Earl Spencer, Family and Althorp Museum

[iowabelle]

I'm not sure that Diana's father, then Viscount Althorp, cheated on Frances. However, it seems that Viscount Althorp aged rather badly, got boring and stale ... and then didn't have much in common with the much younger Frances, who loved city life and found a romantic partner. Had Diana been paying attention, she might have realized the potential for a similar problem in her marriage.

I meant to say, I think that he didn't cheat on Frances until after she had taken up with Shand Kidd. We all know that eventually he had the passionate affair with Raine.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by iowabelle

I'm not sure that Diana's father, then Viscount Althorp, cheated on Frances. However, it seems that Viscount Althorp aged rather badly, got boring and stale ... and then didn't have much in common with the much younger Frances, who loved city life and found a romantic partner. Had Diana been paying attention, she might have realized the potential for a similar problem in her marriage.

I meant to say, I think that he didn't cheat on Frances until after she had taken up with Shand Kidd. We all know that eventually he had the passionate affair with Raine.

According to 'High Beams', they have an article, from the Mail, entitled 'Was Diana's mother a battered wife', in which it claims he may have been a womaniser and wife beater. The link won't post here because you have to be a member to read it. I will keep looking for the written rumour.

[scooter]

I had not read that the late Earl Spencer was a womanizer, however I do remember reading that he was physically abusive towards Frances. Unless I am having a senior moment, did Frances not cross file for divorce siting cruelty?

[Bella]

From what I've heard - and this supposedly comes from a friend of one of Raine Spencer's children - Diana's father was a decent but emotionally stunted man who did not cheat on Frances. He was very nervous (due to the terrible way his own father treated him) and prone to bouts of severe depression. Frances supposedly was so traumatized by the Spencers pressure for her to have a son that she went for the first man who treated her with any kind of attention and affection - something painfully lacking in her own marriage.

Diana's grandfather Spencer was the notorious womanizer and alledged wife-beater.

Seems the current Earl Spencer isn't much to write home about either in terms of how he treats woman, including his sisters. Spoiled brat. Tho they say he is an attentive father. Who knows.

[Monika_]

...Yes, there was resentment over how she controlled their father and how she took over Althorp and sold many of it's treasures, but let's not forget that Diana mended fences with her long before she died and the two often met for lunch.

[georgiea]

Read that the Earl dumped his American live-in girlfriend of two years or so.

[tan_berry]

I read in a Diana´s biography that her parents had so many children looking for the male heir. When they finally got one, the child died, and that happened before Diana and Charles were born. That experience is usually terrible for a marriage.

I do not think Charles Spencer is a saint, but he is in the limelight, different to most men of his generation. Two marriages at forty something is not a big thing, nowadays. He did cheat repeteadly on his first wife, they say, who was busy looking for the male heir he needed, too. That is the worst part of the movie. Very bad, indeed. So selfish and inconsiderate.

[LOSSEAN]

Too bad he is doing well for himself. And he has beautiful and brainy daughters too. I haven't read much of the stories shared lately on this thread but I read his furniture business based on Althorp designs have been winners. I am impressed by the way he expresses himself (such clever use of words) but I agree with the general consensus that he was not fair during Diana's eulogy, in regards to the Royal family. Then I remembered he was from the same stock as Churchill, the great wartime leader...no wonder the same way with words! but Churchill would definitely have turned in his grave at such vitriolic, vindictive stab at the beloved Royal family whose legacy he had valiantly upheld.

[Mermaid1962]

I find that, as time goes by, more people are aware of how awful Earl Spencer's speech was at that funeral. At the time, it seemed like a grief-stricken brother fighting for his sister's legacy; but as time goes by, it sounds more and more like a bitter rant against the Windsors.

Originally Posted by LOSSEAN

I agree with the general consensus that he was not fair during Diana's eulogy, in regards to the Royal family. Then I remembered he was from the same stock as Churchill, the great wartime leader...no wonder the same way with words! but Churchill would definitely have turned in his grave at such vitriolic, vindictive stab at the beloved Royal family whose legacy he had valiantly upheld.

[Warren]

Originally Posted by georgiea

Read that the Earl dumped his American live-in girlfriend of two years or so.

Yes, the newslink was provided by Zonk on 30 June at post #209.

[Duchess]

Originally Posted by Mermaid1962

I find that, as time goes by, more people are aware of how awful Earl Spencer's speech was at that funeral. At the time, it seemed like a grief-stricken brother fighting for his sister's legacy; but as time goes by, it sounds more and more like a bitter rant against the Windsors.

so true isn't it?! i remember thinking it was great that he was finally saying what diana felt along but now, in hindsight, it just seems like it was a knee jerk reaction that deeply hurt the queen.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by Mermaid1962

I find that, as time goes by, more people are aware of how awful Earl Spencer's speech was at that funeral. At the time, it seemed like a grief-stricken brother fighting for his sister's legacy; but as time goes by, it sounds more and more like a bitter rant against the Windsors.

While his latest squeeze sat in the church!

I saw it as a hate fueled rant, with no thought or regard for his nephews or HM, from a brother who had hardly done his best for his sister. Those children had already suffered the loss of a beloved parent and the trauma of walking behind the coffin and now they were a captive audience for this diatribe!

It was quite simply neither the time nor the place for his attack of verbal diarrhoea.

[iowabelle]

Originally Posted by scooter

I had not read that the late Earl Spencer was a womanizer, however I do remember reading that he was physically abusive towards Frances. Unless I am having a senior moment, did Frances not cross file for divorce siting cruelty?

"Back in the day" mental cruelty was a common legal reason for seeking divorce but didn't necessarily mean actual abuse or cruelty took place. My impression is that, although then Viscount Althorp may have been loud and was physically intimidating by virtue of size, he allowed women to run him (Frances, her mother, and later Raine).

I have also heard of alcohol abuse by some accounts but other authors deny that. I think there was definitely a tendency toward depression. Until the death of his father, life was very difficult -- the elder Earl Spencer (Diana's grandfather) was an eccentric, mean bully who controlled the purse strings and certainly loved his estate over his own family.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by iowabelle

"Back in the day" mental cruelty was a common legal reason for seeking divorce but didn't necessarily mean actual abuse or cruelty took place.

Mental cruelty/abuse is still a valid reason for divorce, unfortunately it was/is as real as physical abuse and does take place!

[Bella]

Charles, Earl Spencer, has the persona of the cliche politician, imo. He's really all about himself but he'll say and do whatever it takes to put himself in a positive light, whether he's being sincere or not. I think alot of what he said at Diana's eulogy was to make himself popular and look like the noble brother and head of the family defending the poor misunderstood and often maligned by the RF sister. He totally took advantage of the unsettled public opinion of the RF right after D's death. This man should run for office.

[iowabelle]

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Mental cruelty/abuse is still a valid reason for divorce, unfortunately it was/is as real as physical abuse and does take place!

I think you misunderstood what I meant. I don't dispute that abuse exists.

In the U.S. we normally use the language "irreconcilable differences" now, but we used to have to allege abuse, infidelity, etc. as the grounds for wanting a divorce. (In the case of the Spencers I know that then-Viscount Althorp alleged infidelity and she claimed mental cruelty. Frances had to make some sort of counter-claim because she wanted custody of the children.) I think "irreconcilable differences" is kinder language because the parties don't have to go into great detail or make up stories, plus it doesn't get into "he said, she said" issues which are upsetting to children.

It was also common "back in the day" in Britain for the spouses to agree to have the husband caught in bed with another woman and that would serve as the grounds for divorce.

Obviously, in the Spencers' case Viscount Althorp triumphed, especially since his wife had been named as the other party in the Shand Kidd divorce and her own mother testified against her. I'm not sure that Frances was able to provide convincing evidence that Viscount Althorp had abused her.

[Skydragon]

Originally Posted by iowabelle

I think you misunderstood what I meant. I don't dispute that abuse exists.

Sorry, I thought you were saying it didn't.

In the U.S. we normally use the language "irreconcilable differences" now, but we used to have to allege abuse, infidelity, etc. as the grounds for wanting a divorce. (In the case of the Spencers I know that then-Viscount Althorp alleged infidelity and she claimed mental cruelty. Frances had to make some sort of counter-claim because she wanted custody of the children.) I think "irreconcilable differences" is kinder language because the parties don't have to go into great detail or make up stories, plus it doesn't get into "he said, she said" issues which are upsetting to children.

It was also common "back in the day" in Britain for the spouses to agree to have the husband caught in bed with another woman and that would serve as the grounds for divorce.

Obviously, in the Spencers' case Viscount Althorp triumphed, especially since his wife had been named as the other party in the Shand Kidd divorce and her own mother testified against her. I'm not sure that Frances was able to provide convincing evidence that Viscount Althorp had abused her.

Here it depends whether the divorce is contested as to what details are discussed and whether there is money involved. I have been involved with a battered wives group and sometimes I think mental abuse is worse in some ways and as you say very hard to prove to outsiders. I always felt incredibly sorry for Frances, to lose custody of your children is bad enough but to do so with the help of your own mother must be the ultimate betrayal.