Diana's Styles and Titles

[Rudolph]

Diana held no title. The title was held by her grandfather, her father and her brother.

Which highlights a big difference between the nobility in Britain and the continent.

In Britain, individuals are ennobled, not entire families. Earl Spencer is a noble while his son, Viscount Althorp is a commoner.

 

[Queen Claude]

I think that the point was not about who had the bluest blood but who had the bluest English blood. I am not totally vouching for the quote but it seems plausible to me because it seems to be in the same vein as the dig about the British Royal Family not being all that British/English.

 

[duke of poliganc]

I think that the point was not about who had the bluest blood but who had the bluest English blood. I am not totally vouching for the quote but it seems plausible to me because it seems to be in the same vein as the dig about the British Royal Family not being all that British/English.

i think you are right members of the nobility always have a lot of pride in having a old title regardless of the rank and having an old family

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Diana eventually boosting on Britishness lead to nothing. Her family is widely connected with nobility, with let us say the House of Albemarle (Van Keppel, Dutch origin), with the House of Berwick (Alba, Spanish origin), with the House of Portland (Bentinck, Dutch origin), etc. As it was not desireable that Kings married their own subjects and as it was international policy to make alliances, it simply was de rigueur that a royal found a foreign partner.

 

[Countessmeout]

I didn't say otherwise. I said James's legitimate children's children didn't have children.

James II had 3 legitimate children - Mary, Anne, and James.

Mary had no surviving children and Anne's 1 surviving child died before becoming an adult. James had 2 legitimate children, Charles and Henry.

Henry was a Catholic bishop who had no acknowledged children. Charles (I was wrong, but my point remains), had no legitimate children, but one surviving illegitimate daughter, Charlotte, and it is believed her 3 (also illegitimate) children died without having had children.

Yes.

There are 2 legitimate lines to the house of Stewart, both female. One is through Charles I's daughter Henrietta who married the Prince of Orleans. Through her daughter Anne we can trace the Jacobite claim. The current claimant is Franz, duke in Bavaria. Sophie of Lichtenstein, his niece, and her son after her, follow Franz and his brother Max (her dad). Among those connected to this line are the Brazilians. Prince Pedro's wife was a granddaughter of one of the claimants. Her grandmother Maria Theresa was the 5 time great-granddaughter of Henrietta. MT's claim passed to her eldest son Rupprecht, Pedro's father in law's older brother.

The other line goes back a generation to the daughter of James I, Elizabeth. Elizabeth was the grandmother of George I, from whom the Windsors are descended, the senior protestant line. Most of the major royal houses in Europe and many minor, count Elizabeth as an ancestor (Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Netherlands, spain, Luxembourg and Greece among them).

 

[Denville]

I think that the point was not about who had the bluest blood but who had the bluest English blood. I am not totally vouching for the quote but it seems plausible to me because it seems to be in the same vein as the dig about the British Royal Family not being all that British/English.

It is plausible that Diana siad it. The English aristocracy DO think of themselves as just as grand as the RF, who were of German origin. So it is quite possible that Diana felt that her family were older and in England well before Philip came into the country, regardless of his royal rank and marriage to the queen.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Hmmmm. I wonder how many people in Britain are actually descended from ancient Britons? (Rhetorical question.) There's been one wave of immigration after another during the last two Millenia.

 

[Denville]

They don't have to be from ancient Britons, but certainly a family like the Spencers who can trace their lineage back to Tudor times and before, would think of themselves as in no way inferior to the RF.

 

[duke of poliganc]

Duchess Marie Thérèse of Württemberg after divorcing Prince Henri, Count of Clermont ( the current Count of Paris ) was created Duchess of Montpensier in her own right by her former father-in-law, Henri, Count of Paris, then head of the Orléans dynasty .

 

[Mermaid1962]

I was thinking more about the people who make a big deal about the Royal Family being German and not about aristocratic families in particular. But yes, I see what you mean about aristocratic families feeling they're superior.

They don't have to be from ancient Britons, but certainly a family like the Spencers who can trace their lineage back to Tudor times and before, would think of themselves as in no way inferior to the RF.

 

[Queen Camilla]

Diana referred to the Queen and Prince Philip as Germans. She famously called her inlaws, the Queen and Prince Philip Germans to a prospective employee. (1988)

Now why would her 'German' mother-in-law award her former daughter-in-law with any kind of reward or honor.

The Queen knew Diana much better than her fans.

Her fans need to look at from the Queen's perspective.
Diana's behavior did not warrant rewarding.

 

[Curryong]

Well, Diana didn't get any further honours. She remained Princess of Wales and mother of the heir and spare till the day she died. Her son will rule one day, and I suppose she didn't really need any greater honour or reward than that.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

Duchess Marie Thérèse of Württemberg after divorcing Prince Henri, Count of Clermont ( the current Count of Paris ) was created Duchess of Montpensier in her own right by her former father-in-law, Henri, Count of Paris, then head of the Orléans dynasty .

The titles in the House de France are for private use. No one recognizes them. Exactly like the current Duke of Parma (generally recognized) is also Duque de Madrid (no one recognizes that), his brother Prince Jaime is also Duque de San Jaime (no one recognizes that), his sister Princess Maria Carolina is Duquesa de Guernica (no one recognizes that).

I think you can not compare the purely private granting of a not-recognized title as Duchesse de Montpensier in the House of France to the position of the former Princess of Wales in a reigning and recognized House which is part of a functioning constitutional system in a real state.

Even the titles Comte de Paris and Duc de France are fantasy-titles. The only recognized title in the House of Orléans is Prince (Princesse) d'Orléans and the head of that House used to be known as Duc d'Orléans, a most prestigious, historic title. They should stick to that. Duc de Nemours, Princesse de Joinville... my *ss...

 

[Queen Camilla]

Well, Diana didn't get any further honours. She remained Princess of Wales and mother of the heir and spare till the day she died. Her son will rule one day, and I suppose she didn't really need any greater honour or reward than that.

Diana was no longer Princess of Wales. She was the ex-wife.

 

[Pranter]

She was still called Diana, PoW ...as I recall? The styling indicating she was divorced.


LaRae

 

[Zonk]

She was. She used the correct styling that all divorced people use I believe.

It's a shame the War of the Wales's continues here at The Royal Forums.

 

[Queen Camilla]

It's a shame the War of the Wales's continues here at The Royal Forums.

Yes and mostly in threads that have nothing to do with Diana.

 

[Countessmeout]

She was still called Diana, PoW ...as I recall? The styling indicating she was divorced.


LaRae

Yes, simply put, the title becomes basically their surname at divorce. It is the same with ex wives of aristocrats. Diana went from HRH The Princess of Wales (not allowed to use Diana as she was not a princess in her own right), to Lady Diana, Princess of Wales. If she remarried, she'd lose the last part. As Fergie is legally Sarah, Duchess of York. If she was alive when Camilla married Charles we'd have HRH The Princess of Wales, and Lady Diana, Princess of Wales.

 

[Pranter]

Cool that's what I thought...THE being the operative word indicating the holder of the title.


LaRae

 

[Curryong]

Diana has lots of threads and is avidly discussed in all of them. I can't see that she is discussed or argued over in non Diana threads, apart from the occasional comment.

And I said in my previous post she was (Diana) Princess of Wales till the day she died, the next one will be Kate, and it is Diana's son and grandson who will be Kings after Charles. Diana's legacy indeed!

 

[Countessmeout]

Sorry to disagree, but Kate is not the next POW, in the sense as Diana's successor. We have a current POW, and her name is Camilla. Camilla is HRH Princess Charles, The Princess of Wales....... Just because she chooses to use Duchess of Cornwall doesn't change that. The wife of the Prince of Wales is the Princess of Wales.

Diana has the same legacy as every king's mother before her. And with time and generations, she will be a blip in the history books. Even less then someone like Queen Alexandra who not only mothered a king, but married one. Alexandra in her day was known Alexandra in her time was extremely popular, devoted to medical causes, but besides hospitals in her name, most people know her simply as queen/queen mother. As decades pass Diana will be the same. Its already slowly starting, with younger generations not knowing her well if at all. When Kate becomes queen consort, there will be many people who will not know her ring as anyone but hers.

 

[Curryong]

Alexandra was also the daughter and sister of Kings.

Yes, and Camilla will be just a blip in history as well, I expect. It also doesn't negate the fact that Diana was Prss of Wales until the day of her death or that it will be Diana and Charles's descendants who will rule after Charles. The reason Camilla doesn't use the title of Princess of Wales, was at least partly because BP and Clarence House feared a public backlash at the time of their wedding.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

[...] Diana went from HRH The Princess of Wales (not allowed to use Diana as she was not a princess in her own right), to Lady Diana, Princess of Wales. [...]

She did not become Lady Diana, Princess of Wales. Her style was Diana, Princess of Wales. All in line with the Letters Patent of 21 August 1996.

 

[Roslyn]

She did not become Lady Diana, Princess of Wales. Her style was Diana, Princess of Wales. All in line with the Letters Patent of 21 August 1996.

Unless I'm missing something, and I did read it carefully, all the Letters Patent did was deprive her of the right to use the style title or attribute of Royal Highness. She was born entitled to use the courtesy title of Lady and although it was subsumed under the higher styles and titles of HRH and Princess of Wales while she was married to Charles, I am not aware of any reason she would not be able to call herself Lady Diana once again since she had never lost that right. After the divorce "Princess of Wales" was only essentially a surname.

 

[Denville]

yes she could have called herself Lady Diana, Lady Diana Pss of Wales would not be the correct way to do it. Diana Princess Of Wales was the name she was using as the divorced wife of the POW. If she remarried, to a man with no title, she would revert to her "lady" title and call herself Lady Diana Smith. Or she could have chosen as a divorcee to revert ot her maiden name if she wanted, and call herself lady Diana Spencer or Mountbatten Windsor.. but it was unlikely that she'd do that as Princess has more "cachet" than Lady.
But had she married an Earl, she would not call herself Lady Diana Countess of X.. just "Countess of X".

 

[Countessmeout]

She did not become Lady Diana, Princess of Wales. Her style was Diana, Princess of Wales. All in line with the Letters Patent of 21 August 1996.

The letters patent only dealt with royal titles, as they addressed all future ex wives. It stated that they would lose the HRH and other courtesies due to a wife of a royal prince. This had nothing to do with any personal titles. Diana was from the moment her father became an Earl, Lady Diana. And in no way did the queen's letter change this. She was still entitled to be addressed as the daughter of Earl Spencer. As with her sisters, her marriage did not eliminate her right to her courtesy title.

 

[Denville]

Yes she could still call herself Lady Diana, but she woudl not call herself "Lady Diana Princess of wales." one or the other but not both. And it was most likely that she would use the Princess title until she remarried and had to give it up

Alexandra was also the daughter and sister of Kings.

Yes, and Camilla will be just a blip in history as well, I expect. It also doesn't negate the fact that Diana was Prss of Wales until the day of her death or that it will be Diana and Charles's descendants who will rule after Charles. The reason Camilla doesn't use the title of Princess of Wales, was at least partly because BP and Clarence House feared a public backlash at the time of their wedding.

I woudl say that Diana will be remembered for her charity work, her charm and beauty, her fashion sense etc.

 

[Osipi]

I woudl say that Diana will be remembered for her charity work, her charm and beauty, her fashion sense etc.

Yes, she will but more so for being the ex-wife of The Prince of Wales and the scandalous, global soap opera called "The War of the Wales". Similar to along the lines that one thing that stands out about the reign of King George IV was that he banned his wife, Caroline, from his coronation ceremony.

BTW: Caroline of Brunswick was another Princess of Wales that had kind of a soap opera going on about her too.

 

[duke of poliganc]

Diana has the same legacy as every king's mother before her. And with time and generations, she will be a blip in the history books. Even less then someone like Queen Alexandra who not only mothered a king, but married one. Alexandra in her day was known Alexandra in her time was extremely popular, devoted to medical causes, but besides hospitals in her name, most people know her simply as queen/queen mother. As decades pass Diana will be the same. Its already slowly starting, with younger generations not knowing her well if at all. When Kate becomes queen consort, there will be many people who will not know her ring as anyone but hers.

i think Lady Margaret Beaufort , Countess of Richmond and Derby the mother of king Henry VII legacy is still present and she never even held the title of princess lit alone queen so diana's legacy well never be less than any queen mother

 

[Denville]

You can't POSSIBLY compare a terrible crazed vulgar nitwit like Caro of Brunswick to Diana. Diana had her faults but as time passes while people will remember the divorce and the failed marriage, I think that her great achievemetns in making the RF a star family for a while, and her AIDS work etc will be remembered more.