Prince Charles and Camilla Shand started their relationship in 1970, when Charles went overseas for military duties in 1972 he told Camilla not to wait for him, in 1973 she was married to Andrew Parker Bowles, what if Charles had asked her to wait for him, and they'd been married in the early 1970s?
Charles tells Camilla to wait for him
- Thread starter black angel
- Start date
The royal family would, on the whole, be regarded as less notorious but more boring. Not only because Diana wouldn't be famous, but also because Charles & Camilla's kids would probably be more ugly -- a lot of William's good reputation is to do with him having been regarded as sexy.
Slightly OT ... someone needs to develop a program that would enable us to create photos of ATL people by merging the physical features of 2 people, such as Charles & Camilla.
I think there's a "what would your baby look like" program out there.
people tend to forget that Charles wasn't all that ugly as a young man, and William is now slowly turning into his father 
Yes, but I don't want to create baby pictures, I wish to generate images of ATL adults.
While Charles might be less interesting he might be more popular or at lest never spends 10 years on the shit list after Diana's death we might see a bigger family for Charles, maybe if his first child is a girl (why not Elizabeth?) we see the law changed so she can be Queen over any brothers
He was always sort of gawky. William was more conventionally handsome, the sort of looks that'd make teenage monarchists throw their panties at him, crying out "Oh, my Prince Charming!" and swooning.people tend to forget that Charles wasn't all that ugly as a young man, and William is now slowly turning into his father
And William is not turning into Charles! Charles has more hair.
Based on that picture I'd say that William (baldness pasttern wise at least) is becoming his Uncle Edward.
I've see pictures where he's got the whole Charles/Duke of Kent grin of death, the years are NOT going to be nice to William
Paul V McNutt
Banned
Diana would be unknown. She would have continued working in a preschool until she married.
Aye.
She'll be just another aristocratic housewife. She got one O-Level in Home Economics I believe - so I'm doubting her chances for meritocratic related success. Without royal backing pure charisma and charm doesn't tend to get you anywhere.
The next gen of Royals will be less photogenic and have less sympathy due to no dead demigodess syndrome - bar that if they're half human they'll get similar treatment. Only obvious positive would be less "he looks like his father" jokes about the (apparently) illegitimate Harry.
why would the law of succession change if Charles and Camilla had had a daughter first???? No sense there at all. Anyway I think that if he had wed Camilla he would have been a whole lot happier and the Royals wouldn't have had any of those blips in popularity or all that silliness from a big chunk of the UK's population with Diana's death. Diana herself would probably be what she always was-a slightly vapid, sloane range airhead.
(oh and no I'm not called Nick Soames)
(oh and no I'm not called Nick Soames)
Actually, I find this Camilla-unrelated, but simply because this is the 21st century now. Actually, I can imagine this might be the case just as well if OTL-Prince William would have been born as a Wilhelmina.
Yes, very probable. And guess what, without the whole OTL-story, Camilla, Princess of Wales, might actually be a popular figure.
so what if its the 21st century? What does that matter? The 19th century was the modern age for people back then -just because its another century on means nothing at all-purely immaterial. Anyway its possible that the laws of succession will be changed in the next ten years.
Any children resulting from Charles and Camilla would be well into their mid and late 30s, so perfectly feasible that Chuck is already a grandfather several times over and the worlds screeching girls have one of his grandsons as their pinup rather than Master Bieber (or whoever the current spotty flavour of the month yowth is).
Camilla is quite poplar although again I find this irrelevant. It should be entirely immaterial whether the Royal Family is popular as their role is first and foremost that of our consititutional head of State and Defenders of The Faith. Anything after that is pure gloss. As far as I am concerned Diana was pure poison for the Royal Family and for the UK nation especially with all that sentimentality we need more of the Duke of Edinburgh's sense of duty and straightforwardness.
Any children resulting from Charles and Camilla would be well into their mid and late 30s, so perfectly feasible that Chuck is already a grandfather several times over and the worlds screeching girls have one of his grandsons as their pinup rather than Master Bieber (or whoever the current spotty flavour of the month yowth is).
Camilla is quite poplar although again I find this irrelevant. It should be entirely immaterial whether the Royal Family is popular as their role is first and foremost that of our consititutional head of State and Defenders of The Faith. Anything after that is pure gloss. As far as I am concerned Diana was pure poison for the Royal Family and for the UK nation especially with all that sentimentality we need more of the Duke of Edinburgh's sense of duty and straightforwardness.