The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1  
Old 10-23-2005, 08:04 PM
maryshawn's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Green Bay, United States
Posts: 1,214
Paul Burrell, Diana's former Butler

Paul Burrell spent 21 years working for the British Royal Family. In 1987, he became butler to the Prince and Princess of Wales at Highgrove, their country estate. When the couple separated in 1992, he moved to Kensington Palace to serve as butler to the late Princess of Wales and held that position until her death.

Since her death, Mr. Burrell was indicted on charges of taking things from Princess Diana--charges which were subsequently dismissed when the Queen intervened, and written a book called "A Royal Duty" about his life with the Princess of Wales. He continues to comment publicly on matters relating to the British Royal Family.

Some members and I thought it would be interesting to start a thread on Mr. Burrell and his activities, before and after the death of the Princess of Wales. So please feel free to post your thoughts in adherence with the rules and policies of The Royal Forums.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-23-2005, 08:48 PM
CasiraghiTrio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Burbank, United States
Posts: 6,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by maryshawn
Paul Burrell spent 21 years working for the British Royal Family. In 1987, he became butler to the Prince and Princess of Wales at Highgrove, their country estate. When the couple separated in 1992, he moved to Kensington Palace to serve as butler to the late Princess of Wales and held that position until her death.

Since her death, Mr. Burrell was indicted on charges of taking things from Princess Diana--charges which were subsequently dismissed when the Queen intervened, and written a book called "A Royal Duty" about his life with the Princess of Wales. He continues to comment publicly on matters relating to the British Royal Family.

Some members and I thought it would be interesting to start a thread on Mr. Burrell and his activities, before and after the death of the Princess of Wales. So please feel free to post your thoughts in adherence with the rules and policies of The Royal Forums.
Hi, Mary
Thanks for getting this started! This will be very interesting. I am really curious to know what others here feel about the trial. I have had so many thoughts about it. First of all, I want to assure everyone that I have enormous respect for the British royal family. I admire them in some cases. However, as to their involvement in the Burrell affair, I can't help suspecting some foul play on their part. I do not believe that Paul Burrell took anything. I came to this decision after reading an article of Dominick Dunne in Vanity Fair, published during the trial. Also, several other sources state that these things he supposedly took were gifts and that Diana had a very unusual degree of closeness with her butler. By "unusual degree", I am not implying anything sexual or inappropriate. I only mean that there must be a reason several sources say that Diana called him her "rock".
Returning to the trial, I think it's very odd that the Queen "suddenly remembered" her conversation with Burrell after Diana's death. She claimed she didn't remember telling him to take Diana's things, then he was indicted and there was a trial, and just before he was scheduled to testify, she "suddenly remembers". This is very suspicious, in my opinion. This makes me think that the Queen feared that Burrell would reveal something embarrassing about the royal family, or something that would bring dishonor or disgrace upon them. All that said, I suspect the whole investigation and trial to have been a hoax to "get rid" of Burrell because he knew too much. Rather than kill him (which is what Henry VIII would have done, no doubt) there was an attempt to discredit him in the public, disgrace his name, and put him in jail. But the royal family did not go after him directly. In order to keep a safe distance from the unpleasantness, they used the Spencer family as the hammer to hit Burrell on the head and shut him up. They never expected him to testify, or want to testify, or be able to testify. If they had, they probably would have got rid of him some other way. I don't mean that they would have bumped him off. I don't suspect the modern royal family of bumping anyone off. But I just mean, things might have been handled a different way. This is just my theory. I might be wrong, and for the family's sake, I hope so.

I also suspect that when Prince William wanted to speak directly, face-to-face with Burrell, the family were afraid Burrell would tell him things, things that they don't necessarily want William to know about. And that is why, I believe, the meeting was abruptly cancelled and never brought up again.
__________________

__________________
Chewsteraghi on Tumblr. Schmichaelira on Twitter. Tumblr aka obsessivechewsteraghidisorder. Be warned: I'm weird.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 10-24-2005, 08:25 PM
maryshawn's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Green Bay, United States
Posts: 1,214
I found the Queen's "sudden recollection" of a conversation with Mr. Burrell very odd, as well. I do think the Spencers were hopeful Mr. Burrell would be charged and convicted for taking things which were not his, in their opinion. This family doesn't back down easily. The British royal family, on the other hand, saw things escalating, realized what could be brought out at any trial and took a more pragmatic overview and wanted the matter dropped and forgotten. I suspect they hoped that by "firing this warning shot" over Mr. Burrell's head, they hoped he would go away and lead a quiet life--preferably in the States. The fact he wrote his book and continues to speak in the media and still lives in the UK must be anathema to them.

I am not familiar with the Dominick Dunne piece you speak of. I'd heard he'd written on the subject but never read the article.

I think holding onto some of the things he had was rather odd. Her nightwear, the letters to the boys, photos,...... Seems strange to me and I would have expected him to hand over the "Dear Wombat" letters to William, no muss, no fuss.

Diana's friends are a bit all over the board when it comes to Mr. Burrell. Those who support your view, that the things in Mr. Burrell's house were there for good reasons and at Diana's request, have either stuck to this or changed their minds when the extent of the contents were catalogued and published--particularly after his book was written. Then, a few of them came out with guns blazing against him.

I still don't know who "tipped" authorities off there might be these things at Mr. Burrell's house. Has there ever been an official explanation by the police? They must have had to explain their actions in some way for their search and seizure of the articles in question. Also, where are these things now? Were they all returned to Mr. Burrell or have they been dispersed or destroyed? Someone clearly had an "agenda" when they notified authorities. When you think about it, if the Spencers or Windsors knew and wanted to handle the matter quietly, they could have gone to Mr. Burrell and asked for the items--leaving him to say yes or no.

Also, remember Mr. Burrell's mysterious statements sent out as "a secret code" to William and Harry about "remember what we talked about that day in the apartment. I will never betray you or your mother's confidences." Some say that triggered the Queen coming forward. But my memory is a bit foggy on this matter. Does anyone recall what that was about and if it was pertaining to the trial or the book publication?

What does Paul Burrell do now professionally? Does he live off the royalties of the book--which various sources have argued sold well or sold poorly. And I don't know the answer to how well it did. Does he do personal appearances for money to discuss Diana? Does he appear as a regular contributor to various newspapers as a commentator on the royals?

I agree that the whole thing seems fishy for a lot of reasons. I guess I can't totally figure out why this man held onto things which were so obviously the belongings of Diana's sons nor can I figure out why he would play his trump card as the "keeper of the secrets" by writing his book? Was it payback to the Spencers and Royal Family?

You raise good points. I think highly of Mr. Dunne and wish I could have read his thoughts on the whole situation. I'll try to google search and find an article or interview.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 10-26-2005, 05:15 PM
CasiraghiTrio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Burbank, United States
Posts: 6,402
I read your response a couple of days ago and I wanted to reply but didn't have the chance to do so with great thought. So here is my response now.

but, wait, I have to say first, I just viewed PB's website and I'm disappointed, though not surprised, there was no mention of the trial and the whole ordeal surrounding it. i hoped for some statement or something but he pretends like it never happened.

I agree with you that the items he had seemed like strange items for him to have. Do you have further details about these letters addressed to Wills and Harry? Are they originals or copies? Because, if they are copies, it is possible Diana had Paul make copies for safekeeping and archiving and he has never destroyed them out of loyalty. Surely the originals would be in the possession of the addressees?? I'll be interested to know if Paul has the originals or not.

About the Dunne article, I must say there were things in it which annoyed me and which I didn't agree with, but overall, I found his perceptions of the situation to be very sound. It was a Vanity Fair article that came out in January 2003. Charlize Theron was on the cover. I do actually have a way of getting this to you but it will be a couple months' wait, if that's ok.


As executer of the Will, Lady Sarah would be in charge of all the assets, no? Or rather of making sure all the possessions of Diana were forwarded to the correct people. I wonder if one of or some of the Spencers wanted certain items and since Paul had them, if they requested from him that they can take these things. If he said no, maybe they got mad and accused him of stealing?

Or maybe Wills and Harry wanted a specific something, so their royal secretary or aide sent a request to PB, who refused, and as revenge, the royal reps passed on word of this to the Spencers. Possibly the Spencers reported to the authorities their accusation that PB had stolen some items out of KP?
__________________
Chewsteraghi on Tumblr. Schmichaelira on Twitter. Tumblr aka obsessivechewsteraghidisorder. Be warned: I'm weird.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 10-26-2005, 10:26 PM
Harry's polo shirt's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: my paradise, United States
Posts: 2,091
I always thought he was pretty cool and just needed to make some money because he lost so much for no reason (the trial)...but then I found out he writes about the royal family for a tabloid-that is just plain wrong and rude...
__________________
"The pain of spending a week with my brother is well worth it."
– Prince William, on joining Prince Harry for a charity motorcycle ride across South Africa

Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 10-27-2005, 07:28 PM
maryshawn's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Green Bay, United States
Posts: 1,214
According to the prosecutor in the trial, the letters and photo albums were originals, not copies. He circulated some of them to the jury so they could see for themselves. I could understand PB safeguarding copies; I can't understand why he would hold onto the originals--and family albums, which surely Diana's sons would want.

I imagine the Royal Family are more than a bit alarmed by Mr. Burrell's failure to disappear off the tabloid circuit. He wrote his book and made his money, now move on.

I find it interesting to read in his book, PB recounts his sitting around drinking 3 bottles of wine a day just to sleep while his wife cleaned houses to make ends meet. At one point, clearly at her wit's end, she grabbed a photo of Diana and shook it in his face, saying: "She had you by the balls in her lifetime, and she still has you by the balls now!"

It would seem Maria Burrell wants her husband to go on with his life....and I think many of us would agree.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 10-27-2005, 07:51 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,531
He does not need anymore publicity. This man, I use the term lightly, needs to remember he was a SERVANT, not a ROYAL.

I think his behavior has been disgusting and flagrant for a man who professes to have loved and served Diana so well.

He is a perverse, catty, individual who should have been tried for what he took.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 10-28-2005, 02:04 AM
CasiraghiTrio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Burbank, United States
Posts: 6,402
Quote:
Originally Posted by maryshawn
According to the prosecutor in the trial, the letters and photo albums were originals, not copies. He circulated some of them to the jury so they could see for themselves. I could understand PB safeguarding copies; I can't understand why he would hold onto the originals--and family albums, which surely Diana's sons would want.

I imagine the Royal Family are more than a bit alarmed by Mr. Burrell's failure to disappear off the tabloid circuit. He wrote his book and made his money, now move on.

I find it interesting to read in his book, PB recounts his sitting around drinking 3 bottles of wine a day just to sleep while his wife cleaned houses to make ends meet. At one point, clearly at her wit's end, she grabbed a photo of Diana and shook it in his face, saying: "She had you by the balls in her lifetime, and she still has you by the balls now!"

It would seem Maria Burrell wants her husband to go on with his life....and I think many of us would agree.
Wow, he actually mentions all this in his book? I would've thought he'd talk about himself in a more flattering manner. I have not read this book but I had heard from one person who read it than all the info. about Diana was very harmless, very typical of others' book content about her, and that he kept things respectful and didn't expose seriously private things. But that was just one person's impression, of course. I am not impressed with this info. I am learning in this thread. It is making me question my sureness that he was all victim and no offender. I am trying to keep an open mind, though. I want to be fair to all sides, but I don't want to judge PB based on these statements about him.
__________________
Chewsteraghi on Tumblr. Schmichaelira on Twitter. Tumblr aka obsessivechewsteraghidisorder. Be warned: I'm weird.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 10-28-2005, 06:58 PM
maryshawn's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Green Bay, United States
Posts: 1,214
Yes, he does write about himself in this way. I'm not exactly sure why he included that particular statement made by his wife.....almost makes her sound angry at Diana. Essentially, almost 1/4 of the book is about PB after Diana's death. He presents his "case," if you will and his recounting of the facts. The rest is interesting but there are no "knock your socks off" revelations. His main thrust is how important he was to the Princess and how she confided things in him. He takes a few pot shots at other men, in particular, who he felt were possibly influencing Diana more than he felt was proper. All in all, I read it and thought this man was extremely possessive of Diana. It gives some credence to those who have said--including some of her closer friends--she was getting tired of him snooping around her and her things. She felt he was a bit too close, always hovering around. I think this book was written for two reasons: to get a piece of his own back at the Spencers for the trial and to provide a living legacy of how close he was to Princess Diana. He wants to be remembered as her one and only "rock." A third reason could be he needed the money and the attention. My feeling is PB needed this book more than anyone else did. And, now, I wish he would cease and desist and just go quietly. I'm still amazed the man has his own website! If he were really a staunch friend, he would never have written a book about Diana. All in all, I believe those who have never said much, save for pleasant comments in video interviews, like Lucia Flecha de Lima, were far more Diana's friends than Mr. Burrell ever was. But I am going to read the last sections more carefully to try and figure out how his relationship with the Spencers went from decent to disastrous in such a short period of time.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 10-28-2005, 07:24 PM
Duchess's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: xx, Canada
Posts: 1,648
i'm in the midst of reading this book for the second time and i have to say that i still feel that he overstates his value to Diana. I can't quite put my finger on it as to why i feel this way. perhaps it's because he always paints himself in such a good light...the ever patient, completely loyal, never complaining servant. or maybe it's the bit about him falling asleep in her closet after her death. this man is a HUGE narcissist!


also, for any of you that have the book can you have a look at something for me. in the photos there's one that shows the back garden of the home he was shown near highgrove prior to moving there. then there's another photo of the front of what's supposedly the same home after renovations. this might be picky but i don't think they're the same home. if you look closely at the roofing, one has shingles and the other has what looks like curved tiles. the other difference is that in the first photo, the outside walls of the house are a stucco like material and in the second photo they appear to be stone.
__________________
Duchess
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 10-28-2005, 07:46 PM
maryshawn's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Green Bay, United States
Posts: 1,214
I just looked and they don't look like the same house at all. I wondered about that when I first saw the photos. IF they are the same house, someone put a ton of money into its restoration!!!!

I think your observations about Mr. Burrell are the same which trouble me, as well. Never a difference of opinion, always there and at the Princess' beck and call (even when he says Diana stopped speaking to his wife and only he and his sons could go to her home; he really puts his wife's relationship with Diana "out there" more than he needed to, IMO. It's like he finds it flattering--in his opinion--both women wanted him around but he's clear; Diana won out. This is hardly flattering to his wife, nor to the Princess of Wales). If his accounts are accurate, I would have found him a pest--there first thing in the morning till he turned off all the lights at night, save for the one she always wanted on outside of her bedroom in the hall. The way he tells it, he was always there with her--eating, watching movies, talking, ........ It basically leaves no room in her life for others--so I think time has bloated some of these memories.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 10-29-2005, 11:53 AM
Duchess's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: xx, Canada
Posts: 1,648
you have to wonder if she wanted him there that often or he just stayed, whether he was welcome or not. i think he definitely has a twisted view of the employer/employee relationship.
__________________
Duchess
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 10-29-2005, 01:46 PM
maryshawn's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Green Bay, United States
Posts: 1,214
Doesn't he strike you as more underfoot (not to mention, underhanded) than anything? It's hard to know. Diana didn't like being alone--hence, her need for three cell phones and nonstop stream of advisors/healers, but some people have gone on record--including that reporter whose name always escapes me who she confided in--that she definitely did not like having him around her all the time and felt he was listening at doors and snooping through her things when she wasn't there. Many accounts state he was on his way out and Diana was hoping he would get a position with a celebrity and leave her household. The danger in firing him was that he did know so much...... and--as we see know--can and will use it. It makes me shudder when he references "things he knows but hasn't made public out of respect and caring for the boys and the Boss."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duchess
you have to wonder if she wanted him there that often or he just stayed, whether he was welcome or not. i think he definitely has a twisted view of the employer/employee relationship.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 10-30-2005, 12:17 PM
Duchess's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: xx, Canada
Posts: 1,648
i think the reporter you're thinking of is richard kay. and yes i agree, he seemed more underfoot than anything else. how sees writing a book and continually talking about diana as "respect for the boys" is beyond me. it seems the only ones that have shown any respect for the boys and diana are luchia flecha de lima, rosa monckton and surprisingly, charles by not talking about her! burrell is as bad as hewitt in my opinion.
__________________
Duchess
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-30-2005, 03:12 PM
maryshawn's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Green Bay, United States
Posts: 1,214
From the AP in 2003:


In the BBC interview, Mr Burrell complained that Diana's sons had not been in touch with him since his trial.

"It would have been a very different world if the telephone had rung and the boys had said, 'Oh Paul we're sorry we couldn't help you during your trial, we just couldn't, our hands were tied. Why don't you come down to London with Maria and the boys and we'll do something?'"

Referring to his book, Mr Burrell added: "Just one telephone call would have stopped it - one. Is that too much too ask - really?

This quote from Mr. Burrell just supports my feelings about him. So he was trying to hold the Princes hostage by dangling his book over their heads??? That's just nasty! He comes off as a very petty, petulant man, IMO. If I'm reading this correctly, he's trying to say he wouldn't have published the book had Princes William or Harry called him???? In other words, he knows what he did was wrong and it's payback time.

In the Sunday Mirror, the butler's wife, Maria Burrell, was quoted as saying: "The royal household want everyone to focus on the plight of William and Harry, but what about my boys? No one gave them any consideration when their dad was dragged to court and threatened with prison when all he did was protect Princess Diana's world."

Mr Arbiter, the former palace spokesman, predicted Mr Burrell wasn't finished.

"We have got a runaway train here and it is not going to stop until it hits the buffers, and the buffers are a long way off," he said on Saturday.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 10-30-2005, 03:24 PM
maryshawn's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Green Bay, United States
Posts: 1,214
From AP 2003; in an interview with a "relaxed, unconcerned Paul Burrell":

In a newspaper interview which will be of great concern to a Royal Family already devastated by the damaging revelations serialised in the Mirror last week, Mr Burrell suggested his claims had merely been "the tip of the iceberg" and threatened to reveal further Royal secrets.

It emerged yesterday that the book’s initial print run in the United States ran to one million - a fifth of record-breaking Scots author JK Rowling’s latest Harry Potter novel.

The extraordinary and unprecedented war of words between the palace and the former Royal servant of 21 years’ standing - which began on Friday when the princes accused him of a "cold and overt betrayal" of their mother - continued unabated yesterday.

As reports suggested Mr Burrell might be preparing a second book based on material he has held back, a spokeswoman at Clarence House reiterated the princes’ plea for the revelations to stop.

Well, we haven't seen it yet but I firmly believe Mr. Burrell will be writing more--and a second book could very well be in the works. A friend of Diana's, Vivienne Parry, said "Mr. Burrell was thinking of one thing only when he wrote this book--"P" for "pension plan."
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 10-30-2005, 03:28 PM
maryshawn's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Green Bay, United States
Posts: 1,214
Thank you; it is Richard Kay! And you make an excellent point about Charles. He has been nothing but silent when it comes to Diana and apparently has instructed his inner circle to do the same. I think, on a few occasions, he made a few complimentary remarks about his dead ex-wife. I believe they were on overseas trips when he made his remarks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duchess
i think the reporter you're thinking of is richard kay. and yes i agree, he seemed more underfoot than anything else. how sees writing a book and continually talking about diana as "respect for the boys" is beyond me. it seems the only ones that have shown any respect for the boys and diana are luchia flecha de lima, rosa monckton and surprisingly, charles by not talking about her! burrell is as bad as hewitt in my opinion.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 10-30-2005, 04:57 PM
Duchess's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: xx, Canada
Posts: 1,648
Quote:
Originally Posted by maryshawn
From the AP in 2003:


In the BBC interview, Mr Burrell complained that Diana's sons had not been in touch with him since his trial.

"It would have been a very different world if the telephone had rung and the boys had said, 'Oh Paul we're sorry we couldn't help you during your trial, we just couldn't, our hands were tied. Why don't you come down to London with Maria and the boys and we'll do something?'"

Referring to his book, Mr Burrell added: "Just one telephone call would have stopped it - one. Is that too much too ask - really?

This quote from Mr. Burrell just supports my feelings about him. So he was trying to hold the Princes hostage by dangling his book over their heads??? That's just nasty! He comes off as a very petty, petulant man, IMO. If I'm reading this correctly, he's trying to say he wouldn't have published the book had Princes William or Harry called him???? In other words, he knows what he did was wrong and it's payback time.

In the Sunday Mirror, the butler's wife, Maria Burrell, was quoted as saying: "The royal household want everyone to focus on the plight of William and Harry, but what about my boys? No one gave them any consideration when their dad was dragged to court and threatened with prison when all he did was protect Princess Diana's world."

Mr Arbiter, the former palace spokesman, predicted Mr Burrell wasn't finished.

"We have got a runaway train here and it is not going to stop until it hits the buffers, and the buffers are a long way off," he said on Saturday.
can you believe she dragged her children into this whole mess?! how can she even compare them to William and Harry? if her husband wasn't such name dropping money grabbing blabbermouth then he wouldn't have been in trouble in the first place.
__________________
Duchess
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 10-30-2005, 05:53 PM
ysbel's Avatar
Heir Apparent
TRF Author
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 5,390
I've avoided this thread because the whole situation around Paul Burrell is so sleazy. It just makes my skin crawl.

But I will say that the Burrell boys were dragged into the trial when the jury got a video tour of the Burrell home. Only their bedrooms were offlimits.

Its these boys that I feel most sorry for, not William and Harry. William and Harry were born into a public life and have people around them to help them cope with situations like this.

These kids come from a working class background and I doubt if they were shielded at all from the public spectacle.

In one sense I agree with the wife. Everybody feels so much sympathy for Diana and William and Harry but nobody seems to care that Paul abandoned his wife and two young children emotionally on what seemed like an obsession with Diana.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 10-30-2005, 11:29 PM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Chicago, United States
Posts: 1,531
Throw him in the Tower of London......
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
diana princess of wales, paul burrell, princess diana, tabloid press


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
1982: Diana's fall Idriel Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 59 06-16-2008 01:13 AM
"The Way We Were: Remembering Diana" - Paul Burrell Skydragon Royal Library 141 10-21-2006 06:38 AM
"A Royal Duty", by Paul Burrell Yennie Royal Library 31 07-15-2006 05:49 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events diana fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta elena jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympic games ottoman pieter van vollenhoven pom pregnancy president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince floris prince laurent prince pieter-christiaan princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess claire princess elisabeth princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marie princess mary queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia spain state visit wedding william


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

RV & Travel Trailer Communities

Our RV & Travel Trailer sites encompasses virtually all types of Recreational Vehicles, from brand-specific to general RV communities.

» More about our RV Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:55 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]