The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #421  
Old 11-30-2006, 11:32 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
Beatrix, why are you so insistent on this point? Does it really matter so much?

Regardless of her title or status, Diana was a member of the royal family after her divorce and she was still treated as a princess since she was the mother of Prince William. That's all that really matters and she is dead.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #422  
Old 12-01-2006, 12:12 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeatrixFan
Buckingham Palace never once referred to Diana as Princess Diana and that's what you claimed. If you can show me a statement from the Palace in which they talk about "Princess Diana" then I'll re-think. Diana was a Princess by marriage and was never made a Princess in her own right AFAIK.
To be indignent wont prove or contribute anything to this discussion, which up until now has avoided a less than amiable exchange amongst those participating. I'm hopeful we can keep it that way

Two members have both stated (as is their right) that they have heard of Diana, Princess of Wales being addressed as Princess Diana by 'BP' etc. Who are you (or I) to question what they, themselves, have read or heard?

Whether you believe what others have to say or not is one thing (and up to you), but until you can come up with a source that prove's them to be incorrect, then you are in no position to say, for definite, that they are.

I hope you all have a good day
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #423  
Old 12-01-2006, 12:39 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Charleston, SC, United States
Posts: 341
If Buckingham Palace ever issued a formal or official statement that referred to Diana as 'Princess Diana' or officially indicated that it was acceptable for the media to refer to her as such, I would like to know the details of that statement. It would have been incorrect form, and BP doesn't make mistakes like that in official statements.

That's not to say, of course, that employees of the Palace may have referred to her, informally, as 'Princess Diana' and been quoted as such. But, an informal quote is not the same as an official statement, and I think that it what Beatrix Fan is referring to. (BF, feel free to correct me if I am wrong.)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #424  
Old 12-01-2006, 12:59 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by sassie
That's not to say, of course, that employees of the Palace may have referred to her, informally, as 'Princess Diana' and been quoted as such. But, an informal quote is not the same as an official statement, and I think that it what Beatrix Fan is referring to.
Of course, but until BeatrixFan can himself prove this, he cannot dismiss what or what may not have occurred. I'm sure if he comes across any source(s) to support his statements, then he shall aptly apply them where required

This thread (certainly this forum) is (should be) about bringing together the facts and if anything, assisting one another in understanding the circumstances of the subject to the best we can. To enjoy a common interest we all share
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #425  
Old 12-01-2006, 09:10 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Charleston, SC, United States
Posts: 341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Madame Royale
Of course, but until BeatrixFan can himself prove this, he cannot dismiss what or what may not have occurred. I'm sure if he comes across any source(s) to support is statements, then he shall aptly apply them where required

This thread (certainly this forum) is (should be) about bringing together the facts and if anything, assisting one another in understanding the circumstances of the subject to the best we can. To enjoy a common interest we all share
Of course.

But the claim that BF was debating was that Diana was referred to as "Princess Diana" in official statements released by BP, and he was correct in saying that that never happened. He wasn't arguing that she was never referred to as such informally by Palace staff.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #426  
Old 12-01-2006, 09:21 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,983
Thanks sassie and to BeatrixFan, no offence or misunderstanding was (or ever is on my behalf) intended

And again, evidence is crucial in any discussion that turns into debate.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #427  
Old 12-01-2006, 06:29 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
Quote:
Beatrix, why are you so insistent on this point? Does it really matter so much?
Well, it does when you're claiming something happened that wouldn't. However, reading back the posts, I see there's been a misunderstanding. You wrote that the Palace referred to her in statements as "Princess Diana" which they didn't of course. But they did release a statement saying that if the media wanted to call her Princess Diana it was acceptable for journalistic purposes. So, I was arguing that the Palace didn't ever refer to her officially as Princess Diana - which they didn't. You were arguing that they made it known that the press could call her Princess Diana if they wanted to - which they did. My apologies for the misunderstanding.

And Madame Royale - don't worry hunnie. I'm never offended - I just offend.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #428  
Old 12-01-2006, 06:30 PM
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,897
Not around here you don't, if you know what's good for you.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #429  
Old 12-01-2006, 06:32 PM
BeatrixFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,843
Point taken. I was speaking generally.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #430  
Old 12-02-2006, 12:41 PM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Charlotte, United States
Posts: 79
I just read here on the forum a copy of her will that I believe was written in 1993 and it has her as Princess Diana (that is it), wouldn't that have been her legal name at that time?

Lily
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #431  
Old 12-02-2006, 01:07 PM
Avalon's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,905
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lily97
I just read here on the forum a copy of her will that I believe was written in 1993 and it has her as Princess Diana (that is it), wouldn't that have been her legal name at that time?
Lily
Late Diana was never a Princess in her own right, not during the marriage and not after the divorce. During the marriage she had all the titles of her husband but she was not a Princess in her own right. She was Diana, Princess of Wales and never Princess Diana of Wales.
__________________
Queen Elizabeth: "I cannot lead you into battle, I do not give you laws or administer justice but I can do something else, I can give you my heart and my devotion to these old islands and to all the peoples of our brotherhood of nations." God, Save The Queen!
Reply With Quote
  #432  
Old 12-02-2006, 01:42 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
That's true Avalon. Diana was a Princess by marriage, not by birth. But I don't understand what the fuss is. A Princess by marriage can and often does outrank a Princess by birth if the rank of her husband is higher than the rank of the Princess by birth.

Diana always outranked the Princess Royal during her marriage even though Anne was born a Princess.

I'm not sure about Diana's status after the divorce. She lost her royal status but kept her title as Princess and the Queen kept her order in the order of precedence so its possible that she still did outrank the Princesses by birth after her divorce.
__________________
"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
  #433  
Old 12-02-2006, 02:01 PM
Avalon's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,905
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel
That's true Avalon. Diana was a Princess by marriage, not by birth. But I don't understand what the fuss is. A Princess by marriage can and often does outrank a Princess by birth if the rank of her husband is higher than the rank of the Princess by birth.

Diana always outranked the Princess Royal during her marriage even though Anne was born a Princess.

I'm not sure about Diana's status after the divorce. She lost her royal status but kept her title as Princess and the Queen kept her order in the order of precedence so its possible that she still did outrank the Princesses by birth after her divorce.
Oh, that's true. The Duke of Edinburgh outranks all men in the Kingdom, including the Prince of Wales. Princess Diana outranked all women in the kingdom (until her divorce), except Her Majesty and The Queen Mother.
__________________
Queen Elizabeth: "I cannot lead you into battle, I do not give you laws or administer justice but I can do something else, I can give you my heart and my devotion to these old islands and to all the peoples of our brotherhood of nations." God, Save The Queen!
Reply With Quote
  #434  
Old 12-02-2006, 02:20 PM
Henri M.'s Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Eindhoven / Maastricht, Netherlands
Posts: 1,896
Quote:
Originally Posted by branchg
Beatrix, why are you so insistent on this point? Does it really matter so much?

Regardless of her title or status, Diana was a member of the royal family after her divorce

No, she ceased to be a member of the royal family. Similar to Sarah Ferguson, Mark Phillips and the Earl of Snowdon.

and she was still treated as a princess since she was the mother of Prince William.

That is true, but she did not enjoy the style and rank of a Princess of the United Kingdom. She was styled Diana, Princess of Wales, which is the style used by divorced female spouses of peers and was no title but purely en titre courteoisie. She would have lost that syle upon remarriage.
The Earl Spencer himself stated that his sister Diana was satisfied with the way she was styled after her divorce.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #435  
Old 12-02-2006, 03:14 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
In the end, I doubt Diana really cared. She continued to be treated the same anyway and was accorded appropriate dignity and precedence as the mother of a future king, regardless of her title or rank.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #436  
Old 12-02-2006, 03:17 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by ysbel
I'm not sure about Diana's status after the divorce. She lost her royal status but kept her title as Princess and the Queen kept her order in the order of precedence so its possible that she still did outrank the Princesses by birth after her divorce.
Diana retained her precedence on state and national occasions, which meant she remained the third lady in the land after The Queen and The Queen Mother on royal occasions.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #437  
Old 12-02-2006, 05:40 PM
Henri M.'s Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Eindhoven / Maastricht, Netherlands
Posts: 1,896
Quote:
Originally Posted by branchg
Diana retained her precedence on state and national occasions, which meant she remained the third lady in the land after The Queen and The Queen Mother on royal occasions.
In theory.
There has been no any royal occasion she was invited for, since her divorce.
It would most likely have been the weddings of her two sons, I can think about.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #438  
Old 12-02-2006, 06:26 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Charleston, SC, United States
Posts: 341
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lily97
I just read here on the forum a copy of her will that I believe was written in 1993 and it has her as Princess Diana (that is it), wouldn't that have been her legal name at that time?

Lily
I'm not sure what location you are reading that at, but the text of her will states "Diana, Princess of Wales".

http://www.thedianaring.com/lastwill.htm
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #439  
Old 12-02-2006, 07:21 PM
sirhon11234's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,464
her charity work

Quote:
Originally Posted by Henri M.
In theory.
There has been no any royal occasion she was invited for, since her divorce.
It would most likely have been the weddings of her two sons, I can think about.
You have to remember that after the divorce Diana was too involved with her charity work to attend a royal function. I think the only one that she attended was william's confirmation in June of 1997.
__________________
"I think the biggest disease the world suffers from in this day and age is the disease of people feeling unloved."
Diana, the Princess of Wales
Reply With Quote
  #440  
Old 12-03-2006, 11:57 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: , United States
Posts: 2,736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Henri M.
In theory.
There has been no any royal occasion she was invited for, since her divorce.
It would most likely have been the weddings of her two sons, I can think about.
Well, unfortunately, we'll never know since she died only a year after the divorce. But I would assume that she still would have been invited to things since her relationship with Prince Charles and The Queen was very good at the time of her passing.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
diana princess of wales, princess diana, styles and titles


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
Questions about British Styles and Titles summrbrew2 British Royals 2521 11-25-2014 09:30 AM
Questions About [non-British] Styles and Titles Lord Sosnowitz Royal Ceremony and Protocol 729 10-09-2014 04:24 PM
Titles and Styles of Harry, his Future Wife and Children Aussie Princess Prince Harry and Prince William 1110 07-12-2014 10:00 PM
Styles and Titles Nahla10 Ruling Family of Dubai 36 08-08-2013 12:05 PM




Popular Tags
abdication belgium birth brussels carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta leonor infanta sofia jewellery jordan king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg nobility official visit olympics ottoman pieter van vollenhoven president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess mabel princess margriet princess mary princess mary fashion queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia 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 02:07 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]