Was 'The Oval' in Althorp the right place to bury Diana? - Page 6

GillW · #**101** 08-23-2007, 05:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sirhon11234

Out of 5 what would you rate Althorp as GillW?

....6 !!

There is honestly nothing I can see that I would improve. Whilst it was nice years ago to get a personal guide for the house tour, the number of visitors now makes this impractical. However the staff stationed in every room are equally as knowledgeable, helpful & friendly, so whilst there may be more people inside at any one time, it is not (in my experience anyway) overcrowded, nor rushed. There is a lot to see, gardens to enjoy, places to sit & take it all in. Even the guide book is good! - historical information, nice illustrations - a lovely souvenir.

pinkie40 · #**102** 08-25-2007, 01:06 AM

At first I was quite upset Diana was not buried, at least, in Westminster Abbey, simply for the convenience of those of us who can visit Central London with no trouble...Even Elton John had mentioned it in an article of People magazine that he would have liked Diana buried there. But I can imagine what a shrine it would become..almost like Canterbury and Thomas a' Becket...

Then I realized the space limitations of the Abbbey and also the fact the Windsors' still considered her not a member of the family....although they did offer to "re-instate" her when she had returned to Althorp and the burial party was having lunch. ( I can imagine the conversation....."Now they want her back..........")

That being said, there was one tabloid in America in the weeks after her death and a very peculiar sentence in Paul Burrell's book (A ROYAL DUTY) to intone she might have after all been cremated and interred with her father after all in the Spencer Vault....

But after all that and reading this thread and visiting Althorp myself, I do hope she is on the island and I do hope she rests in peace in a place where her sons can be given a lovely place to visit and think of their mother...

mkgs · #**103** 08-25-2007, 03:03 AM

Does no one have a sense of Historical Perspective?? Diana, Princess of Wales was the mother of a Future British Monarch. She should have been buried in a place of significance with the Royal Family at Frogmore. Not carried off to an insignificant little island by her money grubbing brother.

Think of it. One day Queen Camilla (mistress of the Prince of Wales) will lie with the Royal Family at Frogmore while the mother of King William V sits in a little lake. Even the Duchess of Windsor was granted burial at Frogmore! You can bet the Duke and Duchess of Windsor understood the significance of that.

Earl Spencer did not do his sister any favor by whisking her away from the Royal Family in her death. He did nothing to protect and secure her memory and rightful place among the Royal Family as the mother of King William V (God willing.) Instead he made her resting place into something more akin to Elvis. I am sure that the Prince of Wales was more than happy to send her off to Althorp.

The Queen and Royal Family should have insisted for the sake of Prince William and Prince Harry that she be buried with their family. Earl Spencer should have seen the importance of that resting place.

Hopefully one day King William V will see to it that his mother's remains are placed in the Royal burial grounds where they belong. As is befitting a Princess of Wales and the mother of a King.

It seems as if everyone has forgotten what it means to be ROYAL. -Even the Royals!

mkgs · #**104** 08-25-2007, 03:16 AM

The Queen also should have put her foot down on Elton John singing that Marilyn Monroe song in Westminster Abbey! UHHHGG! How vulgar! It pains me to think about it!
Somehow I don't think that's what Diana would have chosen for a program of remembrance in Westminster Abbey. I think she would have come up with something a little more dignified, important, and appropriate. I don't think it would have included associations with Marilyn Monroe.

**TheTruth** · #**105** 08-25-2007, 03:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkgs

Does no one have a sense of Historical Perspective?? Diana, Princess of Wales was the mother of a Future British Monarch. She should have been buried in a place of significance with the Royal Family at Frogmore. Not carried off to an insignificant little island by her money grubbing brother.

Think of it. One day Queen Camilla (mistress of the Prince of Wales) will lie with the Royal Family at Frogmore while the mother of King William V sits in a little lake. Even the Duchess of Windsor was granted burial at Frogmore! You can bet the Duke and Duchess of Windsor understood the significance of that.

Earl Spencer did not do his sister any favor by whisking her away from the Royal Family in her death. He did nothing to protect and secure her memory and rightful place among the Royal Family as the mother of King William V (God willing.) Instead he made her resting place into something more akin to Elvis. I am sure that the Prince of Wales was more than happy to send her off to Althorp.

The Queen and Royal Family should have insisted for the sake of Prince William and Prince Harry that she be buried with their family. Earl Spencer should have seen the importance of that resting place.

Hopefully one day King William V will see to it that his mother's remains are placed in the Royal burial grounds where they belong. As is befitting a Princess of Wales and the mother of a King.

It seems as if everyone has forgotten what it means to be ROYAL. -Even the Royals!

It makes sense but I don't totally agree with you. Diana never fitted into royal life, she felt rejected. She always said that she indentified herself more with people in lower social class, she is by being burried in Althorp : everybody can pay her a visit. Her worst fear I think was to be kept away from them, she WAS the People's Princess after all.

Princes William and Harry are big enough to tell what they want to do. If they wish to visit their mother's grave, they can and as it was said previously, if King William V wants to move her grave, he can.

Althorp is her roots, where she was a lady, not a princess but still she had this special gift to help people. I prefer to see her burried in Althorp because we know that visitors come for her, not for the place or other graves like it could have been the case at Frogmore. At Althorp she is no VIP, just Lady Diana Spencer, one of the people.

chrissy57 · #**106** 08-25-2007, 04:25 AM

My problem with her being buried at Althorp is two fold - one is that the princes have to get permission from their uncle to visit the grave. It is after all on his land. Two is the fact that it allows Earl Spencer to make money off her memory and not to really let her rest in peace.

Skydragon · #**107** 08-25-2007, 06:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkgs

I am sure that the Prince of Wales was more than happy to send her off to Althorp.
The Queen and Royal Family should have insisted for the sake of Prince William and Prince Harry that she be buried with their family. Earl Spencer should have seen the importance of that resting place.
It seems as if everyone has forgotten what it means to be ROYAL. -Even the Royals!

Charles as the EX husband of Diana would have very little say in what was done with the remains. That is what happens after a divorce, it becomes the responsibilty of the dead persons 'blood' relatives.
Diana didn't get on with the royal family and of course was no longer a royal, so it would have been inappropriate to place her with the royal family.
The royals seem fully aware of what they are and as such Diana, as a EX wife, was buried where her brother, mother and sisters wanted.

sirhon11234 · #**108** 08-25-2007, 06:52 AM

As mother to the future king Diana was still a member of the royal family and still a Princess of the UK without an HRH. I'am sure the Queen would not have objected if the Princess of Wales was buried at Frogmore. Its William and Harry's choice to move her remains.

Henri M. · #**109** 08-25-2007, 07:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sirhon11234

As mother to the future king Diana was still a member of the royal family and still a Princess of the UK without an HRH. I'am sure the Queen would not have objected if the Princess of Wales was buried at Frogmore. Its William and Harry's choice to move her remains.

No. With her divorce from The Prince of Wales, Diana ceased to be a member of the royal family. Exactly like Sarah Ferguson. Exactly like Mark Phillips. Exactly like Anthony Armstrong-Jones. Of course Diana remained family to Prince William and Prince Harry. Of course Sarah remained family to Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie. Of course Mark Phillips remained family to Peter and Zara. And of cource Anthony Armstrong-Jones remained family to David and Sarah.

Former female spouses of Peers however do have the right to continue (until remarriage) their former husband's title. So Diana became known as 'Diana, Princess of Wales' and Sarah became known as 'Sarah, Duchess of York'. Both derived their status as a Royal Highness from their marriage to a Prince of the blood royal. With the end of their marriages, logically they lost their status attached to the marriage.

And, as last, Diana was never a Princess of the United Kingdom. Like Sarah never was. And like Camilla is not. By marriage to a Prince of the blood royal, they share their spouse's social rank and can be known with their spouse's title(s) en titre courteoisie. None of them however, did acquire nobility or any title on their own by the marriage. There are only five Princesses of the United Kingdom: Anne the Princess Royal, Beatrice of York, Eugenie of York, Louise of Wessex and Alexandra of Kent.

Skydragon · #**110** 08-25-2007, 07:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sirhon11234

As mother to the future king Diana was still a member of the royal family and still a Princess of the UK without an HRH. I'am sure the Queen would not have objected if the Princess of Wales was buried at Frogmore. Its William and Harry's choice to move her remains.

Diana was never a Princess of the UK.

Quote:

the Princess of Wales, during her marriage, has been always and only HRH The Princess of Wales. She has never been "Princess Diana" - for the style of "Princess Own-christian-name" in the United Kingdom can come only with birth, never with marriage, as is evident from the style of others who became princesses by marriage and are known accordingly as "Princess Husband's-christian-name".)......Lady Diana, Princess of Wales will no longer be a princess, just as Lady Diana, Duchess of Cornwall will no longer be a duchess. The rank of princess came with marriage and it will go when the marriage ends.

Princess of Wales

sirhon11234 · #**111** 08-25-2007, 07:07 AM

Quote:

No. With her divorce from The Prince of Wales, Diana ceased to be a member of the royal family.

Taken from the royal family's website

Quote:

The Prince and Princess continued to share equal responsibility for the upbringing of their children. The Princess, as the mother of Prince William (second in line to the throne), continued to be regarded as a member of the Royal family.

Diana, Princess of Wales > Biography > Marriage and family

Skydragon · #**112** 08-25-2007, 07:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sirhon11234

continued to be regarded as a member of the Royal family

'regarded' being the operative word - it does not say she was still a member.

sirhon11234 · #**113** 08-25-2007, 07:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skydragon

Diana was never a Princess of the UK.

Princess of Wales

Okay, but that website stated that she no longer was a Princess of Wales which is incorrect. She lost her HRH but she retained her title as Princess of Wales.

sirhon11234 · #**114** 08-25-2007, 07:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skydragon

'regarded' being the operative word - it does not say she was still a member.

But she was still considered a member of the family, she was buried under a Royal Standard.

Henri M. · #**115** 08-25-2007, 07:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sirhon11234

Okay, but that website stated that she no longer was a Princess of Wales which is incorrect. She lost her HRH but she retained her title as Princess of Wales.

She retained nothing. She never was Princess of Wales on her own. She was -by courtesy- addressed as such, being the spouse to The Prince of Wales.

After her divorce Lady Diana Spencer formerly Mountbatten-Windsor opted for the social custom that divorced and widowed spouses of Peers continue to use their former spouse's main title, purely out of courtesy. Had Diana married to Dodi, then she would become Lady Diana Al-Fayed. Not that she would have 'lost' anything. (She had no title however). It is just the social way of addressing to her.

Henri M. · #**116** 08-25-2007, 07:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sirhon11234

But she was still considered a member of the family, she was buried under a Royal Standard.

She was not buried under the Royal Standard but under her personal Standard. That is an honour which can be requested by the sons, for an example. Like a resigned President or an Archbishop can be buried with all honours, even when they factually were no longer a President or Archbishop.