The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #141  
Old 09-03-2018, 07:07 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
We'll most likely never know what Sarah wants or what Sarah might have planned until the occasion actually arises. For all we know, she could lean towards doing a full body donation to medical science and request no funeral at all.

We just don't know.
I doubt it. Im sure she'd like to be buried with the RF, but its not going to happen... not under Charles or the queen.
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #142  
Old 09-03-2018, 07:11 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Somewhere in the U.K, United Kingdom
Posts: 105
I know Diana wasn’t buried at frogmore but do you think the Queen would have allowed Diana to be buried at frogmore?
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #143  
Old 09-03-2018, 07:38 AM
Queen Claude's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 955
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
Why? Sarah is not favoured by the RF... she's nto a member of the RF, and I can't see why she would be treatd as a member of the RF, just because she "wanted it".
Sarah is favored by the one who counts which is the Queen, and IMO if her funeral and burial arrangements involved St. George's Chapel, the Royal Chapel of All Saints and / or Frogmore, and she discussed her funeral arrangements with the Queen and the Queen approved, I don't see this as something not happening even if the funeral and burial happens when one of QEII's successors is the monarch.

Personally I don't see having the funeral of a non-BRF member at St. George's Chapel (or the Royal Chapel of All Saints) as a big deal, there are precedents for that. Burial at Frogmore would be the request requiring more deliberation and consideration.

Quote:
Originally Posted by royal_enthusiast View Post
Could Sarah have something like Lord Snowdon when he had a private funeral and then a memorial service attended by all the royals.
Of course, if that is her wish and the others are willing to attend.

It seems like you are trying to determine certain people's status or ranking based on the funeral that they had or will have, and since funerals are a very personal thing, there are too many variables to try to determine someone's status based on his / her funeral arrangements.
Reply With Quote
  #144  
Old 09-03-2018, 08:31 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Somewhere in the U.K, United Kingdom
Posts: 105
Thank you all for your responses, I really appreciate it and you have all been of great help.

It has occurred to me that Diana’s funeral was arranged by the Lord Chamberlain. I hate to be speculative and apologise if I am being but it has occurred to me that if she had lived and remarried would her subsequent wedding be organised by the Lord Chamberlain or would that just apply to her funeral. I know there is no definite known answer and we will never know but I would love to hear what your personal view of this would be.
Reply With Quote
  #145  
Old 09-03-2018, 09:41 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Warsaw, Poland
Posts: 8,249
I highly doubt that her eventual remarriage would have been organised by the Lord Chamberlain.
Reply With Quote
  #146  
Old 09-03-2018, 09:47 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 9,550
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal_enthusiast View Post
I know Diana wasn’t buried at frogmore but do you think the Queen would have allowed Diana to be buried at frogmore?
I think the Queen would have approved. But the Spencers had the lead and made other arrangements
Reply With Quote
  #147  
Old 09-03-2018, 10:18 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,240
I certainly don't think the queen would have wanted Diana buried anywhere royal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Biri View Post
I highly doubt that her eventual remarriage would have been organised by the Lord Chamberlain.
of course it wouldn't. She was not royal. Because her funeral was a big public event, the Ld Chamberlain organised it because the Spencers would nto have been able to organise such an event. It was based on the plans for the QM's funeral... But if Diana had remarried ti would up to her and her husband to arrange it.. She was not royal any more.....
Reply With Quote
  #148  
Old 09-03-2018, 10:29 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Somewhere in the U.K, United Kingdom
Posts: 105
I thought she was still regarded as a member of the royal family if I remember correctly?
Reply With Quote
  #149  
Old 09-03-2018, 10:35 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 9,550
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
I certainly don't think the queen would have wanted Diana buried anywhere royal.
The Queen is a Christian and to me seems a flexible and practical lady. Angus Ogilvy, Henry Abel Smith, Dorothy Cambridge née Westenra Hastings, Alexander Ramsay, Wallis Windsor née Warfield, etc are examples of non HRH's and non-royals buried at Frogmore.

But the Spencers had other arrangements, so we will never know.

Quote:
Originally Posted by royal_enthusiast View Post
I thought she was still regarded as a member of the royal family if I remember correctly?
She was the mother of the future King indeed and as such unbreakably linked to the person of the future King.
Reply With Quote
  #150  
Old 09-03-2018, 10:48 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Somewhere in the U.K, United Kingdom
Posts: 105
So if she was a member of the royal family would her wedding be royal as I thought all members of the royal family have royal weddings regardless of whether it’s public or private, which would be organised by the Lord Chamberlain just as both Prince Harry’s and Princess Eugeine’s wedding were and currently being organised by.
Reply With Quote
  #151  
Old 09-03-2018, 10:53 AM
AdmirerUS's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 5,986
We don't even know IF she would have gotten married, WHERE she would have married. We also don't know IF the wedding would have been at all religious, much less which religion.

But since likely not your standard COE royal family wedding, no to Lord Chamberlain IMO. Since very possibly not in the UK, no Lord Chamberlain.

EDIT: And I just looked at the title of this Thread - Wow, are we off topic!
__________________
"And the tabloid press will be a pain in the ass, as usual." - Royal Norway
Reply With Quote
  #152  
Old 09-03-2018, 11:00 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duc_et_Pair View Post
The Queen is a Christian and to me seems a flexible and practical lady. Angus Ogilvy, Henry Abel Smith, Dorothy Cambridge née Westenra Hastings, Alexander Ramsay, Wallis Windsor née Warfield, etc are examples of non HRH's and non-royals buried at Frogmore.

But the Spencers had other arrangements, so we will never know.
of course they had other arrangemetnts. Diana was a member of the Spencer family, and IMO the queen only agreed to the funeral because of the public mood.

Quote:
Originally Posted by royal_enthusiast View Post
So if she was a member of the royal family would her wedding be royal as I thought all members of the royal family have royal weddings regardless of whether it’s public or private, which would be organised by the Lord Chamberlain just as both Prince Harry’s and Princess Eugeine’s wedding were and currently being organised by.
She was not.. once she had divorced Charles, she lost her HRH and was only regarded as part of the family because of the boys. She was invited to certain events, the boys were still her boys, but she did not even spend Chirstmas lunch with the RF... because she didn't feel comfortable iwht them. Why on earth would they regard her as Royal or arrang her wedding? I can't imagine why she would wish for such a thing.
Reply With Quote
  #153  
Old 09-03-2018, 11:13 AM
Duc_et_Pair's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: City, Netherlands
Posts: 9,550
The Princess Royal, by all accounts a royal, married in an intimate ceremony in a Scottish village church.

The Duke of Edinburgh, by all accounts a royal, wants a funeral as sober as possible.

Prince Michael of Kent, by all accounts a royal, married in Vienna.

Morale of the story: the grandesse of an occasion or the involvement of the Lord Chamberlain says nothing. It are always personal choices and circumstances in my opinion.
Reply With Quote
  #154  
Old 09-03-2018, 12:33 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 4,240
P Michael had no choice since it was his wife's second marriage. It was a civil marriage and at the time, Royals were held not to be able to marry in a civil ceremony in England..... and it was also Anne's second marriage.
Reply With Quote
  #155  
Old 09-03-2018, 04:04 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 13,833
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal_enthusiast View Post
Thank you all for your responses, I really appreciate it and you have all been of great help.

It has occurred to me that Diana’s funeral was arranged by the Lord Chamberlain. I hate to be speculative and apologise if I am being but it has occurred to me that if she had lived and remarried would her subsequent wedding be organised by the Lord Chamberlain or would that just apply to her funeral. I know there is no definite known answer and we will never know but I would love to hear what your personal view of this would be.
Basically, if Diana were to have remarried again, I think that she would have wanted it to be as far removed from the British royal family as possible other than having her sons attend. This is the woman that actively dismissed any offer by the BRF of protection after the divorce. At the time of her death, she didn't exactly hold the royal family in any kind of high esteem and would have planned her life as her own and possibly could have seen any kind of involvement from the BRF or its staff as "controlling" or "interfering"

The more I think about it, the involvement of the Lord Chamberlain in putting together a funeral quickly stemmed from Charles' involvement in everything from the moment he realized that Diana had been killed in Paris. If he had been the type of ex-husband that had totally put her out of sight and out of mind, he wouldn't have done all the things he did for Diana at the time along with being there for his sons. He didn't have to accompany Diana's sisters to Paris to bring Diana home but he wanted to. To me, that showed the integrity Charles, the man, has and the respect he held for his ex-wife.

It very easily could have just been all totally handed over to the Spencers to do what they will. The BRF weren't required to step in but they did to assure that Diana was afforded a funeral that included everyone down to the public masses that mourned her.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #156  
Old 11-03-2018, 01:24 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Somewhere in the U.K, United Kingdom
Posts: 105
How many members of the royal family are there in total?
Reply With Quote
  #157  
Old 11-03-2018, 01:51 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 1,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by royal_enthusiast View Post
How many members of the royal family are there in total?
Neither the British monarchy nor British law have ever clearly designated who is or is not classified as a "member of the royal family".
Reply With Quote
  #158  
Old 11-03-2018, 01:52 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: England, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,515
Well many many many, but the royal's official has links to bios for the following on their website:

HM The Queen
Philip
Charles
Camilla
William
Kate
George
Charlotte
Louis
Harry
Meghan
Andrew
Edward
Sophie
Anne
The Duke of Gloucester
The Duchess of Gloucester
The Duke of Kent
The Duchess of Kent
Princess Alexandra of Kent
Prince and Princess Michael of Kent

Of course, this really is just a list of HRH's and misses out the Queen's grandchildren (except Will and Harry) and her great grandchildren (apart from Will's children).
I suspect this indicates whilst others from those listed are of course members of the Queen's family they are not considered members of the Royal Family in an official sense.
Reply With Quote
  #159  
Old 11-03-2018, 02:09 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Somewhere in the U.K, United Kingdom
Posts: 105
I have an example which might clarify who’s regarded as a member of the royal family. Would Zara Tindall as an example have to ask permission from the Queen and Foreign office when ever she goes abroad in the line of work? This is because I know members of the royal family have to follow this protocol whenever they go abroad except for private holidays. Therefore, I wonder how many members of the Queen’s family have to comply with this?
Reply With Quote
  #160  
Old 11-03-2018, 03:23 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 3,285
While not official, I would say that the any 'royal highness' by definition is part of the 'royal family'; and I don't see a reason to extend that definition to those who are not royal highnesses (the only ones who could be debated imo are non-royal spouses of royal highnesses - it seems that they don't really count but in practice they do represent the queen at times).
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply


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
Relationships between Members of the British Royal Family Ava Elizabeth British Royals 1441 08-29-2019 07:44 AM
Relationships between Members of the Spanish Royal Family kil Royal Family of Spain 1497 02-20-2019 07:17 PM
Interviews with Members of the Royal Family SpiffyBallerina Royal House of Sweden 94 12-23-2014 07:06 AM




Popular Tags
archie mountbatten-windsor aristocracy bavaria;house;chef;luitpold;ludwig belgian royal family birthday celebration bracelets castles charles of wales countess of snowdon countess of wessex crown prince hussein crown prince hussein's future wife crusades current events cypher denmark discussão duchess of cambridge duchess of sussex duke & duchess of cambridge; duke of sussex family search felipe vi french royalty friendly city germany hamdan bin mohammed head of the house henry v house of bourbon house of saxe-coburg and gotha jack brooksbank jerusalem letter lineage lithuanian castles marriage meghan markle mohammed vi monaco christening monaco royal monarchism nelson mandela bay official visit pakistan palaces patron prince charles prince harry princess anne princess royal queen paola romanov family royal tour rumania shakespeare sharjah siblings south africa spain spanish royal state visit sweden swedish history swedish royalty trump usa valois viscount severn windy city



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:28 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2019
Jelsoft Enterprises