Charles, Prince of Wales
As Canada prepares to host the Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall for their Diamond Jubilee visit, the Canadian press is debating the Prince’s merits as a future King. Both the Prince’s admirers and detractors focus almost exclusively on their perception of his character and activities. A recent article on cbc.ca summarized the debate as a question of whether Prince Charles is “A fuddy-duddy who talks to his plants, or a misunderstood visionary whose thoughtful views on everything from architecture to ecology and faith reflect a man whose values are important to Canadians?”
Canadians skeptical of Prince Charles cite a broad range of reasons including his role in the breakdown of his first marriage to the late Diana, Princess of Wales, the perceived eccentricity of his opinions, his willingness to share these opinions with the public, and the comparative popularity of his son and daughter-in-law, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.
Portrait of the nineteen year old Queen Victoria on her coronation day in 1838.
There is an enormous difference between how most British monarchs were perceived at the time of their ascensions and the time of their deaths. Every King or Queen in the past couple centuries has faced some degree of public skepticism when he or she became the reigning monarch. Observers of Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth II questioned whether the august duties of Head of State could be successfully discharged by a young woman. When Queen Victoria was crowned in 1838, at the age of nineteen, the author Thomas Carlyle remarked, “Poor little Queen! She is at an age at which a girl can hardly be trusted to choose a bonnet for herself, yet a task is laid upon her from which an archangel might shrink.”
Edward VII at his coronation in 1902
Since Queen Victoria reigned for sixty-three years, it was difficult for her subjects to imagine her eldest son, Albert Edward, as King after her death in 1901. Like Prince Charles, Albert Edward’s reputation was the subject of popular debate during his long tenure as Prince of Wales. His admirers praised his sociability and good intentions while his detractors noted his gambling, womanizing, and testimony in two separate divorce cases. As King Edward VII, Albert Edward gained widespread admiration as a diplomat and peacemaker in foreign affairs, far exceeding the mixed expectations he faced when he ascended the throne.
Both George V and George VI were second sons who had been educated for the navy instead of kingship. Like Edward VII, they both exceeded comparatively low popular expectations to become respected sovereigns. When George V died in 1936, the public viewed him as the model of domestic respectability, but his first act as King in 1910 had been to initiate legal proceedings against a journalist who accused him of bigamy with both Queen Mary and an admiral’s daughter. King George noted in his diary, “The whole story is a damnable lie and has been in existence now for over twenty years. I trust that this will settle it once and for all.” The journalist was sentenced to twelve months in jail for criminal libel. As dramatized in The King’s Speech, George VI overcame his difficulties with public speaking to become an effective leader during the Second World War.
The precedents set by past monarchs suggest that popular critiques of Prince Charles in the media do not capture his potential as the future King. His immediate predecessors all overcame the skepticism they faced as royal heirs to become successful and popular monarchs.
When the BBC filmed the documentary 
The influence of powerful royal mothers on their daughters and granddaughters in the key theme in the works of popular historian Julia Gelardi. 
The difficulties experienced by Catherine, Marie Antoinette and the younger Victoria demonstrated that the lessons learned from their powerful mothers were not always effective at a foreign court. Gelardi provides an excellent introduction to some of the most famous royal women of the sixteenth, eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Her other works, 
One of the most powerful mother figures to preside over the English court was Margaret Beaufort “My Lady, the King’s Mother” to Henry VII, the subject of Elizabeth Norton’s well written and well researched biography, 
One of the best scholarly works on the relationships between ruling and non-ruling royal women in the sixteenth century is Sharon Jansen’s 
For an introduction to the powerful Queens of England in the Middle Ages, two excellent choices are Lisa Hilton’s 
When the Elector of Hanover succeeded to the British throne as King George I in 1714, he was not accompanied by a Queen but by two women whom the English public presumed to be his mistresses. Sophia Charlotte von Platen and Melusine von der Shulenburg were cruelly dubbed “The Elephant” and “The Maypole” because of their physiques while the King’s former wife, Sophia Dorothea of Celle, was pitied for her long imprisonment in spite of her known adultery.
Although eighteenth century women were expected to be faithful to their husbands, whose lives were not governed by the same constraints, observers throughout Europe judged Sophia Dorothea to be the innocent party because George had “preferred two hideous mistresses to a beautiful, innocent wife.” In 
The reconstruction of Melusine’s life was a difficult task for the author. Although the eighteenth century was a golden age of correspondence among European elites, George and Melusine never wrote personal letters to each other, leaving Gold to speculate about key aspects of the relationship. Noblewomen such as Melusine were expected to make strategic marriages rather than accept the socially inferior position of mistress. Gold speculates that Melusine may have fallen in love with the young, married Elector, suggesting that his character was closer to the sympathetic portrayal by his recent biographer Ragnhild Hatton in 
Despite the absence of key sources, Gold successfully reconstructs Melusine’s significance to George’s life and reign. Since the majority of the book covers the period after George ascended to the throne, Melusine’s significance to British politics and culture is particularly well analyzed. In contrast to George, Melusine spoke fluent English and became a mediator between the King and his ministers, developing a particularly successful working relationship with Prime Minister Horace Walpole. Melusine had less success to her attempts to act as peacemaker within George I’s fractious family. The future George II never forgave his father for the imprisonment of his mother and quarreled repeatedly with George I until his own ascension to the throne.
Melusine shared George I’s interest in Italian opera and the music of George Frederic Handel and the couple had a profound influence on English high culture in the early eighteenth century. Handel’s Water Music was written for George’s and Melusine’s journeys on the Thames and had the added benefit of drowning out scurrilous remarks made by the river’s “foul mouthed boatmen.” George I’s ascension to the British throne had been highly controversial because there was widespread support for the legitimacy of James Edward Stuart “The Old Pretender.” Attacks on Melusine “the Maypole” were an effective way for Jacobites to attack Hanoverian rule over the British Isles, particularly as she became involved in the South Sea Bubble, and developed a reputation for corruption.
In the ITV/PBS series 
Prior to the First World War, the Earl and Countess of Grantham schedule their year according to the timing of the London season, which includes the presentation of debutantes to the King and Queen. The couple’s youngest daughter, Lady Sybil is eligible to be presented during the 1914 season, a circumstance complicated by her political activism. When Sybil expresses an interest in canvassing for politicians who share her enthusiasm for women’s suffrage, her grandmother, the Dowager Countess, is quick to note that she will soon be presented at court.
Queen Mary’s well known disapproval of the more militant tactics employed by suffragists undoubtedly informs the Dowager Countess’s incisive obervation that one cannot be arrested in riot in May then presented in June. When Emily Davison threw herself in front of King George V’s horse at the 1913 Epsom Derby, the Queen commisserated with the jockey, describing Davison’s death as a ““sad accident caused through the abominable conduct of a brutal lunatic woman.” Sybil’s political activism not only jeopardizes her safety but has the potential to invite royal disapproval.
The influence of the royal example on the Dowager Countess’s conceptions of appropriate behaviour are confirmed in the second season when Sybil expresses an interest in becoming a wartime nurse. The aristocratic Dowager Countess and the middle class Mrs. Crawley experience a rare moment of agreement when they support Sybil’s decision to join the war effort. While Mrs. Crawley’s support is inspired by broader ideals of public service, the Dowager Countess observes, “You cannot pretend it is not respectable. Every day we are treated to pictures of Queens and Princesses in Red Cross uniform.” The leadership roles played by royal women in the First World War created opportunities for women of the aristocracy to adopt new roles and the Dowager Countess’s support for Sybil’s nursing reflects this changing worldview.