Andrew & Sarah: Marriage, Divorce and Divorce Settlement

[expat]

Your thoughts and insight are very much appreciated Alex as well as being very informative, thank you.

 

[Meadow]

Thankyou for that Diarist. I think the same way as you. I think if Andrew hadn't been a Prince she wouldn't have bothered. But I still wonder what Andrew saw and why he didn't see what others like Paddy McNally seemed to see. Pity you can't see the video because Sarah's whole attitude shifts and her demeaner changes. You can't see that in the chat transcript but it wasn't a pretty sight. I am wondering what will happen if her book fails to sell a lot of copies. I had read it wasn't doing well in the States and I doubt it will do well here in Oz. I hope she hasn't already spent that money in advance because she may not be getting what she thinks she will. I did wonder how Sarah's camp came up with the money figure she earns a year it makes her not being able to live within her means even worse. I had read that David, Beatrices boyfriend had in fact already helped Sarah out financially which in the end may come back to bite him. Sarah seems to have no problem asking others for expensive vacations etc I wonder what she has to give in return. This is something that can't go on Sarah is so unpopular and still living the jetset life which she seems to have gotten confused with the Royal life. I don't think it is a surprise to Andrew he got pictured frolicking he seems to have been able to have plenty of holidays without being snapped so I am always suspicious when suddenly he shows himself in such a way. I think like you it is possible it is a message to Sarah and to others that there is no dating type relationship between him and Sarah. Just parents raising their kids. Not that I don't think Sarah wouldn't marry Andrew again in a minute I think she would. Things have changed in the family, she sees other wives taking more a backseat to things but still living in a grand style I think that is what she would love to do again. I'm basing this on what she said in the interview about her longing for that life again. I do think she knows she has blown it for sure now. Do you know if her book is being released in the UK? That could be her next round of interviews hopefully they won't be as soft like you I found 60 minutes to be tame but then when he tried to ask the hard question she walked out!

 

[NotAPretender]

If I remember correctly Sarah wanted to live on the base and be a navy wife but the security was against the idea so she was forced into the isolation of BP without the support network of the other wives whose husbands were serving with Andrew.

bertie, I think we only have Sarah's word for that. I would think it odd that the Queen would have denied Sarah the same joy of being with her military husband in his assignment, in the way that the Queen herself had that pleasure. With Sarah's endless rewrite of history, I think I am calling that into question.

 

[Diarist]

Thankyou for that Diarist. I think the same way as you. I think if Andrew hadn't been a Prince she wouldn't have bothered. But I still wonder what Andrew saw and why he didn't see what others like Paddy McNally seemed to see.

Meadow, I have met Andrew on several occasions [actually, now I start to count them up, quite a few over the past 30 years or so] and whilst I salute him for both serving in the Royal Navy and also for seeing action in the Falklands during such service, I have to say that, if I may do so without causing offence, I would not rate him as particularly bright. Whilst in the Navy he had other officers and naval ratings to 'guide' and 'think for him' and when undertaking Royal Duties, he had the services of well-educated and clever staff.

Without his staff etc at his best I would rate Andrew as affable and well-meaning, but I would not rate him as particularly astute [as I think has been apparent throughout much of his Royal Career, from such misjudged antics as spraying photographers with paint right through to the reports I have read about the Jerry Epstein controversy and his other less than stellar successes as the UK trade representative.

Multi-millionaire tax exile Paddy McNally I rate as a very astute man. He has cannily built up a fortune through his involvement with the commercial side of Grand Prix [auto] racing. Since his wife died, McNally has astutely avoided matrimony [no marriage = no divorce = no payment of a financial settlement if it all breaks down!!].

We've heard endlessly from Sarah in interviews etc etc but from memory, the Duke of York has mostly confined his public utterances to occasions during his Royal duties etc. Had he spoken often on a personal level, I think that he would soon have shown that intellectually, he is no great shakes!!!

Insofar as it is appropriate for me to mention this here, I have always been of the opinion that the union of the Yorks took place because Andrew was ready to settle down and Sarah [every adept at flattery etc, to which Andrew always struck me as very susceptible] knew how to tease and cajole him. Her sense of humour was similar to his [rather low brow, emphasis on dirty jokes and food throwing etc]. The Queen, I think, gave her blessing, as Sarah was one of the few girls who met [at least superficially] her criteria of someone who was well-versed in royal ways, was from a 'Courtier' background,was a girl with a love of horses and no eating disorders, who also seemed to love Andrew [put what I have said in context: at that time, behind the scenes, the BRF were coping with the near-breakdown of the marriage of Charles and Diana, the latter also suffering from an eating disorder etc etc]. And Sarah of course did know Diana and I am sure that the Queen hoped that Sarah's prescence in the BRF would also prove something of a comfort to Diana]. Sarah was, as someone posted here, also 'sexually experienced' and it is true that 25 years ago, NOT every girl of 'good family' [particularly if they had not been to College] was. I am sure that Andrew must have found it refreshing to meet up with a girl who was rather, er, ''uninhibited....''. Yet, so far as the Queen was concerned, Sarah's previous lovers could be relied on to behave with discretion. And the Queen was right in this respect - there have been no 'kiss and tells' from Paddy McNally or Kim Smith-Bingham.


Only my thoughts,

Alex

 

[Aliza]

The interview that they did prior to the wedding came across to me of two people who very much wanted to live on the base or for her to live there when he was away - my understanding is that that is what they both wanted.

Iluvbertie, I remember this exactly as you do. Not only on the basis of the pre-wedding interview, but also from Sarah's first book of memoirs and the interviews she did to promote the same.

She stated bluntly that she had practically begged the Queen and the DoE for permission to live on base with Andrew, but this was denied due to the security cost and other factors (which I don't believe she mentions in specificity). She directly quotes the DoE as saying, "The Mountbattens managed, so can you". I don't believe Sarah would have quoted HM's husband verbatim in print if this were not precisely what HRH did say on the subject. Furthermore, she then complained that Andrew accepted this decision too readily from her viewpoint and used it as "another" example of Andrew not "fighting the 'grey men' " in her cause.

It is so easy today, when all her conversations with the media emphasise her love and respect for the DoY - to forget how down she was on Andrew for quite a long while. I remember Sarah even castigating his use of certain expressions as "just not on"; to use her examples, he supposedly said "mirror" instead of "looking glass", "lunch" instead of "luncheon", "toilet" as opposed to "lavatory", etc. (I was amused that the daughter of the PoW's polo manager considered her English to be above that of the Sovereign's second son, and wondered at the time if she had been reading old books from the eldest Mitford sister. )

In response to Diarist I can only say that I was at one large private function attended by the DoY and had he been anyone but a member of the Royal Family, his behaviour would have been called flat-out boorish. Andrew seemed a nice enough man, but I agree with Diarist's perceptions, completely. He is not overly intelligent and even his manners don't come up to the usual BRF standard, to say the least. That said, his behaviour during Sarah's interactions with the media has been nothing short of impeccably discreet and his championship of the mother of his daughters is nothing short of commendable to the extreme. I do find his reference to her as "his third child" quite telling, though... Nevertheless, I think his treatment of his daughters' mother has shown him to be a true gentleman and an amazing father. I personally believe this behaviour has been for Beatrice and Eugenie's sakes and not too much more should be read into it.

IMHO, it must have contributed enormously to his daughters' sense of love and security during their childhood and adolescent periods and his unselfishness in this regard goes too often unnoticed in the British tabloids, so far as I can see. I don't detect the yearning for the past in Andrew that Sarah keeps putting on display every time she is in front of a journalist of any type. It's just too bad that her continued attraction to the media has made any attempts for him to move on with his life rather difficult. He's never had a chance to "close the door" on the past with Sarah, and it is next to impossible to move on to a new and healthy permanent relationship until this former marriage is completely consigned to the past. I feel quite sorry for Andrew, though I recognise he has had choices in this matter, too. I just think his choices have been more for his daughters than for their mother and I think Sarah misinterprets this as support for her in a romantic way rather than support for his parenting partner.

 

[Diarist]

Mindful of Zonk's plea to keep discussions in their proper threads, I've done a cut and paste from the other thread Osipi so that I can answer your question about titles, as this relates to Sarah's post-divorce title and is therefore more properly discussed on her 'Divorce' thread. I hope therefore that you will forgive me for doing some snipping.

I also didn't realize that the proper title was Madam. I actually thought that ahem... them kinds of Madam were called that these days. Shows what I know. The more I've been thinking about Sarah's title is that perhaps The Duchess in our common ordinary language is used is because until Andrew remarries, she is the only one with the title? We all mess up on the "proper" usages. Even as a married woman, I cringe when my name isn't used in an address. Mrs. John Smith gives me the shivers. Its the changing times. I do however see Sarah using The Duchess of York as a way of acclaiming importance that she really has no right to. It is that usage that tells me that she needs to let go and find something that can be connected to her, that she can claim as her own. She has it but hasn't really done much to use it. ?

You make an interesting point here with regard to usage Osipi; in my present work, I do quite a bit of checking of official documents and formal letters and I am forever finding incorrect usage when it comes to former wives of Peers [i.e. who before their marriages were only styled as 'Miss' or 'Mrs' (if they were divorcees who then went on to marry a Peer!)]: There is an incorrect assumption, particularly on the part of official bodies [HM Revenue and Customs (the UK version of your IRS), The Department of Work and Pensions etc] and even our better UK newspapers, that the former wife of the peer is still entitled to call herself 'The Duchess of X', 'The Marchioness of X' and that this entitlement continues until the Duke of X, / The Marquess of X remarries.

This assumption is completely wrong - as soon as the Divorce is pronounced, the former spouse has to refer to herself as (say) Annabel, Duchess of Blankshire.

What I do think is true is that if the Duke of York HAD remarried, and particularly if he had re-married reasonably quickly, it really would have made Sarah's misusage of the title look very wrong indeed: people would soon have realised that you can't have TWO 'Duchesses of York'.

On a side note and kind of an amusing thought to me is that on the subject of Sarah being called the Duchess of York, perhaps in her own private moments, she's cackling and saying "fix THAT you ornery men in grey!"
She never really did like them did she?

Like many off the cuff remarks and jokes, your observation is actually quite pertinent Osipi. You have suddenly reminded me of an incident that took place involving my (former) boss when I was working full time and which leads me to believe that the 'Grey Men' have been unahappy for some years as to Sarah's manner of using her (former) style and title:

It was after Sarah and Andrew had divorced and Sarah had started out on her lucrative (as it initially was) career of 'selling' herself on the basis of her royal connections. The eagle-eyed among you may remember that I have mentioned my boss serveral times before on other threads - he was (still is come to that) a very 'correct' gentleman, devoted to Queen and Country, had served in the Army and in many respects rather strict, but he was never unkind or unfair. He was drawn (as were many civil servants at that time) from a public school [which is actually a private school] background and was very formal and for the 1990's seemed rather old fashioned.......in short he - and his colleagues - was from exactly the same background as 'The Grey Men' and in fact so much so that it was not unknown for some such people to actually move to the Palace to work. Anyway, one day, one of the secretaries came back from her vacation to Clearwater in Florida. Whilst there, she had seen an interesting [certainly interesting for the Department where I was working at the time] newspaper headline and she had cut the offending article out to bring home to England. And she showed it to my boss and he went 'ballistic' as the saying goes [i.e. very angry]. And what was this offending headline? Well, it was quite simply this: 'Royalty Visits'. This seems harmless enough....until I tell you that the article actually related a visit by Sarah, Duchess of York to Burdines Department Store, where she proceeded to dispense dining advice relating to the use of 'Fine China and Crystal'. In short, Sarah was fulfilling a commercial engagement in her capacity as 'ambassador' for the china and crystal companies. The thought of a commercial contract being confused with a Royal engagement sent my boss almost apoplectic!!! What was particularly troubling was the tone of the article, which read like a report of a royal engagement, with Sarah being received as if she was (still) Royal, and being conducted to China department as if she was still a member of the Royal Family...

Although I was of course not privy to any convesations that then took place, I understand that the offending article was referred to BP!

And then it does get quite interesting. 10 days later, my boss said that he was certain that 'no one' had envisaged that Sarah would have started a worldwide career of peddling her royal connections. I did not press him to go into any detail about who 'no one' was!!! [Grey men at BP I wonder?]

Some months later, I was talking to a friend at Guards Polo Club, and he told me that he understood there was now a general feeling at BP that it had in fact 'been a mistake' not to regulate Sarah's commercial activities. Apparently, although Sarah had NOT be subject to a confidentiality clause [gagging agreement] on her divorce, and it was accepted that she was going to [and was allowed to] write her autobiography, BP thought that she would then quietly disappear from view. This was apparently on the basis that as Sarah had been somewhat lazy when it came to completing Royal Engagements [she had often complained about their frequency and duration when a 'working royal' and this also applied even if she was on 'home territory' such as a State Banquet at BP] she would, now that her divorce had released her from the necessity of 'turning out and performing' then welcome the opportunity of doing nothing...... Apparently the Queen [and particularly Prince Philip] were dismayed about the way things were turning out..........Whether this is completely accurate or just speculation or even wishful thinking, I cannot say (although I know my friend would not have said anything UNTRUE to me,) but for my own part, it has the very definite ring of truth about it.

In the light of these statements, my own opinion is that if the Queen and her advisors had had the benefit of foresight that not only would Sarah's commecial activities would have been pretty severely regulated in the Divorce Agreement but that more serious consideration would have been given to the fact that she retained the right to call herself even the correct 'Sarah, Duchess of York'. I suppose to some people - particularly non-royal experts in the United States, it would seem that there was no harm in Sarah building a career which was in effect selling her 'royal connections'. However, it has always been a sacrosanct tenet of Royal duties that members of the Royal family do NOT charge for engagements and that people should not have to 'pay for access' to members of the Royal Family [although paying for attendance at a Charity event where a member of the Royal Family IS permitted, because of the 'good cause' element that is being supported by the royal visit]

Although it would be difficult for Sarah to lose the right to call herself 'Sarah, Duchess of York', because there is a legal right for her to do so, in practice I believe that this could be achieved by drawing up a formal agreement whereby in return for some form of consideration [e.g. a payment of money or the provision of accommodation or, come to that, as a condition in being allowed to remain in Royal Lodge] Sarah agrees to give up calling herself Sarah, Duchess of York.

Hope this is of some interest

Alex

 

[Meadow]

Thank you for that Diarist that is off great interest. It seems Sarah worked out things pretty well for herself. It may now be too late to do anything about her name it has been so long. The name seems to have done all it can for Sarah now. People have realised she isn't as close to the family and her access is very limited. I can imagine the Queen and DofE being so upset the title means a lot to the Queen and to see it used in such a way must have been upsetting. Sarah claims respect for the Queen yet shows so little when money becomes involved. I think everyone thought she would go quietly no one expected her to become so attached to fame and the need for attention.

 

[AristoCat]

I've been rereading Sarah's "My Story," and she tells in there about having a job, paying for renting a room and not being able to pay her parking tickets and wearing skirts that a friend of hers discarded. She admits that she spent her income on jazz clubs and restaurants. So this inability to budget was there before she ever got involved with Andrew. She was also receiving an allowance from her father at the time.

I read the book "The Queen and Di" and it described how Sarah was always the poor relation among her friends. I don't know why renting a room and having a job is somehow a deprivation, but I think wearing discarded clothes of friends might likely have left an imprint on her psyche. She reminds me of Jackie O., who grew up financially insecure and ended up constantly believing that there was never enough. As if she would never be secure.

The marriage settlement was more than generous and she made so much more out of her various business ventures. I do not know how she will be able to kick the insecurity. Out of all of that has happened, I admire how she has never really behaved as if her entire life has been some martyrdom. She clearly enjoyed the parties and balls and reception and jewels and gowns, enjoyed socializing. I suppose that in the royal marriage with Andrew though, she felt socially superior because she was more English and far more related to various Stuarts.

It's disconcerting that she would feel that way, but she does; she perhaps feels that since she has the social superiority, that she should live better and that the Windsors should be grateful that she married in and added more English blood to the Windsor lineage. It's been the 'fatal flaw' and Diana was the same. She is more than anything else going to continue around her ruinous path and self destruct in other relationships if she doesn't let that part of her psyche go.

I can imagine the Queen and DofE being so upset the title means a lot to the Queen and to see it used in such a way must have been upsetting.

I think Prince Philip is the one man who has kept HM from being taken advantage of by Sarah. I can't imagine just how much Philip might loathe her if she's banished to an estate during hte holidays instead of with the rest of the RF. The title "Duchess of York" is quite frankly now trivialized and I don't see how on earth it will be restored to it's former prestige and dignity while Sarah is still running around using it. Andrew was remarkable in that he let her still live in Royal Lodge and then of course, still stand by her publicly.

What I do think is true is that if the Duke of York HAD remarried, and particularly if he had re-married reasonably quickly, it really would have made Sarah's misusage of the title look very wrong indeed: people would soon have realised that you can't have TWO 'Duchesses of York'.

I think if Andrew were to get serious and remarry now, the press would either mock her (Sarah), or disgard her for the new Duchess. The problem is that Andrew has not remarried and Sarah now strikes me as the type that cannot end up coping if there is a new woman in Andrew's life. She would look more like a joke than she is already and there is no chance that she would make as much money. Plus, a new Duchess of York would make free appearances and speeches and wouldn't charge a dime for them, which would make Sarah all the more expendable to charities and other organizations that require a high, prominent profile.

We've heard endlessly from Sarah in interviews etc etc but from memory, the Duke of York has mostly confined his public utterances to occasions during his Royal duties etc. Had he spoken often on a personal level, I think that he would soon have shown that intellectually, he is no great shakes!!!

Andrew has always been self restrained when it comes to Sarah and what could he say that would be effective if he overtly criticized the mother of his daughters? That would publicly put his daughters in the middle of a conflict and I have no idea on how it would stop if things escalated. No point in messing with Sarah at this point and possibly creating a public relations nightmare. He strikes me as an affable, low strung fellow who likes the simpler things in life and there to me would be no real benefit of him getting his hands dirty.

I don't detect the yearning for the past in Andrew that Sarah keeps putting on display every time she is in front of a journalist of any type.

Quite frankly I don't see how he would have a peaceful life if in fact he remarried her. He looks content with his life and content that he is a divorcee. She has nothing to recommend her back into the royal fold and a remarriage brings no benefit to him personally. He has a lot more freedom and domestic stability, plus there isn't a constant conflict with lifestyle choices/routines.

I don't think it is a surprise to Andrew he got pictured frolicking he seems to have been able to have plenty of holidays without being snapped so I am always suspicious when suddenly he shows himself in such a way.

Certainly he has always been discreet and he is likely sending a clear message to the public and Sarah that he is uninterested in married life with anyone. He has his own title, income, place to live, and freedom to do what he pleases. Sarah rightly still has the legal right to use the title, but to be frank she has that aspect of her title so wrapped up in her own identity and sense of self, that I don't think that she would be undamaged if she did have it yanked. Better to let her keep it and then if Andrew moves on, let her be quietly nudged out. Better than traumatizing her by taking the rest of the title away. She doens't have an HRH, which keeps that part of the title for Andrew's new wife if he remarries.

 

[NGalitzine]

" I suppose that in the royal marriage with Andrew though, she felt socially superior because she was more English and far more related to various Stuarts.

Socially superior to whom? The House of Windsor? Sarah would have to be really delusional to imagine that a Ferguson was socially superior to the BRF. As for her descent from Charles II, that was through one of his many bastards and is shared by many families, aristocratic and otherwise. I recall some talboids making stupid comments about Diana being more royal than the her husband because of her Stuart descent but that was just stupid tabloid talk.

 

[camelot23ca]

I read the book "The Queen and Di" and it described how Sarah was always the poor relation among her friends. I don't know why renting a room and having a job is somehow a deprivation, but I think wearing discarded clothes of friends might likely have left an imprint on her psyche. She reminds me of Jackie O., who grew up financially insecure and ended up constantly believing that there was never enough. As if she would never be secure.

I think Sarah is way past the "blame my parents for my problems" stage but I do have to wonder how much she was actually taught growing up about finances, budgeting and money in general. Some lucky people have a natural talent for managing their money but, for most people, it's a skill that needs to be developed and practiced over time.

Based on Sarah's adult life prior to marrying Andrew it doesn't seem like her parents had any expectation that she might one day have to contribute to her own financial support. If their primary expectation was that Sarah marry a nice boy from the right sort of family then I wouldn't find it hard to believe that no one ever bothered to teach her even the very basics with regard to money, (for example the fact that ideally you earn more than you spend).

 

[Osipi]

Based on Sarah's adult life prior to marrying Andrew it doesn't seem like her parents had any expectation that she might one day have to contribute to her own financial support. If their primary expectation was that Sarah marry a nice boy from the right sort of family then I wouldn't find it hard to believe that no one ever bothered to teach her even the very basics with regard to money, (for example the fact that ideally you earn more than you spend).

You bring up some very interesting points I think. I think what we could do is put it into a generational aspect and perhaps it would make more sense. As I grew up and was educated not that many years before Sarah did, I can kind of give some input into this. Its true that Sarah grew up in a class of society a bit above how I would classify my upbringing although I did attend private schools (US), I would think that our parent's mindsets would be very much similar. That, and the fact that a woman would still attend a "finishing school" give us some clues.

Mothers raising daughters during that era were still, for the majority, stay at home moms who never entered the work force unless it was a necessity for survival. Although the idea of finishing school was not in our vocabulary, girls took "Home Ec" (cooking, sewing, grocery shopping and budgeting an allowance were the rote), whereas boys took "shop" classes. If I had a dime for every time my mother assessed a groom at a wedding by saying "He makes good money", I'd be vacationing on Nekker Island for sure! (of course I always wondered too what money *wasn't* good. Sheesh). When we look at this social economic climate, a woman didn't need to know high finances. She had a husband for that. Divorce during that time also was still spoken of in a whisper and in Hollywood gossip columns. Then so many things changed practically overnight in the 60s and 70s.

By the time my children were in their teenage years, divorce was a common thing and I remember reading and being surprised that only 16% of women were actually stay at home moms. With my own "nice boy that made good money" out of the picture, I can honestly say that, like Sarah, I had no idea how to manage money either! Necessity and common sense are good teachers though.

So in the long run perhaps Sarah didn't/doesn't have a clue about money and finances but I would think that she cannot use this as an excuse. One may not have the foggiest idea of how to use a fire extinguisher but when the house is on fire, you learn how to use one really quick. You learn what happened that started the fire and learn from that mistake. To set a fire again by making the same mistakes and still not know how to use the extinguisher is sheer stupidity.

 

[Diarist]

We've heard endlessly from Sarah in interviews etc etc but from memory, the Duke of York has mostly confined his public utterances to occasions during his Royal duties etc. Had he spoken often on a personal level, I think that he would soon have shown that intellectually, he is no great shakes!!!

In the light of AristoCat's comments, could I apologise for not making it clearer in what I wrote above - I was talking generally about [my assessement] of] the Duke of York's capabilities, and did not mean my comments to be taken as a comment on his failure to talk about Sarah.

I was trying to make the point that, in my humble opinion, Andrew is no great intellectual - when I have met him, he struck me as affable and well-meaning but not more than very averagely clever. I was also trying to say that as his public utterances on Royal engagements are confined to what is in in effect 'small talk', people generally would not appreciate that he's not particularly bright. By way of example, when I was presented to the Duke of Gloucester, the fact that he had had a Cambridge education was very apparent - he struck me as a 'quite a deep thinker'; I don't think anyone meeting the Duke of York would be left with the same impression!

For the record, I would not expect or want the Duke of York to mention Sarah in public. We know all about what Sarah thinks about almost everything and everyone, but we have never heard Andrew's views on what Sarah says, which I think is entirely right and proper and reflects well on Andrew, who I think handles himself well and with great dignity.

Thanks for letting me put this right

Alex

 

[Osipi]

In the light of AristoCat's comments, could I apologise for not making it clearer in what I wrote above - I was talking generally about [my assessement] of] the Duke of York's capabilities, and did not mean my comments to be taken as a comment on his failure to talk about Sarah.

Reading over what you posted Alex, the point which you were trying to make is actually the one that came through clear to me. Andrew always came across to me as a person that would rather sit and watch a video whereas I could picture his brother Charles preferring to read a book. Its just different natures. Andrew also has been wise I think too to keep his private life totally to himself. I do think that if he did comment on things that Sarah does and says, it would only add fuel to the fire. His approach is more "ignore it and hopefully it will go away". The one comment he did make about Sarah being his "third child" has been hashed and rehashed and served up more than a big pot of pea soup.

 

[Diarist]

You bring up some very interesting points I think. I think what we could do is put it into a generational aspect and perhaps it would make more sense. As I grew up and was educated not that many years before Sarah did, I can kind of give some input into this. Its true that Sarah grew up in a class of society a bit above how I would classify my upbringing although I did attend private schools (US), I would think that our parent's mindsets would be very much similar. That, and the fact that a woman would still attend a "finishing school" give us some clues.

Mothers raising daughters during that era were still, for the majority, stay at home moms who never entered the work force unless it was a necessity for survival. Although the idea of finishing school was not in our vocabulary, girls took "Home Ec" (cooking, sewing, grocery shopping and budgeting an allowance were the rote), whereas boys took "shop" classes. If I had a dime for every time my mother assessed a groom at a wedding by saying "He makes good money", I'd be vacationing on Nekker Island for sure! (of course I always wondered too what money *wasn't* good. Sheesh). When we look at this social economic climate, a woman didn't need to know high finances. She had a husband for that. Divorce during that time also was still spoken of in a whisper and in Hollywood gossip columns. Then so many things changed practically overnight in the 60s and 70s.

By the time my children were in their teenage years, divorce was a common thing and I remember reading and being surprised that only 16% of women were actually stay at home moms. With my own "nice boy that made good money" out of the picture, I can honestly say that, like Sarah, I had no idea how to manage money either! Necessity and common sense are good teachers though.

So in the long run perhaps Sarah didn't/doesn't have a clue about money and finances but I would think that she cannot use this as an excuse. One may not have the foggiest idea of how to use a fire extinguisher but when the house is on fire, you learn how to use one really quick. You learn what happened that started the fire and learn from that mistake. To set a fire again by making the same mistakes and still not know how to use the extinguisher is sheer stupidity.

Much of what you say is so true about the way that the upper-classs English educate their DAUGHTERS Osipi, and it does contrast greatly with the way that they educate their sons:

By way of example, look no further than the Spencers! Charles [present Earl] went to Eton and Oxford. Diana however went to the academically undemanding West Heath school [known for the education of 'genteel young ladies'] and then for the 'ski-ing' term at The Institut Alpin, Videmanette. Most West Heath girls emerged with few academic qualifications, although some did do a bit better. The English secondary school education system at the time of Diana and Sarah was directed to achieving two levels of qualification: 'Ordinary' ['O'] Levels, which was a multi-subject examination taken at aged 16 and then the so-called 'Advanced' ['A'Levels] in three or sometimes 4 subjects, which [provided you had a 'decent crop' of O levels] qualified you for University.

Diana famously did not get a SINGLE 'O' level, sitting the examination twice and failing it twice! She then rushed off to the Intitut Alpin , which was a finishing school pure and simple! Indeed, her only 'academic qualification' was a certificate for taking care of her guinea pig! I have even heard American commentators once describe Diana as a 'high school drop out'! Sarah fared a little better academically, as she got 6 O Levels [including English, Geography, Art and Biology from memory] although she failed Math and did not go on to take A levels and so was not qualified for University.

Both Diana's and Sarah's parents seemed fairly relaxed about their respective daughter's lack of academic qualifications. By contrast, although my social background was, I suppose, not that different from Sarah's, as I was lucky enough to be sent to expensive private schools, my parents nevertheless insisted that I worked hard at my studies and I was expected to acquire a decent crop of O & A levels and go to University. My mother especially was very keen on the idea that I would be able to support myself financially, and reasonably comfortably come to that! My mother, when considering my future, was far ahead of her time as she saw that not only that marriages were often ending in divorce but that the taxation system was likely to impact heavily on any money that my parents managed to leave me in due course - in other words, that I could not rely on a significant inheritance - and therefore that I should leaarn to work for my living. A strategy that I myself applaud incidentally!

Despite her lack of significant edcuational qualifications however, Sarah, in my humble opinion must have had some idea about money and finance! At all levels of Society, people in the UK have to learn pretty quickly how to budget! It's my belief that Sarah chose to ignore what I will politely call 'inconvenient truths' about spending!! It is my view that she chose to align herself with the 'monied set' [Paddy McNally and his ilk] and just presumed that they would pick up her bills! So really, I think Sarah was actually 'quite calculating' rather than quite ignorant! Her monthly bank statements would have soon shown that her expenditure was outstripping her income, which I have assumed was the case!

I also think that Sarah would have also noticed how other people were 'always picking up the tab' for her parents' expenditure! Hector Barrantes was reasonably-wealthy from his ranch, where he bred and 'made' Polo ponies, but when he came to Europe for the summer as a 'hired assasin' - [a professional polo player], his expenses - living, travel etc etc were all picked up by the polo patron who hired him: this was a world of luxury cars, helicopters, first class hotels in Deauville etc, parties where the food and drink and decor defied description, with the Patron also putting lots of little presents your way- Rolex watches and the like. You get the picture! It is my humble opinon that this glimpse of the super-rich was what influenced Sarah, and then set her off her sense of 'entitlement' [The big difference though was that Barrantes and his ilk were being compensated for their talent!!]

 

[Diarist]

Continued...........


In my humble opinion,' Major Ron' [with considerably less talent than a 'hired assasin'!!] was nevertheless also pretty adept at getting others to pay his bills! As 'Polo Manager' to the heir to the throne, Major Ron was something of an intermediary between The Prince of Wales and the wealthy Polo patrons who clamoured for Charles to play in their teams. Prince Charles received no salary from these patrons, but [although Charles had his own polo ponies and was also 'mounted' (as the saying goes) by the Queen], a lot of his incidental costs were also taken over by the patrons. And so far as I could see, there was a fair amount of 'wining and dining' of Major Ron, as people sought to ingratiate themselves with him, thereby hopefully lubricating an easy path to the Prince of Wales, because Major Ron was effectively 'gatekeeper' to Prince Charles where Polo was concerned. And so there was a fair amount of helicopter rides and 5 star hotel accommodation provided for Major Ron from these Patrons!

And dear old Ron was not slow to use his own connections either! Each year [as I have mentioned on another thread] Cartier used to sponsor the International polo match at the end of July at Guards Polo Club, which in those days was attended by the Queen, with Prince Charles playing in the second (not first) England team. It was a highly important and prestigious social occasion in the London Season. A few days before the match, Cartier, as lead sponsor, always used to erect a Marquee at the Polo Club, where they would entertain their guests in great style on the actual Day of the Match- with a Michelin starred chef imported for the proceedings etc etc. [Your humble Diarist was once invited to lunch at the Cartier Marquee, and I can tell you that with the food second-to-none, I was pretty impressed!!], Just before Sarah's wedding in 1986, Major Ron threw a party - at Guards Polo Club - for all those friends who had not been invited to Westminster Abbey for the wedding [quite a lot of people actually - from memory, Sarah and her parents were very much restricted to around 100 invitations - which does not go far!!] and I was highly amused to note that canny old Major Ron had negotiated free use of the Cartier marquee for the party that he threw- it had been erected just before the Wedding, as the International polo match was being held just a very short time afterwards! That certainly would have saved Major Ron a good few thousand pounds on Marquee hire!! And I don't want to think closely about payment for the food and drink either!!

On a very much more unsavoury note, let me mention the highly distasteful 'massage parlour' episode! I think I have mentioned before that so far as UK polo is concerned, there are no great financial prizes for winning, but many matches are sponsored and many of these sponsors are from the world of luxury goods who often supply their own wares as prizes - thus Champagne houses who sponsor matches [e.g. Veuve Cliquot] hand out magnums of champagne, Cartier hands out watches etc and Cosmetic companies give out their products [ Let me diagress briefly - I remember that Polo Ralph Lauren once supplied prizes at a match that Prince Charles was competing in, and he was rather taken aback to be presented with some fragrance, which he immediately turned round and gave to a lucky spectator standing near me]. Major Ron, as well as his unpaid role as Prince Charles' polo manager, also worked at Guards Polo Club and the Royal County of Berkshire Polo Club arranging sponsorship. After Major Ron was caught at the Wigmore Club Massage Parlour, the 'ladies' who allegedly 'attended upon him' spoke to the newspapers about the services that they (allegedly) provided to Major Ron and the 'presents' that they had also allegedly received from him, and your humble Diarist and some of her polo playing friends were all VERY amused when they mentioned receiving items that had - shall we say - also appeared as Polo match prizes! Was Major Ferguson 'spreading the joy around' by handing out the extras and leftovers, or had he simply by coincidence been shopping at the stores of the sponsors? You guess!!

In my humble opinon all this exposure to the fact that 'someone else' was always picking up the tab for your personal expenditure was one of the reasons why Sarah was exposed early to the idea that you didn't always have to take personal responsibility for your spending. It seemed that there was always a wealthy man waiting nearby to 'pick up the tab' for expenses, including your luxury excesses!

Just my thoughts and i don't wish to offend,

Alex

 

[Osipi]

Once again, a truly educational insight into what Sarah's life growing up was like and where she comes from.

In my humble opinion,' Major Ron' [with considerably less talent than a 'hired assasin'!!] was nevertheless also pretty adept at getting others to pay his bills! As 'Polo Manager' to the heir to the throne, Major Ron was something of an intermediary between The Prince of Wales and the weathy Polo patrons who clamoured for Charles to play in their teams. Prince Charles received no salary from these patrons, but [although Charles had his own polo ponies and was also 'mounted' (as the saying goes) by the Queen], a lot of his incidental costs were also taken over by the patrons. And so far as I could see, there was a fair amount of 'wining and dining' of Major Ron, as people sought to ingratiate themselves with him, thereby hopefully lubricating an easy path to the Prince of Wales, because Major Ron was effectively 'gatekeeper' to Prince Charles where Polo was concerned. And so there was a fair amount of helicopter rides and 5 star hotel accommodation provided for Major Ron from there Patrons!

This right here shows that the apple doesn't fall very far from the tree when you really think about it. Isn't this exactly how Sarah was "wining and dining" the Fake Sheik in the Cash for Access sting? Or at least, very similar. Perhaps this could explain why Sarah doesn't feel she's done anything wrong. Its a way of doing things she's grown up with and has been exposed to over and over again.

 

[Diarist]

I read the book "The Queen and Di" and it described how Sarah was always the poor relation among her friends. I don't know why renting a room and having a job is somehow a deprivation, but I think wearing discarded clothes of friends might likely have left an imprint on her psyche. She reminds me of Jackie O., who grew up financially insecure and ended up constantly believing that there was never enough. As if she would never be secure.

I've been thinking more about what you said AristoCat and in particularly the book's assertion that Sarah was 'the poor relation' who 'used to wear the discarded clothes of friends'.

Really and truthfully, from what I observed about Sarah and her circle of friends, I do not think that her income was that different from those of her contemporaries [although I can well believe that she spent more than others!]

Sarah - however much her behaviour might sometimes lead us to think otherwise - comes from an Upper Class background. Her mother was a direct descendant of Viscount Powerscourt and Sarah was also related to Princess Alice Duchess of Gloucester and even Sir Robert Fellowes [sometime private secretary to the Queen - who tried to keep Sarah 'under control' at one point when her behaviour was deteriorating to such an extent that it was bringing the Royal Family into disrepute. His efforts came to naught, and Sarah took to juvenile name-calling, referring to him as 'Bellows'. But I digress]

Although to the likes of most of us the British Upper Classes seem pretty well off, many are in fact 'asset rich' but 'income poor'. Thus there may well be a [decaying] castle or a large farm somewhere in the background, but actual 'spending money' might be in short supply. Death Duties and inheritance taxes and the need to create family trusts to protect the fortune but which then prevent access to the cash as well have caused problems over the years. And this is not an entirely new problem - for example, well over 100 years ago, English Aristocrats began to seek out and marry rich American heiresses.....

In short, whilst I don't think Sarah had a lot of cash, she certainly had comparable amounts to many of her schoolfriends and classmates from Queen's Secretarial College. Before her marriage Sarah for example was able to afford to belong to the very expensive Queen's [Tennis] Club in West London. She could afford to own a car. She also smoked rather heavily, and that all costs. And she liked eating out. As for 'discarded clothes', oddly enough it was quite a 'Sloane Ranger' phenomenon to borrow and retrieve your friends' and flatmates' clothes. For example, Diana in her flat sharing days used to 'pool' clothes with her friends. And come to that, Diana herself did not have too many clothes - look at that picture [pre-engagement] of her leaving the [London] Ritz Hotel after Princess Margaret's 50th birthday party - she, an Earl's daughter, and no stranger to a London social life, did not even have a proper evening cloak at that stage - look at how she was wearing her ordinary day overcoat over her evening dress..... In short, I think that Sarah was making a fuss over nothing. And, if I may say so, as Sarah was very much more full-figured than many of her friends, I doubt if she could even have fitted into their clothes....

Where I do think Sarah might have felt the 'poor relation' was in her Paddy McNally days. Many of the people she was mixing with at that point were 'seriously rich' and with NO shortage of ready cash [compare that with the average British aristocrat!!] In the world of Grand Prix racing, the men [tax exile team owners and racing drivers] were often spectacularly rich, and as often or not, their tall, blonde, thin girlfriends were models, and earning a model's salary. Sarah's secretarial salary was not likely to go far in that sort of world, and although I understand that McNally covered her board and lodging and nightclubbing whilst she lived with him in Switzerland and also picked up the tab for Sarah's travel etc, I do not think he gave her a 'spending allowance' [he was far too canny with his money - indeed the real reason many of us suspected that he did not remarry was not just for the sake of his sons (the reason often quoted in the press) but to keep his fortune intact.] And I daresay that she had to buy her own clothes, with perhaps the odd 'treat dress' from McNally....

Only my thoughs

Alex

 

[Moonmaiden23]

I have NEVER understood Sarah's fondness and attachment to Paddy McNally and even less now that I have read your information Diarist(Alex)...thanks!

 

[AristoCat]

When Sarah had all the 'right' traits, they obviously weren't looking at the things that Sarah was actually up to, not where she came from. Already it was established that hse was interested in the high life and that she was interested in the finer things. During her marriage she went hogwild and the RF was naive to not see this and take it into account. Second, by that age, Sarah should have been attracting men with serious intentions to commit to a relationship and then get married, but she was still stumbling around. She wasn't leading a routine life and a stable pattern of behavior in her personal and professional life was never established.

Where I do think Sarah might have felt the 'poor relation' was in her Paddy McNally days. Many of the people she was mixing with at that point were 'seriously rich' and with NO shortage of ready cash [compare that with the average British aristocrat!!] In the world of Grand Prix racing, the men [tax exile team owners and racing drivers] were often spectacularly rich, and as often or not, their tall, blonde, thin girlfriends were models, and earning a model's salary. Sarah's secretarial salary was not likely to go far in that sort of world, and although I understand that McNally covered her board and lodging and nightclubbing whilst she lived with him in Switzerland and also picked up the tab for Sarah's travel etc, I do not think he gave her a 'spending allowance' [he was far too canny with his money - indeed the real reason many of us suspected that he did not remarry was not just for the sake of his sons (the reason often quoted in the press) but to keep his fortune intact.] And I daresay that she had to buy her own clothes, with perhaps the odd 'treat dress' from McNally..

That's the part of her life I meant. She jet setted all over the place, with little of her own to offer. Paddy might have paid her way, but he didn't give her lavish jewelry, dresses, and other items for her to be able to keep up. I wonder how much work did she do as a secretary while doing all that traveling?

 

[camelot23ca]

Once again, a truly educational insight into what Sarah's life growing up was like and where she comes from.



This right here shows that the apple doesn't fall very far from the tree when you really think about it. Isn't this exactly how Sarah was "wining and dining" the Fake Sheik in the Cash for Access sting? Or at least, very similar. Perhaps this could explain why Sarah doesn't feel she's done anything wrong. Its a way of doing things she's grown up with and has been exposed to over and over again.

I think it could be a strange dynamic to grow up around - coming from a family with the "right" background and spending time in the overlapping orbits of the royal family and the very wealthy polo crowd, but not having nearly enough cash to truly keep up with the lifestyle you're surrounded by. I think it would take someone with a good head on their shoulders to be in the middle of all that for an extended period of time and still recognize the fact that having wealthy friends and acquaintances who live grand lives doesnt make YOU wealthy or entitle YOU to live a grand life.

 

[KittyAtlanta]

Oh, how true. At uni I met and became friends with several children of the wealthy, famous and infamous. We have kept in touch over the years, but it is rare that I accept any kind of invitation they extend. Why? I still feel I need new clothes and a better car (which I don't). Only a couple of those kids failed to become wealthy, famous or infamous. They are nice and fun to be around, but alas, they would need some "keeping up with" on a regular basis.

I understand where Sarah has been sitting all her life.

 

[NGalitzine]

Yes, but you obviously understood that you were not wealthy enough to "keep up" with your friends on a regular basis and did not try to. Sarah apparently never came to that realization and felt entitled to live the life that her wealthy friends did. She has been trying most of her life to live their life and not her own.
There is a rather well known quote frequently attributed to The Queen "you must cut your coat according to your cloth"...in other words live within your means. Sarah just never listened and likely never will.

 

[AristoCat]

I am jsut amazed at how much she had; a husband who cared and was quite dashing, she had two healthy kids, a fabulous title, security, and she had more coming her way in time. She would have probably had more over time and in time she would have done better. She would have ended up with a better marriage and better relationship with the RF than even Diana had. Even after, she still made more than enough to live off of for the rest of her life if managed wisely.

 

[Meadow]

I think Sarah has realised that now but at the time and for the first few years afterwards the money was flowing and she got lot's of attention. I don't think Sarah thinks ahead. Most people would have done the more sensible thing and buy a house and put money away for a rainy day. Sarah just doesn't bother to think about it. In the end she is living at Andrew's house in a guest room and while she can still go on her first class holidays I can't see many people respecting her. The rich friends won't always get her out of trouble you can only put your hand out so many times eventually she will have to face the music by herself!

 

[Dman]

Have anyone ever seen this nice video of Andrew & Sarah? That was a couple who were truly in love.

Royally Speaking

 

[Irish Eyes]

Two very similar videos, but I hope you enjoy.

Fergie & Andrew - YouTube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hHF_HXUdhXk

 

[Meadow]

In the beginning they were clearly in love. But as we know it didn't stay that way.

 

[VictoriaB]

In the beginning they were clearly in love. But as we know it didn't stay that way.

I'm not sure they fell out of love. I think Sarah fell out of love with being a member of the Royal Family.

Nothing I can point to to back up my opinion, just a feeling I have.

 

[Osipi]

I'm not sure they fell out of love. I think Sarah fell out of love with being a member of the Royal Family.

Nothing I can point to to back up my opinion, just a feeling I have.

From all that I've read, it does point more to the fact that she couldn't cope with the "men in grey" and royal life. It didn't help any either that Andy was away for so much of the time but I think knowing Andy was in the Navy, Sarah came to accept that fact and thought they could weather it out.

Perhaps if it had been more like the situation that William and Kate have now where Andy would have been there to share the burdens at the beginning, things might have worked out totally different. As it stands now, its pretty obvious that the two of them share a deep mutual friendship and as Sarah herself has said, they have a happy divorce together or words similar to that.

 

[Dman]

You know, despite their divorce, I really don't think the love and friendship between them ever died. It seems like despite the scandals and all the bad press they've encountered, Andrew & Sarah have managed to keep their family together by loving and supporting each other no matter what.