The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #221  
Old 08-17-2016, 06:14 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,114
I think that he and Di had had their rows over his marriage ot Raine when Diana slapped him.. But while she was wrong, I think that by and large Diana WAS rather let down by her family in many ways prior to her marriage.. I think that Johnny was focussed in her childhood on being miserable that his wife had left him.. THEN he married Raine which upset all the children.. Frances cared more about getting her freedom and remarrying than her kids, IMO, or in at least seeing that they had training for their future lives. Lady F cared more about her positon with the RF.
But I think that all the same, Johnny was fond of Di and very proud of her beauty and that she had won an offer of marriage from the Prince. So I'm sure it didn't enter his head that the marriage might not work out, or anything but to be pleased that she had such a grand marriage on offer.
I think he didn't realise really what a big job Di was undertaking and didn't really worry as to whether she could do it.. and I doubt if had Lady Fermoy really spoken to him about stopping the marriage, he would have said antying like what he is supposed to have said. I'm sure he would have said _ "Diana will be fine.. no need to worry about her."
Still I do wonder if Lady F put about a story that she had been worried abut Diana, and felt that she was too volatile or a bit too "nervy" to be in a public job like Princess of W....
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #222  
Old 08-17-2016, 06:52 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Waterford, United States
Posts: 1,728
All of Diana's assorted family probably assumed that the much older Charles, understanding how difficult taking on 'the firm' might be, would have treated his young bride with tender consideration. He didn't adjust his lifestyle to hers- it was all one-sided. But her family could have cherished her a bit more, also.
__________________

__________________
"If you look for the bad in people expecting to find it, you surely will.”

Abraham Lincoln
Reply With Quote
  #223  
Old 08-17-2016, 07:44 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 4,608
I don't think that Ruth did express doubts openly to anyone. I doubt it very much. If she did have anxieties she would have kept them to herself, IMHO.

I read Dimbleby's book on Charles last night, or at least the section leading to Charles's engagement, and Dimbleby just has a little note there that before Ruth's death she spoke to him about the marriage.

Dimbleby is very discreet and we don't know if it was a wide-ranging conversation or not, just that she told him that she had doubts at the time that Diana would make a happy Royal wife (nothing about her mental state) but because she didn't know Charles very well at the time she had said nothing to him. Lady F justified this by saying that she doubted that Charles would have been swayed anyway.

I have no doubt that she didn't speak to Earl Spencer in the way that it's been reported. How often did she see her granddaughter in those years between Diana leaving school and her becoming engaged, anyway? A lot, sometimes, hardly ever? Those years when she was bustling about, cleaning flats, looking after children, chilling with her girlfriends in her flat, going out with her small circle of friends to parties, favourite restaurants etc, were some of the happiest and most content of Diana's life.

What I mean is, would Diana have exhibited such troubled behaviour in her late teens as to have caused her grandmother to panic when it appeared that she may marry the POW, and cause her to express doubts to others?

Yes, Diana had had a troubled childhood (though I doubt that Lady F knew all the repercussions) yes, she was not scholastically gifted, yes, she never stuck at anything much, leaving things like helping the young children at ballet class after only a few weeks, etc. Yes, there was the wild Roche blood and the rebellious Spencer blood to take into account. Enough of anything though, to cause Ruth to think this marriage must not occur, that warnings must be given?

I don't think so. If she did speak to Earl S. it would have been done in private, surely? Even if Raine had been present would she have blabbed to anyone? Who was taking down the gist of this conversation, servants with ears flapping at keyholes? To me it sounds like one of those tabloid reports where journos at the Daily Fail know exactly what one Royal says to another!

If Lady F by her own admission said nothing to Charles, and it's unlikely that she said anything to her son in law, who else would she have spoken to? It wasn't for nothing that Ruth had been a courtier for years in a system where discretion is priceless and keeping your mouth shut is valued above everything. Jmo, but that's why I think that story of her warning before the engagement against Charles marrying Diana is nothing but pure fantasy.
Reply With Quote
  #224  
Old 08-18-2016, 01:21 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,114
I think that Ruth saw Diana a certain amount, but problaby not every weekend. and I guess she would have heard something through the family grapevine about the Diana raging at her father over his remarriage... but I agree, I doubt if Diana was really exhibiting wild behaviour, at that time.. There was brattish behaviour with Nannies, but that was attributable to her being lost and lonely after her mother's deserton.
she didn't stick to things, but that's not that uncommon in a young teenaged girl.
Perhaps Ruth, later in life, DID feel that Diana had had a troubled childhood, Indeed and that perhaps that was "in the famlly" because SHE had reared Frances, and promoted the marriage for Frances and Lord Spencer..and it had turned out so badly. Frances had been a "bolter" who wasn't IMO very concerned to train her daughters or make sure they at least passed a few exams at school. So maybe she felt guilty at the whole chain of events that had given Di the troubled childhood.
but seems to me that she was more concerned in her old age, that Charles had had a bad marriage than that her onw grandchild had been very unhappy.
Reply With Quote
  #225  
Old 09-30-2016, 10:16 PM
CyrilVladisla's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Conneaut, United States
Posts: 2,802
Do you believe Diana found it hard to believe people loved her for herself and therefore came to distrust their motives?
Reply With Quote
  #226  
Old 10-01-2016, 09:09 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Torrance, United States
Posts: 3,297
Sadly Cyril I believe that Diana's insecurities took root during her parents' divorce trial and the custody arrangement. Both she and her brother Charles appear to have been greatly affected by this and had difficulty in sustaining relationships/friendships with family, friends and romantic partners. However marrying Charles who was not "in love" with her only made the situation worse IMVHO.
Reply With Quote
  #227  
Old 10-01-2016, 10:27 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 4,608
I agree, TLLK. From what I've read also these deep seated feelings appeared to get worse in the last year or so of her life. There was some bizarre behaviour, some mistrust of old friends which led to Diana cutting them from her life, and estrangement from some family members, such as her mother.

The divorce and afterwards proved a huge sea change for Diana. She was away from the protective wall that being a senior member of the BRF gives, under intense media pressure, with some journalists being critical for the first time ever, and probably felt quite lost. I think a lot of the feelings of abandonment she felt as a child were coming to the fore again in those last months, unfortunately.
Reply With Quote
  #228  
Old 10-05-2016, 02:15 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 2,470
I think having a mother leave you to go off with her lover would cause so much pain and abandoned issues.
And before someone says fathers do it without bad outcomes. I firmly believe a mum leaving leaving her children causes a lot more damage.



Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
Reply With Quote
  #229  
Old 10-05-2016, 10:49 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Torrance, United States
Posts: 3,297
And Diana's former sister-in-law Sarah went through a similar circumstance as a child with her mother leaving the family for a new lover.

The Spencer divorce was especially ugly for that decade considering that Earl Spencer was granted custody of the children over their mother.
Reply With Quote
  #230  
Old 10-05-2016, 04:01 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,228
IMO the mother-child connection is the most fundamental connection in a young child's life, even now when dads are more hands-on. Even though Diana and her younger brother saw their mother fairly often at first, they were so very young. Her grandmother Spencer seems to have been a loving woman, but the children didn't see her very often. Prince Charles seems to have been closest to his maternal grandmother in the formative years, because his mother was away so much. However, a grandmother, even a loving one, isn't a mother. I'm pleased that the current generation of royal tots seem to spend a lot of time with their mother.
Reply With Quote
  #231  
Old 10-05-2016, 04:43 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 7,279
Diana's mother did not in fact leave her children. She left Johnnie Spencer, whom she alleged had been mentally and physically abusive to her. The fact that she had also fallen in love with someone else didn't help the situation.

She had purchased a home in London and intended to enroll her two youngest children Charles and Diana in school(Sarah and Jane were in boarding school) but Johnnie Spencer fought her tooth and nail for custody and with the assistance of Frances's mother Lady Fermoy and the rest of the Establishment behind him he won.

The idea that she cruelly abandoned her young children is just wrong.

Sarah's mother Susan Ferguson did in fact walk out on her kids, quite literally. Sarah's recounting of it in her memoirs was heartbreaking.


Susan Barrantes sounded like a cold, selfish occasionally cruel mom.
__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena

"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice". Martin Luther King Jr. 1929-1968
Reply With Quote
  #232  
Old 10-15-2016, 11:31 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 6,228
I agree on all points. Frances Shand-Kydd did try to keep her children. I suppose that, in those days, there was nothing like shared custody.

I have much more sympathy for her situation than I have for Sarah's mother. For most of us, it's hard to imagine the kind of selfishness that would move a mother willingly move thousands of miles away from young daughters.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post

The idea that she cruelly abandoned her young children is just wrong.

Sarah's mother Susan Ferguson did in fact walk out on her kids, quite literally. Sarah's recounting of it in her memoirs was heartbreaking.

Susan Barrantes sounded like a cold, selfish occasionally cruel mom.
Reply With Quote
  #233  
Old 05-07-2017, 10:52 AM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,872
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
Diana's mother did not in fact leave her children. She left Johnnie Spencer, whom she alleged had been mentally and physically abusive to her. The fact that she had also fallen in love with someone else didn't help the situation.

She had purchased a home in London and intended to enroll her two youngest children Charles and Diana in school(Sarah and Jane were in boarding school) but Johnnie Spencer fought her tooth and nail for custody and with the assistance of Frances's mother Lady Fermoy and the rest of the Establishment behind him he won.

The idea that she cruelly abandoned her young children is just wrong.

Sarah's mother Susan Ferguson did in fact walk out on her kids, quite literally. Sarah's recounting of it in her memoirs was heartbreaking.


Susan Barrantes sounded like a cold, selfish occasionally cruel mom.
Thank you! I am so sick of people painting Frances as leaving her children or calling her a bolter; when she left she took her kids and they were taken from her.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #234  
Old 05-08-2017, 01:25 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Omaha, United States
Posts: 1,775
Yes, the physical and mental abuse Frances suffered during her marriage to Johnny Spencer has always been "conveniently" omitted by the press. It was a great injustice to her. As for Susan Ferguson, she wasn't completely the sole villain in her marriage. Ronald Ferguson carried on extra marital affairs during their marriage and even during his second marriage he had a mistress. Sarah had his mistress as her Lady-in-Waiting for a time during her marriage to Andrew. We don't always know both sides.
Reply With Quote
  #235  
Old 05-08-2017, 04:46 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 4,608
However, Frances Shand Kydd moved with her husband Peter, when her youngest children Diana and Charles were eleven and eight respectively, to a remote island off the west coast of Scotland, making weekend trips and short visits by her children virtually impossible.
Reply With Quote
  #236  
Old 05-08-2017, 04:59 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 9,165
There was also the ranch in Australia that they had.

Moving to a different location after a divorce and a remarriage isn't uncommon as I've done it myself but my kids were older. All I can say though is that if the Spencer divorce were to happen today, I seriously doubt that Johnnie Spencer would have gotten custody of the children so easily. In a way, I kind of hold him at fault too for not working more with his ex-wife to assure that their children had both parents in their life more. I think Johnnie tried to be a good father but he just didn't realize what the kids really needed.
__________________
“In my walks, every man I meet is my superior in some way, and in that I learn from him.”
~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #237  
Old 05-09-2017, 03:55 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,872
The Spencer divorce was about hurting the other person, not doing what is best for the children; at least from the way Johnnie acted. I don't know what Frances' plan was or if her claims of abuse were false or not.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #238  
Old 05-10-2017, 12:41 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,114
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
There was also the ranch in Australia that they had.

Moving to a different location after a divorce and a remarriage isn't uncommon as I've done it myself but my kids were older. All I can say though is that if the Spencer divorce were to happen today, I seriously doubt that Johnnie Spencer would have gotten custody of the children so easily. In a way, I kind of hold him at fault too for not working more with his ex-wife to assure that their children had both parents in their life more. I think Johnnie tried to be a good father but he just didn't realize what the kids really needed.
Frances did have access to the children, she didn't have full custody but that wasn't unusual at the time for a wife who had left her husband and was the guilty party in terms of adultery.

and given that there were fewer ground for divorce In those days it wasn't unknown for there to be claims made that weren't strictly true. For example, divorces esp In the 20s and 30s were often collusive (although this was forbidden ad if found out could stop a divorce), with the husband "assuming guilt" and "being discovered in bed wit a woman" so that he could be divorced for adultery.
Frances was the guilty party in terms of adultery and she may have countered with an accusation about cruelty...
and Frances did move away to somewhere that it wasn't easy for the children to vist as often, Johnny shut himself up and kept the children at a distance.. so as time passed both parnets were less avaialbe for the children.
I don't think that the children's welfare and happiness were the paramount concerns for either of them, they were mainly being selfish...
Reply With Quote
  #239  
Old 05-10-2017, 04:25 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 9,165
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
Frances did have access to the children, she didn't have full custody but that wasn't unusual at the time for a wife who had left her husband and was the guilty party in terms of adultery.

and given that there were fewer ground for divorce In those days it wasn't unknown for there to be claims made that weren't strictly true. For example, divorces esp In the 20s and 30s were often collusive (although this was forbidden ad if found out could stop a divorce), with the husband "assuming guilt" and "being discovered in bed wit a woman" so that he could be divorced for adultery.
Frances was the guilty party in terms of adultery and she may have countered with an accusation about cruelty...
and Frances did move away to somewhere that it wasn't easy for the children to vist as often, Johnny shut himself up and kept the children at a distance.. so as time passed both parnets were less avaialbe for the children.
I don't think that the children's welfare and happiness were the paramount concerns for either of them, they were mainly being selfish...
I think too that at the time of Johnnie and Frances' divorce, in the upper circles, it was unusual for the parents to do a whole lot of parenting themselves. Children were to be seen and not heard and mostly in the care of the nanny. There weren't family dinners around the table. There weren't parents helping their kids with their homework (before sending them off to boarding school) and for the main part, the children were to be enjoyed when the right situation arose and of course, the all important heir to the title must be procured.

Neither Frances or Johnnie were the "hands on" kind of parents for the most part but I do think they both loved their children dearly.
__________________
“In my walks, every man I meet is my superior in some way, and in that I learn from him.”
~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #240  
Old 05-10-2017, 05:39 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,114
thats not the point. Of course they had nannies and didn't spend long periods with the children, but Johnny saw little of them and Frances when she lived in London used to get emotional during their visits but then went off to Scotland where it wasn't so easy to visit.
I'm sure they'd say that they loved them, in practice I think they loved themselves more. Johnny emerged from seclusion to marry a woman that his kids disliked and caused more turmoil in the family... Frances IMO could have maintained her marriage for a bit longer, I think J would have overlooked a discreet affair, but she preferred to take the chance that she would lose custody, in order to marry her second husband
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
diana princess of wales, diana's family, frances shand kydd, princess diana


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
King George V (1865-1936) elenaris British Royal History 169 10-02-2017 01:51 PM
The Abdication: December 11, 1936 gaoshan1021 British Royal History 179 10-26-2016 01:29 PM
Grand Duke Kyrill (1876-1938) and Grand Duchess Victoria Melita 'Ducky' (1876-1936) Marengo The Imperial Family of Russia 64 07-03-2016 02:36 PM
Lady Frances Armstrong Jones and Rodolphe von Hofmannsthal: Dec 2006 Heather1 Weddings: Non-Reigning Houses & Nobility 44 02-12-2011 03:39 PM
Spanish Royal Family Assasinations, 1936 morhange Spanish Royal History 2 11-25-2007 08:51 AM




Popular Tags
best outfit birthday carl gustaf chris o'neill crown princess mary crown princess victoria current events denmark fashion poll general news hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duchess stéphanie's fashion & style hereditary grand duke guillaume infanta cristina infanta leonor infanta pilar infanta sofia iñaki urdangarín king felipe king felipe vi king philippe king willem-alexander letizia liechtenstein miguel urdangarin monarchy news nobel prize november 2016 october 2016 picture of the week picture of the week november 2016 prince alexander prince carl philip prince daniel prince felix prince gabriel prince nicholas prince oscar princess claire of luxembourg princess estelle princess leonore princess madeleine princess of asturias princess sofia princess victoria queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen mathilde queen mathilde daytime fashion queen mathilde fashion queen mathilde style queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen silvia rohans state visit state visit to spain stephanie sweden swedish royal family victoria



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:40 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017
Jelsoft Enterprises