence so many yt vids of them watching it
So, did you actually watch the Coronation?
I have no problem with Camilla... but I've never met her. I do have a problem with her moral compass though. That also applies to her husband and his brother Andrew