Relationships between Members of the British Royal Family

[Denville]

Mrs. Michael should have reached out more to William and Harry after Diana's death. I think that the Kents should have been more friendly to the Waleses.

Who Is Mrs Michael? If you mean Princess Michael I don't know why she shodl be PARTICULARLY friendly or supportive to WIl and Harry.
I gather that all the RF tried to help them when their mother died.. esp when up in Balmoral Anne's 2 children tried to keep them company in the week or 2 after Diana died
I think that as neighbours at KP Diana and Prss Michael had their ups and downs, but she was fond of Diana and sympathised iwht her when the divorce happened...so I imagine that she at least offered sympathy to the boys..

 

[Westfield Bakery]

Who Is Mrs Michael? If you mean Princess Michael I don't know why she shodl be PARTICULARLY friendly or supportive to WIl and Harry.
I gather that all the RF tried to help them when their mother died.. esp when up in Balmoral Anne's 2 children tried to keep them company in the week or 2 after Diana died
I think that as neighbours at KP Diana and Prss Michael had their ups and downs, but she was fond of Diana and sympathised iwht her when the divorce happened...so I imagine that she at least offered sympathy to the boys..

True. Prince Michael would have been a good influence on Harry, his tough military upbringing and his Russian history would have taught Harry well.

I wonder how Harry gets along with his grandfather, Prince Philip. A lot of people see Harry in Philip (tough, charismatic, handsome).

 

[Muhler]

People simply react to personal tragedies in a different way. It is IMO next to impossible to compare personal loss, because that's what they are, personal.

Some deal with it themselves.
Some need help.
Others should perhaps have asked for help.

I'll add that Diana's death was a bit unique. In her case there were someone to blame (whether right or wrong is beside the point), someone to be angry at, someone who "took her away" from in this case William and Harry.

The rest listed were due to accidents, and traumatic as they are, it really wasn't anyone else' "fault" so to speak.
And losing a relative in war. In a way you are mentally prepared for that to happen.

The only one who is comparable IMO is King Juan Carlos, who shot his brother. Coming to terms with that (if he indeed has come to terms with it) must have been very difficult. But his generation did not seek help. - And there were countless others of his generation who had suffered severe personal traumas.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

I have the idea that the relationship between Prince Harry and his grandfather is excellent. As no one else in the family Harry resembles Philip the most, to my humble opinion.

The immediate fall-out of Diana's tragic accident happened at Balmoral Castle in the remote countryside of Scotland. The core circle engulfing the two sons were -of course- their father Prince Charles, their grandparents at Balmoral and maybe the Spencers (who possibly also were vacationing elsewhere when it all happened).

To drag Marie-Christine into this seems awkward to me. Her husband is a quite distant relative. Their son Frederick is older than Harry. Why she is particularly pointed out for a possible lack of empathy is a mystery to me. From the outside look I have never noticed any animosity between Marie-Christine and Diana. And why would there be anyway? Diana was the Princess of Wales, the future Queen. She ranked above almost all and everyone in the family. Diana was Champions' League. Anne was Premier League. Marie-Christine was Championships' League. Total different situations.

 

[Westfield Bakery]

I have the idea that the relationship between Prince Harry and his grandfather is excellent. As no one else in the family Harry resembles Philip the most, to my humble opinion.

The immediate fall-out of Diana's tragic accident happened at Balmoral Castle in the remote countryside of Scotland. The core circle engulfing the two sons were -of course- their father Prince Charles, their grandparents at Balmoral and maybe the Spencers (who possibly also were vacationing elsewhere when it all happened).

To drag Marie-Christine into this seems awkward to me. Her husband is a quite distant relative. Their son Frederick is older than Harry. Why she is particularly pointed out for a possible lack of empathy is a mystery to me. From the outside look I have never noticed any animosity between Marie-Christine and Diana. And why would there be anyway? Diana was the Princess of Wales, the future Queen. She ranked above almost all and everyone in the family. Diana was Champions' League. Anne was Premier League. Marie-Christine was Championships' League. Total different situations.

Diana had called Marie-Christine "Fuhrer" because at Kensington, she'd spy on the Waleses. Marie-Christine could have been friendly with William, Harry and Charles.

I wonder if the Gloucesters and Harry get along.

 

[Osipi]

I really don't believe that Harry would even see the Gloucesters and/or the Kents that often. Perhaps at the extended family Christmas lunch at Buckingham Palace? I'd even go as far as to bet my last Greek yogurt that they're more like acquaintances than "family". Growing up, I had first cousins that I really only saw at weddings and funerals once my grandmother died.

Even the immediate family of Charles, Camilla, the Queen, DoE and William, Kate and Harry probably don't spend all that much time together either. They all have their own very busy schedules to keep. The only real closeness I have been able to gather from information is between W&K&H. That stands to reason though, they all live close together at KP and can visit and play with the kids when they have some down time.

So, really, I think for the most part, the Gloucesters and the Kents are pretty much irrelevant in Will and Harry's life.

It was mentioned that Marie-Christine was called the "Fuhrer" by Diana. She also has another pretty popular nickname which is "Princess Pushy".

 

[maria-olivia]

Zara Philips did a lot for them and was often invited by the Prince of wales to share their holdays.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

We can argue that they didn't mention the Queen either, but William said previously that she was, as the Duke, a great support.
I know there's is a lot of wishful thinking about Charles being a bad father , but it's simply not true.

Exactly!

And when it comes to Charles's parenting:

1. The anti-Charles part of the British press says Charles was an absent and bad father (something we know is wrong).

2. The Pro Charles part of the British press (and yes it is one) says Charles was a present and good father (something we know is correct).

William/Harry's relationships with their grandmother's cousins:

Why should the Queen's cousins have a close relationship with (or good influence on) her grandsons? I'm from a close family, but I have no contact with my grandparents cousins.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Diana had called Marie-Christine "Fuhrer" because at Kensington, she'd spy on the Waleses. Marie-Christine could have been friendly with William, Harry and Charles.

I wonder if the Gloucesters and Harry get along.

The characters of Marie-Christine and Diana possibly were total opposites. I can imagine that Marie-Christine has a sort of tüchtige Germanic worldview and little patience for über-privileged ladies who come not furtherer than lamenting about their poor and miserable life. No, my idea is that Marie-Christine would say: stop wailing and panzer yourself! "Schatzlein, Sie sind die Prinzessin von Wales, um Gottes Willen!" (Darling, you are The Princess of Wales, for Christ's sake!)

 

[Countessmeout]

Zara Philips did a lot for them and was often invited by the Prince of wales to share their holdays.

Harry and William both were close to Peter and Zara growing up. Likely among other things due to age.

First cousins are understandably lot closer then third cousins are.

I don't find that the boys spend rare time with Charles as concerning. They are adults. I am very close to my parents but I haven't seen them in over a year. We don't live close and work keeps us busy. Charles and his sons have busy schedules which keep them traveling, especially Charles, a lot.

 

[Westfield Bakery]

I hope Anne and Marie-Christine get along, despite them being polar opposites.
The Queen, the Duchess of Cornwall, the Princess Royal, and the Duchess of Cambridge should try to interact with Marie-Christine more, try to make her feel more welcomed in the BRF. She's more beautiful than all of them!!!


It's a shame that Kate and Anne have not invited Marie-Christine over for lunch or dinner in the past.

Kate would learn A LOT from Princess Michael. It's a shame the two of them don't have lunch together or shop together around London and the suburbs.

 

[Iluvbertie]

And we know that this hasn't happened how exactly?

We see about 5% of their lives. What they do in the rest of the time is not made public.

Marie-Christine is presented in the media in one way but is that what she is really like? We don't know.

We know that as Michael isn't a working royal she isn't one either so we see even less of her life than we do of the others as we only see her at the really big events such as Trooping when it seems that the others get along fine with her - but they could act quite well for the 30 or so minutes they are in public.

We don't know how often any of them actually spend any time with each other. We know for instance, that Charles and Camilla weren't with the family at Easter - why - well some would suggest because they aren't wanted. If you follow the BRF for any length of time and read the CC you would know that Charles always spends Easter in Scotland these days.

We hear that the Queen's family get together for Christmas but how many people realise that that entire 'togetherness' lasts for less then 24 hours as Charles and Camilla and the York's leave after the Queen's message at about 3.30 so that Camilla can go to her children, Charles to Scotland alone while the York's go to spend the rest of the holidays with Sarah.

The three Kent children seem quite close. I remember last year there was a picture (or it may have been two years ago now) of the Duke and Michael having a cup of tea at Alexandra's place for Greek Easter taken by one of the Duke's children. Presumably Marie-Christine was there with her sisters-in-law.

How many of us spend much time with the children and grandchildren of our husband's first cousin? That is what the relationship is between Marie-Christine and Anne and Kate. Michael is the Queen's first cousin so hardly that close in relationship with Anne and even less so with William so why anyone would expect any sort of relationship with Kate I don't know.

 

[Westfield Bakery]

And we know that this hasn't happened how exactly?

We see about 5% of their lives. What they do in the rest of the time is not made public.

Marie-Christine is presented in the media in one way but is that what she is really like? We don't know.

We know that as Michael isn't a working royal she isn't one either so we see even less of her life than we do of the others as we only see her at the really big events such as Trooping when it seems that the others get along fine with her - but they could act quite well for the 30 or so minutes they are in public.

We don't know how often any of them actually spend any time with each other. We know for instance, that Charles and Camilla weren't with the family at Easter - why - well some would suggest because they aren't wanted. If you follow the BRF for any length of time and read the CC you would know that Charles always spends Easter in Scotland these days.

We hear that the Queen's family get together for Christmas but how many people realise that that entire 'togetherness' lasts for less then 24 hours as Charles and Camilla and the York's leave after the Queen's message at about 3.30 so that Camilla can go to her children, Charles to Scotland alone while the York's go to spend the rest of the holidays with Sarah.

The three Kent children seem quite close. I remember last year there was a picture (or it may have been two years ago now) of the Duke and Michael having a cup of tea at Alexandra's place for Greek Easter taken by one of the Duke's children. Presumably Marie-Christine was there with her sisters-in-law.

How many of us spend much time with the children and grandchildren of our husband's first cousin? That is what the relationship is between Marie-Christine and Anne and Kate. Michael is the Queen's first cousin so hardly that close in relationship with Anne and even less so with William so why anyone would expect any sort of relationship with Kate I don't know.

Families should get along with all family members, however, that does not happen. The Duchess of Cambridge would get more advice from Marie-Christine, especially in the fashion department. No one dresses like Marie-Christine.

 

[Iluvbertie]

We can argue that they didn't mention the Queen either, but William said previously that she was, as the Duke, a great support.
I know there's is a lot of wishful thinking about Charles being a bad father , but it's simply not true.

The problem is that they never speak about their father and so the Diana fans are able to have a field day by saying they hate him, they blame him for Diana's death, they blame him for the breakdown of the marriage etc.

A simple comment, such as, 'papa tried but in the end we needed more' would have stopped all that speculation for good.

They never say that so they leave open the idea that they don't care about their father.

They only ever speak about him when they have to on a documentary about him when they can't very well say anything negative.

A few off the cuff comments about him, as they are always doing about Diana, wouldn't hurt them but would help their father's reputation as a father, with the haters who are thinking they are supporting Diana in their hatred of Charles.

 

[Westfield Bakery]

It would frankly be nice to see the Cambridges, the Waleses with the Queen's first cousins. They are family. It would be nice to see the Gloucesters have a more public role in the BRF, especially Prince and Princess Richard. Princess Richard is a very smart woman and she would give some stern, but good advice to the Cambridges.

Princess Edward, Duchess of Kent (Katherine Kent) barely wants to be a royal. She's not a working royal. But it would be nice to see Princess Richard and Princess Michael get more attention in the BRF other than Camilla, Kate, and Beatrice and Eugenie.

 

[Osipi]

Families should get along with all family members, however, that does not happen. The Duchess of Cambridge would get more advice from Marie-Christine, especially in the fashion department. No one dresses like Marie-Christine.

The thing is that the British royal family is not your run of the mill ordinary family by any stretch of the imagination. These are people that have their personal planners filled and planned sometimes down to the very minute of the day for months and months and sometimes even a year in advance. Even the Queen at 91 years young keeps a very rigid daily schedule and Charles' is reputed to be almost down to the minute from the time he rises in the morning until the time he goes to bed at night. Its no wonder that to "relax" they have set times such as a couple months at Balmoral, time at Sandringham for Christmas and Windsor for Easter. The Queen faithfully does her government red boxes every day without fail except for on Christmas Day and Easter.

One thing I'd like to know is why in the world a woman of Kate's age in her 30s would seek fashion advice from a woman in her 70s??? When it comes to her wardrobe, Kate knows what she likes and doesn't like and has some of the best designers more than happy to help her with her choices.

Although interesting to muse on, pushing relationships with members on the far edges of the extended family just seems..... silly to me. JMO but it just doesn't make sense to me at all.

Princess Edward, Duchess of Kent (Katherine Kent) barely wants to be a royal. She's not a working royal. But it would be nice to see Princess Richard and Princess Michael get more attention in the BRF other than Camilla, Kate, and Beatrice and Eugenie.

Perhaps they don't want more attention than what they have now. We have to remember that Camilla, Kate, William and Harry are senior members of the royal family and Beatrice and Eugenie aren't even needed or plan (at this time) to be needed to work for the "Firm" and are more or less private citizens yet members of the British royal family.

The Gloucesters and the Kents are slowly but surely fading out from being recognized members of the BRF. Their children will be even less recognized as time passes. Its how the monarchy works.

 

[Iluvbertie]

The Duke and Duchess of Gloucester (they stopped being Prince and Princess Richard when he became the Duke and became a peer of the realm and thus an aristocrat rather than a commoner) do quite a lot but they are older and don't get the publicity.

The Duchess of Kent voluntarily retired from royal duties when she took ill some years ago and is now well into her 80s and isn't going to appear anytime soon. She was never even referred to as Princess Edward as by the time she married he was already the Duke of Kent.

The press are only interested in the younger, mainline royals. They don't even give that much coverage to the Duchess of Cornwall or the Princess Royal who do a lot more than the Duchess of Cambridge who gets all the coverage due to her age.

Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie are covered usually to allow the press to let the comments mock them which happens all the time. They aren't working royals either so the only coverage comes from their nights out or holidays.

I do think it is disrespectful to refer to people using their lowest titles rather than their highest ones. Do you call Charles - Baron of Renfrew or Prince of Wales? No so why do it with the others?

In the UK Duke is a higher title than Prince. Prince is a commoner - like Prince Michael while Duke is a peer of the realm - an aristocrat and thus is higher in status.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

I hope Anne and Marie-Christine get along, despite them being polar opposites.
The Queen, the Duchess of Cornwall, the Princess Royal, and the Duchess of Cambridge should try to interact with Marie-Christine more, try to make her feel more welcomed in the BRF.

I really don't understands you posts.

You want Harry to have a larger wedding than William because he is more popular than his brother. And now you wants the Queen, Camilla, Kate and Anne to interact with Marie-Christine more, to make her feel more welcomed in the BRF?

1. The Queen is known for her kindness to her family, staff and others.

2. She is also known for her ability to make people feel welcome and I'm sure this applies to her cousins and their spouses as well.

She's more beautiful than all of them!!!

What does her being ''more beautiful'' have to do with this discussion? And if this is a competition (which it is not) then I'm sure the Queen wins.

Elizabeth II:
1. Is the most popular, iconic and most famous head of state (many people say person) in the world.

2. She was beautiful as a young woman, and still is (as a 91 year old) with her wonderful smile.

Marie-Christine:
1. Is (for the very few people in the UK and the rest of the world who knows who she is) known as Princess Michael of Kent.

2. She is married to a cousin of the Queen who does not have a full-time royal role.

It's a shame that Kate and Anne have not invited Marie-Christine over for lunch or dinner in the past.

Why should Kate have lunch/dinner with the wife to the cousin of her husband's grandmother?

Kate would learn A LOT from Princess Michael. It's a shame the two of them don't have lunch together or shop together around London and the suburbs.

If there is one Kate should learn from then it's the Queen, not a distant relative of her husband, who does not have a public role.

And if Kate wants help to prepare for her future role as consort (not that she needs it), then It's Phillip (I doubt he's a model for Kate) or Camilla she should go to.

 

[Westfield Bakery]

I have noticed Earl of Inverness (Andrew) has not been at Braemar Highland Games

I have noticed that the Earl of Inverness (Andrew's title in Scotland) has not been at the Braemar Highland Games at Royal Deeside in a long time.

Queen is tickled pink as she attends Highland Games with Prince Charles and Princess Anne | Daily Mail Online

I know that he and former Countess of Inverness (the Duchess of York's title when in Scotland), Sarah, have visited Balmoral, but only when Philip is not in residence.

It would be nice to see the Earl visit Braemar this summer;it be nice to see the Earl in Scotland more in general. he has not been pictured in a Scottish kilt since the early 1980s. The former Countess can't even step foot at Balmoral or Crathie when Philip is around. It drives Philip crazy watching his former daughter in law. I wonder if there still is a rift between Andrew, the earl, and his father, Philip, the Duke of Edinburgh, over the former Countess. The Earl has a more Scottish vibe than his other brother, Edward.

I wonder if the Earl and the Duke get along?

 

[Jacknch]

Please note that posts relating to the styes and titles of the Royal Family have been moved to the http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f23/questions-about-british-styles-and-titles-258.html thread. Posts discussing the fashion of various members of the Royal Family have been deleted as they are off topic. This thread is about the relationships between members of the Royal Family, there are other threads to discuss other topics.

 

[RoyalProtocol]

The Michaels of Kent aren't William and Henry's cousins. Prince Michael of Kent is The Queen's paternal cousin, which makes him Charles' second cousin, and William's third cousin. Hardly the starting block for a close relationship IMO. The boys had their actual cousins, uncles and aunts for support as well as friends and other supporters we're not aware of.







I agree to all of the above, it's hard to hold a grudge against a family you never see along with a family that has also just lost their matriarchal figure.

Sorry to jump in here so late!

The relationships between Prince Michael of Kent and the "main line" Royal Family aren't strictly correct.

Prince Michael is a first cousin of HM The Queen.

Prince Michael is a first cousin, once removed, of HRH The Prince of Wales.

Prince Michael is a first cousin, twice removed, of The Duke of Cambridge and Prince Henry of Wales.

To go slightly further, Lord Frederick Windsor and The Prince of Wales are second cousins. Lord Frederick is a second cousin, once removed, of Princes William and Harry.

Miss Maud Windsor is Prince William's third cousin. It also works in reverse but I think that's just too far!

I hope this all makes sense. Cousins are a complicated business!!

 

[Lumutqueen]

Yeah I'll be honest and say I tried to look it up but there was little information.

 

[Dman]

Why DO Kate's parents see so much more of Charlotte? | Daily Mail Online

I always say, Charles's branch of the family don't present a family unit and I think that's a problem.

 

[Curryong]

Yes, Dman, I think it is too. There is Charles and Camilla in one corner, the Cambridges in another (with Kate's parents and siblings nearby) and Harry somewhere in between but hovering more in the direction of his brother and his family. Goodness knows where, if and when Harry marries, he and his family will fit in.

No doubt things are cordial between Charles and his sons in that there is no open breach but there doesn't seem to be great closeness either. Charles's latest biographer has written that after Charles missed George's first two birthdays Tiggy rang him and warned him that he was missing out on some special connecting time and suggested that instead of working in his study in the early evenings (at Clarence House presumably) he could walk over and see George. The same pattern seems to be occurring with Charlotte.

So much work, so little time apparently, and relationships get neglected. The Cambridges don't stay much at Highgrove seemingly, either.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Hard to 'walk over and see George' in the evenings when George is living 6 hours drive away at Anmer Hall while Charles is in London.

I loved the story about the Cambridge's seeing more of the Queen because they live at Sandringham - except that she is only there for about 2 months a year and for quite a bit of that time they aren't at Anmer but at Bucklebury with the Middleton's or in the Caribbean - again with the Middleton's or on their skiing holidays - anywhere but at Sandringham where the Queen is when she is there.

 

[Curryong]

If Tiggy did give that advice it was obviously for times when the Cambridges were in London. It will presumably be easier to do that when the Cambridge family is living in London permanently. Is there anything to prevent Charles from spending a weekend or two out of his year at Sandringham, perhaps not going up to Birkhall at times but visiting his grandchildren instead?

 

[Iluvbertie]

He does spend a couple of weekends each year at Sandringham. When he went last year - and he has set weekends to do that due to his work commitments - the Cambridge's were seen elsewhere - so even when he is in the same area it seems they want to be elsewhere. They would know the weekends he goes to Sandringham as they are in his schedule years in advance to do things such as open the Sandringham Flower Show.

 

[Skippyboo]

The Cambridges haven't been in the Caribbean since back when Kate was pregnant with Charlotte. Six hours is the round trip time from London to Norfolk. Charles isn't going up and back in the same day. He also has access to a helicopter and housing on the estate. He goes to Scotland from London all the time. That's further than Norfolk. It's actually a farther drive to Anmer from Buckleberry than it's from Clarence House. The kids birthdays have been known since they were born. If Charles wanted to be there on Tuesday, he could have been there. He also could have spent Easter with the Queen and the Cambridges at Windsor instead he chose to spend it in Scotland.

 

[Countessmeout]

Yes but it isn't like Charles is some retired man playing golf who can just go visit his grandkids. charles and Camilla have some of the busiest schedule of any royals. They aren't even in Clarence House all the time, but traveling for their different events. They aren't in Scotland on holiday, they are up there doing events. And why is it up to Charles to do the work? Do the Cambridges maje any effort to take the kids to Birkhall, Clarence, or high grove to see him?

They do make an effort with the Middletons. They take the kids to Middleton manor. Though Mike and Carol work, they run their own company. They have far more flexible time.

I don't get why Charles gets the blame alone. Why didn't they join him in Scotland? I highly doubt the queen would complain. But it all falls on mean grandpa Charles for not going. Even if he has events in Scotland and was not simply there for holiday.

 

[Leopoldine]

I think that its not a big deal. There's no way to know who sees who when.