The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #41  
Old 02-03-2008, 12:16 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,496
I have judged both. When Diana married Charles, she believed in happily ever after. She was very young. She was very foolish. I was married to my first husband at that age. He was 27, so a great deal of age between us. I knew nothing and he was kind, patient and loving. We had a wonderful marriage for 28 years, until he died suddenly. In retrospect, I was an idiot, as was Diana, but my husband was loving and unselfish, so we were able to build a great relationship. I remarried and now an married to a man for 17 years. You see it takes two people to make a relationship, but sometimes one has to carry the ball for a while. Diana wasn't a cadette. She married in good faith. Charles had his side dish ready and waiting. He carried her picture. How many woman would like their husbands to carry their "supposedly former lovers" picture. Diana overheard him tell Camilla he would always love her. Her wore her cufflinks. Come on. Pardon me. Charles had found his soulmate in Camilla and should have married her. He did marry against type. He needed and could not give. He needed a giver.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 02-03-2008, 12:42 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirhon11234 View Post
A perfect example of what you just said is the movie Fatal Attraction.
Glenn Close in that movie was a one night stand!
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 02-03-2008, 12:51 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by COUNTESS View Post
I have judged both. When Diana married Charles, she believed in happily ever after. She was very young. She was very foolish....... Diana wasn't a cadette. She married in good faith.
Not if she encouraged Charles to believe she enjoyed all the things he did.
Quote:
Charles had his side dish ready and waiting. He carried her picture. How many woman would like their husbands to carry their "supposedly former lovers" picture. Diana overheard him tell Camilla he would always love her. Her wore her cufflinks. Come on.
That is only according to Diana and probably far from the truth.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 02-03-2008, 01:00 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by COUNTESS View Post
Diana wasn't a cadette. She married in good faith. Charles had his side dish ready and waiting. He carried her picture. How many woman would like their husbands to carry their "supposedly former lovers" picture. Diana overheard him tell Camilla he would always love her. Her wore her cufflinks. Come on. Pardon me. Charles had found his soulmate in Camilla and should have married her. He did marry against type. He needed and could not give. He needed a giver.
Thanks for explaining Countess. Your stance of judging may have been a bit clearer if you hadn't made the exhortation not to judge Diana but I agree that both parties can be judged and there shouldn't be anything wrong with that.

Are you open to perhaps the possibility that Diana couldn't face the reality that she and Charles married against type and so she later moved up the time of the affair to indicate that Charles had always had Camilla when in fact its very possible that he and Camilla weren't having an affair till later? Rumours about Charles and Camilla having an affair really only started after Harry was born and other things that were going on in the marriage were coming to light pretty soon after they happened although the press at that time wanted to put an innocent spin on things.

Can you imagine that Diana may have seen the cufflinks in a drawer after Harry was born and said to herself, oh so they've been going behind my back all this time and later imagining to herself that she saw the cufflinks on the boat on their honeymoon? The reason I say this is that around the time she taped her conversations of Camilla being there at the wedding, she also complained that the royal family never let her choose an engagement ring a story which has later been discredited by several sources. Do you entertain the possibility that when Diana divulged this that she was thoroughly disgusted with both Charles and his family for whatever reasons and its possible that she exaggerated the hurts and the calumnies in her mind so that a third party who wasn't there may do well to not take some of her accusations at face value?

I think you were incredibly lucky to find such a lovely, caring man who would compensate for your drawbacks when you first married at 18, but do you really think that a man who cannot or won't compensate for a partner's drawbacks is by definition a cad?

Are you perhaps open to the possibility that Charles had had some great friends in Camilla and Kanga and wanted to have for his wife a nice English rose he could protect and then found out later that he wasn't cut out for the protecting role but what he really needed for a wife was a loyal friend? The reason that I say this is that Charles when people were pushing on him to get a relationship with Caroline said he preferred the simple English rose as his bride and when he was younger he seemed to enjoy the hero worship relationship he had with his younger brothers when they were boys. This of course fell out when they got older but Charles (yes the fool) seemed to like the hero worship he got from his brothers and so he may have thought that's what he wanted in a wife.

I'm not saying you're wrong; I'm just throwing out some other possibilities.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 02-03-2008, 02:46 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,496
Oh, there are a plethora of possibilities. Skydraggon, yes, she said she liked this or that and maybe she lied and maybe she thought she might. When you are 19 you really have very little foresight. I use myself as that guide to naivete and stupidity at that age. You really know nothing. Secondly, the picture, etc., you have judged that Diana lied, so nothing more can be said. Charles was raised to get, basically, what he wants. I, believe, he wanted a wife that could give him all the things he is short on or feels he was shorted. Mothering was one of those things. Yet, he picked a veritable child to marry. He may have been attracted to her looks, but she was no smater then than later on. Perhaps, he couldn't envision that the public would adore her more than he. He after all was the prince of Wales. In many ways, he probably is not to blame, as I think he wanted something else and ended up with something he could not handle nor cared to handle. It is all a pity.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 02-03-2008, 03:33 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by COUNTESS View Post
as I think he wanted something else and ended up with something he could not handle nor cared to handle. It is all a pity.
That is true. My feeling at the time of the marriage was that Charles didn't know what he wanted.

Its amazing; so many of the marriages I see now, the wife is definitely the stronger of the two but the husbands don't like to admit that. Its somewhat like expecting a man to ask for directions. Even if they're lost, they don't ask because they don't like admitting a weakness! It seems that a lot of guys like to think of themselves as protectors but what they really want is for someone to take care of them.

Charles didn't appear to show that he needed mothering before his marriage. It looked like his relationship to his mother was good; it was the relationship with his father that was so bad.

But I think the Royal Family in general was very un-self-aware of what they were and what they needed vis-a-vis the non Royal world and when they started marrying with commoners this self-deception became all too apparent. One of the queen's courtiers later said that he thought Sarah was a delightful girl but that she would never do well as a Princess. People had mentioned some things about Sarah's past like her living with her earlier boyfriend and her financial difficulties but the Royal Family actually thought that were getting modern and moving with the times by letting Sarah in their midst.

I think with Diana you could say her young age was a factor in her self-deception and with Charles, his sheltered life as a royal was a factor in his own self-deception. But it does seem like what they thought they wanted from a partner at the outset wasn't what they really wanted which was why I was so curious as to them marrying against type and so the only good solution that could have come from it was if they both valued each other in their public roles enough that they could let each other seek what they needed in private. Its not a solution that I would have chosen but I've seen couples do it.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 02-03-2008, 04:12 PM
Al_bina's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: City, Kazakhstan
Posts: 5,650
The French do a better job of exploring unexpected attractions

Quote:
Originally Posted by sirhon11234 View Post
A perfect example of what you just said is the movie Fatal Attraction.
In my very personal opinion, the better example will be the French film “Trop belle pour toi” (Too beautiful for you), in which a successful car dealer was attracted to a plain looking secretary instead of his stunning wife. The wife approached the mistress in hotel and asked her, “What is so special about you?” The answer was “There is nothing special about me, I just give him peace” [it is Russian translation]. It seems to defy all reason, how this frumpy, dumpy woman with eyes that caress lures this man from elegant wife.
__________________
"I never did mind about the little things" Amanda, "Point of No Return"
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 02-03-2008, 04:13 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by COUNTESS View Post
Oh, there are a plethora of possibilities. Skydraggon, yes, she said she liked this or that and maybe she lied and maybe she thought she might. When you are 19 you really have very little foresight. I use myself as that guide to naivete and stupidity at that age. You really know nothing. Secondly, the picture, etc., you have judged that Diana lied, so nothing more can be said.
Very many 18-20 year olds married older men back in the 70's - 80's and are still happily married. Diana came from a very broken home, so knew the problems she might face if and when she married. I knew at 16 that I didn't much care for London, I certainly knew at 18 what I liked and what I didn't. Because Diana came from a broken home, it wouldn't have mattered how much reassurance she got from her husband, she would probably have been suspicious of the smallest thing. Some people are naturally like that, jealous for no reason, needing constant reassurance, suspicious of 5 minutes unaccounted for. At first it is probably easy to say 'don't be silly', 'of course I love you', 'of course you did well' etc, but I should imagine even a saint would get fed up with it after a while and in that 2 minutes pause while one thinks of a reply that will not cause a scene, it can appear an excuse is being thought up, thus confirming that something is going on - talk about walking on a tightrope.

I recall having the misrepresentation type of conversation before on here, where I asked if it was the right thing to do, to pretend an interest to get the man and very many people said they had done it, it was an acceptable thing to do. To me if you can't be honest at the start of a relationship, there is very little long term hope.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 02-03-2008, 04:38 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,496
Well, Skydraggon, I am glad you knew all that you wished at 18, many don't. I found wisom grows with age and experience. Yes, many people married at 19 and are still married and many or not. None faced the many vargaries that life held for Charles and Diana. I came from a wonderful, loving household, so, perhaps, that is what gave me stability throughout the years. Diana did not. She knew the pitfalls of her parents marriage to a degree, but how would she not be her insecure self? And marrying a person who said "whatever love is", is hardly comforting. I, think, in all marriages you grow and learn from one another, if you care. So, you may think you like something and it turns out you hate it. So, you find compromise. Charles is not a compromiser, nor do I think was Diana.

Al Bina, you are on the mark, again. You give an excellent anology. Yes, I, believe, Camilla gives Charles peace.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 02-03-2008, 05:01 PM
Skydragon's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: London and Highlands, United Kingdom
Posts: 10,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by COUNTESS View Post
I found wisom grows with age and experience.
Not necessarily!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 02-03-2008, 06:23 PM
jcbcode99's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Richmond Area, United States
Posts: 1,980
Well, once again a forum has turned from the topic at hand and generalized it to where the breakdown occured in Charles and Diana's relationship. I think it is pretty simple, when it comes down to it. She wanted to marry the PoW--so she did. It ended up not being the fairy tale marriage she wanted--blame it on personalities, age, whatever--but the relationship did not work. Each had affairs; well, Charles resumed an affair with his first love and Diana began a string of affairs. Later, rather than work on creating a friendship for the sake of the children, the War began and accusations began to fly.
I will say this--in everything I have read--I've not seen any evidence that shows where Charles lied about something. Diana, on the other hand, has been shown to have lied often to suit her needs. We can attempt to blame this on a broken home or whatever, but I simply blame it on the person. Let's face it--we all know it is wrong to lie--if we choose to lie anyway we will reap what we sow. For this reason, the proof that she lied often, I have to say that I do think that she misrepresented herself to Charles--because she wanted to marry him--regardless. Now, at 19 it is hard to not blame the child for seeing the world through rose-colored glasses--because I do believe she loved him with that puppy-love passion we have all felt at some point--and therefore, she was willing to do whatever to secure her lover's interest. I can't really fault her for that--but she did grow up a country girl, and I'm sure Charles believed that she loved that life. She outgrew it--but for Charles, country life was in many ways his escape from his public life. And, Diana LOVED her public life. In public she was a goddess--in the country, she was just Diana, schlepping around. She didn't want that. Charles did.

Of course, it would be naive of us to assume that was the one reason for the breakdown of the marriage. So, in comes Camilla--the evil, hated Camilla. This I have trouble understanding--why is Camilla so hated and Diana's indiscretions ignored, and passed off as occuring because she was lonely. Perhaps Charles was lonely and that was why he and Camilla's frienship continued and maybe, just maybe Diana strayed first and then Charles went his way. Diana has been known to changed a timeline. I'm not saying she did, but I am saying she has done it enough to make one wonder exactly what happened. But,regardless of how it went down, affairs happened. What I don't understand is why is Diana still considered innocent, even though her lies and manipulations have been proven? It makes no sense.
__________________
Janet

"We make a living by what we do; we make a life by what we give" Winston Churchill
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 02-03-2008, 06:45 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Belleville, United States
Posts: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al_bina View Post
In my very personal opinion, the better example will be the French film “Trop belle pour toi” (Too beautiful for you), in which a successful car dealer was attracted to a plain looking secretary instead of his stunning wife. The wife approached the mistress in hotel and asked her, “What is so special about you?” The answer was “There is nothing special about me, I just give him peace” [it is Russian translation]. It seems to defy all reason, how this frumpy, dumpy woman with eyes that caress lures this man from elegant wife.
Interesting comments that I think hold true in this situation. What happened between Diana and Charles happened. It happens to many couples, I guess we don't expect it of what appears to be a fairy tale marriage. I don't think it matters who cheated first. The marriage was prbably doomed from the start. I think it is obvious now that Charles deeply loved/loves Camilla.
Lexi
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 02-03-2008, 07:05 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Al_bina View Post
In my very personal opinion, the better example will be the French film “Trop belle pour toi” (Too beautiful for you), in which a successful car dealer was attracted to a plain looking secretary instead of his stunning wife. The wife approached the mistress in hotel and asked her, “What is so special about you?” The answer was “There is nothing special about me, I just give him peace” [it is Russian translation]. It seems to defy all reason, how this frumpy, dumpy woman with eyes that caress lures this man from elegant wife.
That's a great movie with Gerard Depardieu, Josiane Balasko, and Carole Bouquet. I loved it.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 02-03-2008, 07:24 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcbcode99 View Post
Well, once again a forum has turned from the topic at hand and generalized it to where the breakdown occured in Charles and Diana's relationship..
I don't think so. I asked a question about Charles and Andrew marrying against type and pretty much all the responses have alluded to that. Its inevitable that when talking about marrying against type attention will focus on how this would have affected the breakup.

And I've gotten some answers. I think after hearing from all of you that Charles didn't know what his type was. I do remember reading he was a hero to his younger brothers when they were younger and there is a touching scene in the 1969 documentary that shows him playing a cello for a very young Prince Edward. In the seventies, he stressed the English rose and turned down several girls for being too exotic looking. Diana on some level probably didn't know what type she was either. She did start out as the humble shy English rose but she ended up preferring the city and i daresay she did end up preferring her public to life in the country and with the Royal Family. I do think she also preferred a situation where she was the center of attention rather than just one of a group although she may not have known that when she met Charles. I do think that Diana correctly knew at the beginning that she needed to be taken care of and Charles gave the appearance of a kindly older gentleman who was touched that a young girl would place faith in him.

With Andrew and Sarah, I still think there is some mystery. I can buy the fact that Andrew changed; his older self is far less a playboy than his younger persona and it just may be that he outgrew his Randy Andy image and became more stable whereas Sarah remained a bit wild. So when Andrew settled down, I imagine that Sarah was a bit taken aback and after Andrew settled down, he may have been embarassed by some of Sarah's more outlandish behavior. I could see him being attracted to her wildness at first but like I said, a guy who is a prince and a good looker and a charming personality just doesn't tend to go for women that look and act as inelegantly as Sarah.

My next question is: OK we know why they messed up and thought they would be a good match but why didn't their families stop them? My father's favorite line about Earl Spencer was that he must have had rocks in his head to let the 33 year old prince marry his 19 year old daughter.
__________________
"One thing we can do is make the choice to view the world in a healthy way. We can choose to see the world as safe with only moments of danger rather than seeing the world as dangerous with only moments of safety."
-- Deepak Chopra
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 02-03-2008, 07:41 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Belleville, United States
Posts: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel View Post
I don't think so. I asked a question about Charles and Andrew marrying against type and pretty much all the responses have alluded to that. Its inevitable that when talking about marrying against type attention will focus on how this would have affected the breakup.

And I've gotten some answers. I think after hearing from all of you that Charles didn't know what his type was. I do remember reading he was a hero to his younger brothers when they were younger and there is a touching scene in the 1969 documentary that shows him playing a cello for a very young Prince Edward. In the seventies, he stressed the English rose and turned down several girls for being too exotic looking. Diana on some level probably didn't know what type she was either. She did start out as the humble shy English rose but she ended up preferring the city and i daresay she did end up preferring her public to life in the country and with the Royal Family. I do think she also preferred a situation where she was the center of attention rather than just one of a group although she may not have known that when she met Charles. I do think that Diana correctly knew at the beginning that she needed to be taken care of and Charles gave the appearance of a kindly older gentleman who was touched that a young girl would place faith in him.

With Andrew and Sarah, I still think there is some mystery. I can buy the fact that Andrew changed; his older self is far less a playboy than his younger persona and it just may be that he outgrew his Randy Andy image and became more stable whereas Sarah remained a bit wild. So when Andrew settled down, I imagine that Sarah was a bit taken aback and after Andrew settled down, he may have been embarassed by some of Sarah's more outlandish behavior. I could see him being attracted to her wildness at first but like I said, a guy who is a prince and a good looker and a charming personality just doesn't tend to go for women that look and act as inelegantly as Sarah.

My next question is: OK we know why they messed up and thought they would be a good match but why didn't their families stop them? My father's favorite line about Earl Spencer was that he must have had rocks in his head to let the 33 year old prince marry his 19 year old daughter.
Ok. Here's my question. Do you honestly think that any of their parents could have stopped them?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 02-03-2008, 08:04 PM
jcbcode99's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Richmond Area, United States
Posts: 1,980
Quote:
Originally Posted by lexi4 View Post
Ok. Here's my question. Do you honestly think that any of their parents could have stopped them?
I do--I think that Charles was presssured into a marriage--Diana has also said that she wanted to call it off but couldn't because her "face was on the tea towels"--so, I think there was trepidation on both their parts. If Charles' parents and Diana's family hadn't forced the match......history could have been quite different!
__________________
Janet

"We make a living by what we do; we make a life by what we give" Winston Churchill
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 02-03-2008, 08:06 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Belleville, United States
Posts: 400
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcbcode99 View Post
I do--I think that Charles was presssured into a marriage--Diana has also said that she wanted to call it off but couldn't because her "face was on the tea towels"--so, I think there was trepidation on both their parts. If Charles' parents and Diana's family hadn't forced the match......history could have been quite different!
Ok. Was Charles pressured into a marriage or the marriage to Diana? I am sure he was pressured. Isn't it part of his duty to produce and heir?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 02-03-2008, 08:23 PM
jcbcode99's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Richmond Area, United States
Posts: 1,980
I think that he was pressured into a marriage with Diana--she was from a good family, had royal blood (arguably more than Charles!) and there was a strong family connection. Both families had orchestrated this match--Diana's grandmother was the Queen Mum's lady-in-waiting!
__________________
Janet

"We make a living by what we do; we make a life by what we give" Winston Churchill
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 02-03-2008, 08:34 PM
Roslyn's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Tintenbar, Australia
Posts: 2,669
Quote:
Originally Posted by lexi4 View Post
Ok. Was Charles pressured into a marriage or the marriage to Diana? I am sure he was pressured. Isn't it part of his duty to produce and heir?
Interesting question. The answer is "Yes" to both limbs, I think, because 1. he was under pressure at his age to marry a suitable person and breed, and 2. Diana was Johnny-on-the-Spot.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 02-03-2008, 11:59 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Spring Hill, United States
Posts: 2,496
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel View Post
I don't think so. I asked a question about Charles and Andrew marrying against type and pretty much all the responses have alluded to that. Its inevitable that when talking about marrying against type attention will focus on how this would have affected the breakup.

And I've gotten some answers. I think after hearing from all of you that Charles didn't know what his type was. I do remember reading he was a hero to his younger brothers when they were younger and there is a touching scene in the 1969 documentary that shows him playing a cello for a very young Prince Edward. In the seventies, he stressed the English rose and turned down several girls for being too exotic looking. Diana on some level probably didn't know what type she was either. She did start out as the humble shy English rose but she ended up preferring the city and i daresay she did end up preferring her public to life in the country and with the Royal Family. I do think she also preferred a situation where she was the center of attention rather than just one of a group although she may not have known that when she met Charles. I do think that Diana correctly knew at the beginning that she needed to be taken care of and Charles gave the appearance of a kindly older gentleman who was touched that a young girl would place faith in him.

With Andrew and Sarah, I still think there is some mystery. I can buy the fact that Andrew changed; his older self is far less a playboy than his younger persona and it just may be that he outgrew his Randy Andy image and became more stable whereas Sarah remained a bit wild. So when Andrew settled down, I imagine that Sarah was a bit taken aback and after Andrew settled down, he may have been embarassed by some of Sarah's more outlandish behavior. I could see him being attracted to her wildness at first but like I said, a guy who is a prince and a good looker and a charming personality just doesn't tend to go for women that look and act as inelegantly as Sarah.

My next question is: OK we know why they messed up and thought they would be a good match but why didn't their families stop them? My father's favorite line about Earl Spencer was that he must have had rocks in his head to let the 33 year old prince marry his 19 year old daughter.
Actually, Ysbel, you are right. But their families encouraged them That is the really upsetting thing. Diana was to young to marry someone where the responsilbilities and life change was that dramatic. Her father should have cautioned her not to do this. His parents should have looked at the big picture. But none of them cared, except to get what they felt needed to be done, done. The Spencers felt it was a feather in their cap and the Windsors thought they got a beautiful, docile, breeding machine. Chaste, that was their criteria and aritocratic. The best of all worlds. Everyone would be happy, except the bride and groom. Charles was just as much a victim as Diana in this charade. His age gave him the advantage of being a little more worldly, but he could not stand up against his father, least his mother.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
duke of york, marriage, prince andrew, prince charles, prince of wales, relationships


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
list of all the cinderella-type balls princesslily Royal Chit Chat 3 03-15-2006 09:16 PM
Charles and Camilla to Marry cut1me The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall 985 10-26-2005 11:55 AM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit current events duchess of cambridge dutch royal history engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jewellery jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympics ottoman picture of the month poland pom president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince felipe prince floris prince maurits prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess mabel princess madeleine princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion princess of asturias queen anne-marie queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:58 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]