The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #81  
Old 04-12-2011, 06:08 AM
georgiea's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 1,653
Princess Diana's wedding earrings are to be worn by her sister for Prince William's big day | News
__________________

__________________
Watch your actions, for they become your habits. Watch your habits because they become your character. Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny.
Reply With Quote
  #82  
Old 04-25-2011, 10:07 AM
georgiea's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 1,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel View Post
I have read that William was very unhappy about that eulogy, and considered it a direct attack on his father (to whom he is said to be exceptionally close).

As far as we know, William's Spencer cousins have no role in the wedding whatsoever. However, as the various wedding events occur, we may be able to get a better idea of William's relationship with the Spencers.
Well we now have the seating arrangement in Westminster Abby. The Spencers got a snub in my opinion, because they are sitting on the bride's side. All royal houses attending are on the groom's side after the royal family.

I guess we now know the relationship between Prince William and the Spencers.
__________________

__________________
Watch your actions, for they become your habits. Watch your habits because they become your character. Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny.
Reply With Quote
  #83  
Old 04-25-2011, 10:48 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 4,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by georgiea View Post
Well we now have the seating arrangement in Westminster Abby. The Spencers got a snub in my opinion, because they are sitting on the bride's side. All royal houses attending are on the groom's side after the royal family.

I guess we now know the relationship between Prince William and the Spencers.

I think so too; I expected the Spencers to be seated behind the RF. The fact that they're not suggests they have deliberately been placed as far from the RF as they can reasonably be expected to get.
Reply With Quote
  #84  
Old 04-25-2011, 10:55 AM
jdcharlie's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: :), United States
Posts: 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel View Post
I think so too; I expected the Spencers to be seated behind the RF. The fact that they're not suggests they have deliberately been placed as far from the RF as they can reasonably be expected to get.
I didn't see it as a snub. I think William is honoring them by putting them in the first row but delicately maintaining the peace by separating them from the RF. Imo, it's a nice compromise.
Reply With Quote
  #85  
Old 04-25-2011, 02:19 PM
georgiea's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 1,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdcharlie View Post
I didn't see it as a snub. I think William is honoring them by putting them in the first row but delicately maintaining the peace by separating them from the RF. Imo, it's a nice compromise.
By royal standards I think it is a snub. I think all aristocrats are on the groom's side. Maybe your right about maintaining the peace. I don't think the Middleton's have a large family. All of Catherine's grandparents are died. Maybe the Spencers fill that space. Only a reply from BP will we know for sure.
__________________
Watch your actions, for they become your habits. Watch your habits because they become your character. Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny.
Reply With Quote
  #86  
Old 04-25-2011, 03:23 PM
MRSJ's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: ******, United States
Posts: 1,863
Quote:
Originally Posted by georgiea

By royal standards I think it is a snub. I think all aristocrats are on the groom's side.
It split Royals/NonRoyals NOT bride and groom like a regular wedding- the Spencers have not been snubbed they just aren't royals....
Reply With Quote
  #87  
Old 04-25-2011, 06:03 PM
georgiea's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 1,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by MRSJ View Post
It split Royals/NonRoyals NOT bride and groom like a regular wedding- the Spencers have not been snubbed they just aren't royals....
They might not be royals but they are aristocrats and from the grooms side. I feel like Diana, Princess of Wales is being shun in death like after her divorce.
__________________
Watch your actions, for they become your habits. Watch your habits because they become your character. Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny.
Reply With Quote
  #88  
Old 04-25-2011, 06:57 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Berkshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 650
Quote:
Originally Posted by georgiea View Post
I feel like Diana, Princess of Wales is being shun in death like after her divorce.
In my humble opinion - and it is just my opinion though - I don't think that Diana Princess of Wales is being shunned in any way.

To me, the very fact that Prince William gave his late mother's ring to Catherine, stating that he wanted his mother to be part of his wedding is proof that Diana, Princess of Wales is not being shunned. I am also sure that there will be various touching references to the late Princess at the wedding. The appearance of Diana's earings is one possibility that has been mentioned; there might also be the use of one of Diana's tiaras...perhaps even a sprig of some flowers from Althorp in her bouquet.

In am also sure that in his Best Man's Speech, Harry may well allude to his late mother. I don't think there is any possibility whatsoever that Diana, Princess of Wales will not be mentioned at the Wedding.

The fact that Earl Spencer's placement does not seem particularly prominent does not necessary mean [in my view] that the memory of his sister Diana is being shunned at the wedding. I come to this view on the following basis:

Perhaps the clearest indication is that we are continually being told by Buckingham Palace that all decisions about the wedding are being made by Prince William and Catherine - in other words, that they have a very hands-on role in the organisation, and the RF is not just riding roughshod over their wishes. I am therefore sure that Earl Spencer's placement is entirely satisfactory to Prince William - in other words, Earl Spencer has been seated where Prince William wants him.

In my own view, I am also not entirely sure how close Prince William actually is to his Uncle. Obviously none of us is privy to precisely what goes on 'behind the scenes', but from what I have seen [or rather not seen] reported, there has been very little contact between the adult Prince William and his Uncle. For example, there has been no recorded visit at Althorp by the Prince in order to 'show his fiance' off to his Uncle. I also cannot think offhand of any recent visits to his Uncle by Prince William as an adult - for example to stay at Althorp, to shoot at Althorp etc.

My own interpretation - and I stress it is my own view - is that Prince William was probably not terribly happy in retrospect with Earl Spencer's speech at Diana's funeral. Whilst I have seen constant references to 'how marvellous the speech was', could I say here in my own humble view, that I was not entirely happy with what was being said by Charles Spencer. It was after all, a funeral, and it is just my own personal view that sometimes it is more dignified to leave out acrimonious comments, however heartfelt or even justified they seem to be. The gist of Earl Spencer's remarks could have been taken as being deeply insulting to the Prince of Wales - and the two Princes have always had a warm and loving relationship with their father, which to me suggests that the two Princes did not find the Prince of Wales the ogre that Earl Spencer appeared to me to be depicting.

There is another reason to me whilst Earl Spencer's funeral speech seemed to be inappropriate.... and it is this - at the end of the day, Earl Spencer's private life seemed to be no better than that of the Prince of Wales who he was apparently criticising: Later we learned about the allegations of the cruel treatment by Earl Spencer of his wife Victoria Lockwood; we also learned about Earl Spencer's own infidelities when Sally Anne Lasson revealed to the tabloids about Earl Spencer's adulterous relationship with her. In other words, Earl Spencer seemed to have been somewhat hypocritical, and I daresay that this will not have been lost on Prince William in hindsight.

In my humble opinion, these various things do indicate to me that the relationship between Prince William and Earl Spencer is not particularly warm...

Just my thoughts.

Alex
Reply With Quote
  #89  
Old 04-25-2011, 09:09 PM
MRSJ's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: ******, United States
Posts: 1,863
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diarist
Perhaps the clearest indication is that we are continually being told by Buckingham Palace that all decisions about the wedding are being made by Prince William and Catherine - in other words, that they have a very hands-on role in the organisation, and the RF is not just riding roughshod over their wishes. I am therefore sure that Earl Spencer's placement is entirely satisfactory to Prince William - in other words, Earl Spencer has been seated where Prince William wants him.
Well said - I agree
Reply With Quote
  #90  
Old 04-25-2011, 09:58 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 4,429
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diarist View Post
The fact that Earl Spencer's placement does not seem particularly prominent does not necessary mean [in my view] that the memory of his sister Diana is being shunned at the wedding...
I agree; I don't think the placement of the Spencers has anything to do with shunning Diana; it's all about Earl Spencer.

There are those who say we simply don't know much about their relationship or what goes on behind the doors of the palace. But William is photographed everywhere he goes, and if he spent much time with the Spencers, we'd know about it! But I have only ever heard of William occasionally seeing his aunts...never any mention of his uncle.

William can't actually exclude Earl Spencer, but he can indicate he doesn't want him near his father or his father's family.
Reply With Quote
  #91  
Old 04-25-2011, 10:09 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 12,350
While I agree that don't know the specifics of the relationship between the Earl and William. I disagree with the reason why.

Everyone assumes that William was not happy about the speech that the Earl gave at Diana's funeral. And that certainly is possible. But I think we need to expand on why William and the Earl might not be close.

First of all, when Diana was alive...she took several vacations with her sisters and their children. I recall seeing Frances a couple of times, but never Charles. Sarah serving as a lady in waiting might have allowed her to spend more time with the boys (pre divorce and boarding school) than Jane. Also noting that Jane most likely did not see Diana (or the boys) alot because her husband was part of the "Gray Men Brigade."

Than after the Earl divorced his first wife, Victoria he moved across the ocean to live in South Africa.

Needless to say William (and Harry) might have a better relationship with their aunts because they have always been around. After Diana's death, Sarah drove to Harry's school to drop off a birthday gift that Diana discussed buying for his birthday. The aunts were established because they were around during their formative years. I don't think that was the case for Charles.

ETA: The "speech" could have affected or altered the relationship beween William and the Earl or there could not have been a genuine relationship to begin with.
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #92  
Old 04-25-2011, 10:38 PM
PrincessKaimi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hilo, Malibu, United States
Posts: 1,331
I also remember a story about Diana, way in her pre-princess days, asking her brother if she could come home to live - as they had cottages on their estate - and being told no. I may be misremembering, but I remember at the time of her funeral already having been told that her brother and she did not get along.

I think separating the groom's and bride's sides is difficult rule for this wedding, while perhaps all the crowned heads are "relatives" of the groom, that would take a lot of research to show - and obviously, they're not following that rule anyway.

By putting the "feminine" side of the family, so to speak (bride's family, William's mother's family) it adds some decorum. Diana's family is honored with pride of place - as if they were royals, just on the female side. I'm sure the Middletons are honored to have them seated there, representing the mother of the groom.

Otherwise, to just have Camilla and the Queen representing the traditional role of groom's "female relatives) would certainly evoke even more criticism.
Reply With Quote
  #93  
Old 04-25-2011, 10:43 PM
MRSJ's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: ******, United States
Posts: 1,863
Quote:
Originally Posted by PrincessKaimi
I also remember a story about Diana, way in her pre-princess days, asking her brother if she could come home to live - as they had cottages on their estate - and being told no. I may be misremembering, but I remember at the time of her funeral already having been told that her brother and she did not get along.
I believe this was after her divorce she asked to come live w him- but I also may be remembering wrongly
Reply With Quote
  #94  
Old 04-25-2011, 10:46 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 12,350
Actually PrincessKaimi...it was post Princess. After the divorce, Diana asked Charles (the brother not the ex) if she could have use of a cottage at Althrop. Charles said no because he didn't his family (he had Victoria and 3 young kids maybe four) to have to deal with the paparazii.

While growing up (until her marriage) Charles (the brother not he ex) and Diana were fairly close as Sarah and Jane had already left. This was before they each went to their own boarding school...they united against Raine, etc. And they were both fairly young when Frances left. I have read that Diana used to comfort Charles at night when he cried.

Looking back there is certainly a possiblity that Charles regretted his decision not to let Diana live at Althrop. But really, who can blame him. Let's not forget the press was relentless with Diana after the divorce. He might have been thinking if she had a place to call home, she might not have felt the need to hang out with Dodi. But I think the living after an agrument with someone who has died, always has regrets.
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #95  
Old 04-25-2011, 11:18 PM
jdcharlie's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: :), United States
Posts: 257
Quote:
Originally Posted by georgiea View Post
By royal standards I think it is a snub. I think all aristocrats are on the groom's side. Maybe your right about maintaining the peace. I don't think the Middleton's have a large family. All of Catherine's grandparents are died. Maybe the Spencers fill that space. Only a reply from BP will we know for sure.
The map in the press download from the official site shows the Spencers sitting directly across from the foreign royals. It seems to me there are four places of honor in the Abbey and they are being occupied by the RF, the Middleton family, foreign royals and the Spencers. I don't see how that's a snub.
Reply With Quote
  #96  
Old 04-25-2011, 11:25 PM
georgiea's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 1,653
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
...The "speech" could have affected or altered the relationship between William and the Earl or there could not have been a genuine relationship to begin with.
Agree with you Zonk.

Even if the wedding is in Prince William's hands he has to think about his Windsor relative's feelings. I think the action of putting the Spencers behind all of Catherine's relatives shows this. If you are part of the groom's family you should be on the groom's side of the abbey. Westminster is big enough for that. Here in USA the press is saying the Spencers are going to be shunned. Even if the Earl is not liked Sarah and Jane are.

I just feel that the older royals are not forgiving. Look at the Duchess of Windsor not getting HRH, Princess Margaret not being able to marry a divorced man, Diana, Princess of Wales losing her HRH, the Duchess of York not invited to any royal events, Earl Spencer's speech not letting him be close to his nephews.

BTW at the dedication of the Diana fountain the Queen told the Earl how time can heal wounds. If that is the case the 3 Spencer siblings should be seated with Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall in Princess Diana's memory.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jdcharlie View Post
The map in the press download from the official site shows the Spencers sitting directly across from the foreign royals. It seems to me there are four places of honor in the Abbey and they are being occupied by the RF, the Middleton family, foreign royals and the Spencers. I don't see how that's a snub.
I saw the sitting arrangement. And I agree with the USA press that the Spencer's are snubbed. What would it take to have 3 seats on the groom's side for Diana, Princess of Wales siblings? The rest of the Spencer family could sit behind Catherine's family.
__________________
Watch your actions, for they become your habits. Watch your habits because they become your character. Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny.
Reply With Quote
  #97  
Old 04-25-2011, 11:47 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,978
I disagree.

I don't believe the Spencers are snubbed at all. Quite the opposite.

They are seated behind the brides immediate family. Just as William's paternal uncles and aunt and other relations will be seated behind the Queen, Duke of Edinburgh, Charles, Camilla and Henry. The only difference being that they are on the opposite side.

If foreign royal Heads of State and prince's of the blood are expected to sit behind the BRF then I see absolutely no reason why the Spencers, William's aristocratic yet non royal relations, should be expected to sit alongside the immediate royal family and not behind the Middleton's.

Of the four most prominent positions, the Spencers are assuming one of those. How that could be considered a "snub" is beyond me.

As for The Princess Margaret, that was a situation which reflected the Chruch's commitment to the sanctity of marriage and the Queen and royal family's deep involvement with the church. Remember, Chruch and State are at one in the UK, officially. The Queen being it's Supreme Head and her family having been expected to uphold those values.

Margaret was given the choice as was then percieved appropriate. Duty or personal gratification. I think being the sister of the Queen and the daughter of the Queen Mother, both women with a great sense of duty and selflesness, that Margaret realised that in life, not everything goes to plan as we may like. I don't doubt she wasn't happy about it and I'm sure it hurt but sometimes in life, that happens.

At the end of the day Margaret did have a choice to make and she chose her path. Ultimately, no matter the influence of others, it was her decision to make and she made it.

Furthermore, it was the 60's which was still very much a time of conservative values throughout elite society.

As for Sarah, Duchess of York, how many times does this woman have to be given the benefit of the doubt? I like Sarah, but she has made some hairy choices which have further presented the royal family, by association, in a negative light so go figure really.
__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
Reply With Quote
  #98  
Old 04-26-2011, 12:03 AM
georgiea's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 1,653
We have to disagree to agree Madame Royale.

I guess as an American I feel the Spencers were snubbed. BTW two America TV channels agree.

The seating arrangement that I saw showed the Spencers not after the immediate Middleton family. They were positioned farther back. I would have expect from Prince Williams three seats on the grooms side for Diana, Princess of Wales' siblings (whether royal or not) sitting with his Windsor aunts and uncles in memory of his mother. Prince William by word and action said he wanted his mother a part of his wedding.

Maybe the Earl will give a reading during the wedding. I hope that happens.
__________________
Watch your actions, for they become your habits. Watch your habits because they become your character. Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny.
Reply With Quote
  #99  
Old 04-26-2011, 12:08 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,978
Quote:
I guess as an American I feel the Spencers were snubbed.
So if I were American, I may have been more inclined to have formed a similar opinion?.lol.

Quote:
BTW two America TV channels agree.
The opinions of two American TV channels is hardly representative of the truth, nor are they worth paying attention too imo. It's sensationalised media, what does one expect..

I also see no reason for Earl Spencer to give a reading. What uncle who is a guest, and not a member of the wedding party, ever gives a speech? I find that notion rather odd myself.

So yes, we will have to agree to disagee :)

Quote:
The seating arrangement that I saw showed the Spencers not after the immediate Middleton family.
Yes, it states that they will be seated behind William and Catherine's friends. So not immediately after the Middleton's as I suggested, but still in one of the four most prominent localities.
__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
Reply With Quote
  #100  
Old 04-26-2011, 12:28 AM
PrincessKaimi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hilo, Malibu, United States
Posts: 1,331
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
Actually PrincessKaimi...it was post Princess. After the divorce, Diana asked Charles (the brother not the ex) if she could have use of a cottage at Althrop. Charles said no because he didn't his family (he had Victoria and 3 young kids maybe four) to have to deal with the paparazii...
Thank you, Zonk. This time I think I'll remember it. I do think it's too bad she didn't have her ancestral home to retreat it - or the legal wherewithal to fight the paparazzi, which would have been quite a fight. She could have been very retiring for awhile - it's been done. But usually, celebrities take many years to figure out how to do it (and they usually have a staff to help them).

She was very vulnerable, but she was also difficult to herd about - which is why she's left such a mark.

I am glad to see the Spencers in the front row at the wedding, in any case. Most families have some strained relationships (I'll bet even the Middletons do), it's just difficult to have it all be so public. I hope it's a healing occasion for all of them - it's about time that the Royals have a thoroughly joyous reason to come together.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
althorp, diana, diana princess of wales, diana's family, diana: a celebration, earl spencer, genealogy, museum, 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
Charles Spencer, 9th Earl Spencer and Family sara1981 Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 1033 Yesterday 03:19 PM
Was 'The Oval' in Althorp the right place to bury Diana? TheTruth Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 147 10-21-2007 01:53 PM




Popular Tags
aif antony armstrong-jones australia book british royal family camilla clothes corruption crown princess victoria current events daughter daughters discussão documentary duchessofcambridge duchess of sussex duke of york dutch royal family emma extramarital affairs fashion felipe vi forum general royal discussion genetics germany gloucester hasnat khan iñaki urdangarín juan carlos king felipe and queen letizia current events king philippe king willem-alexander letizia meghan markle monaco patronages piromallo porphyria prince charles prince harry prince harry of wales prince laurent princenapoleon prince of belgium princess beatrice princess claire princess diana princess eugenie pyrmont queen elizabeth queen mary of teck quizz royal royal ancestry royal geneology royal ladies royal wedding siblings soldier state visit surname sweden swedish royal family tony armstrong-jones visit from spain visit from sweden wedding windsor castle windsor wedding



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:56 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018
Jelsoft Enterprises