The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals > Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997)

Join The Royal Forums Today
View Poll Results: When did your opinion of Diana start to change and why?
Morton book (1990) 25 9.80%
War of the Waleses (starting 1990) 20 7.84%
Squidgygate (1992) 12 4.71%
Hewitt affair (1993) 17 6.67%
Charles' interview (1994) 5 1.96%
Panorama interview (1995) 43 16.86%
Phone calls to Oliver Hoare (1994) 14 5.49%
Dodi al-Fayed (1997) 23 9.02%
Other (please explain) 96 37.65%
Voters: 255. You may not vote on this poll

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1041  
Old 05-21-2011, 03:53 PM
sirhon11234's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
Again, before Raine, before Peter Shand-Kydd, the Spencer children lived an almost idyllic childhood at Park House. Certainly it was an aristocratic upbringing that involved nannies...but there was still fun, happiness and love....at least until 1967.

Read the biographies of Sally Bedell-Smith, Anne Edwards, and Sarah Bradford, and Diana's childhood nanny Mary Clarke just for starters.

Diana's unhappiness and emotional turbulence began AFTER her parents acrimonious split.

ETA: I do agree with your assessment of the Princess as a parent...she was an excellent one...but I hated the way she often used and manipulated them to get her way as well.

However, Prince Harry has publically called her the world's best mother, and William despite everything seems to revere her memory. You can't argue with facts.

I think the boys got the best qualities of both Diana and Charles...particularly William.
The divorce affected the Spencer children differently. Sara and Jane have maintained long relationships with their husbands and seem happy. They have the stable families. Where as Diana and Charles are the opposites, their marriages were unstable and had problems sustaining long term relationships. IMO it probably reflects the ages of the children when their parents got divorced.
__________________

__________________
"I think the biggest disease the world suffers from in this day and age is the disease of people feeling unloved."
Diana, the Princess of Wales
  #1042  
Old 05-21-2011, 04:50 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 4,714
sirhon, that is not surprising since Diana and her little brother Charles were the youngest, the divorce would have hit them hardest.

Sarah and Jane were away at school when their parents split up.

One of the most painful revelations of Diana's story is how she used to lay awake at night and listen to little Charles crying out and sobbing for their mother after she left.

And even though Sarah appears to have achieved a stable family life, she went through a period of teen drinking and anorexia.
__________________

__________________
  #1043  
Old 05-21-2011, 08:24 PM
georgiea's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 1,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
Again, before Raine, before Peter Shand-Kydd, the Spencer children lived an almost idyllic childhood at Park House. Certainly it was an aristocratic upbringing that involved nannies...but there was still fun, happiness and love....at least until 1967.

Read the biographies of Sally Bedell-Smith, Anne Edwards, and Sarah Bradford, and Diana's childhood nanny Mary Clarke just for starters.

Diana's unhappiness and emotional turbulence began AFTER her parents acrimonious split.
Moonmaiden we agree. That is what I was trying to write in my post. Diana unhappiness and emotional turbulence began after her parents 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.
  #1044  
Old 05-21-2011, 08:30 PM
sirhon11234's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,464
I remember reading once that one of Diana's old rommmates said that Diana once said the years she spent living in london with her flatmates was her happiest.
I wouldn't be surprised she was close to her roomates who became family in a way she spent a lot of time with them and they gave her a close family unit she didn't have.
__________________
"I think the biggest disease the world suffers from in this day and age is the disease of people feeling unloved."
Diana, the Princess of Wales
  #1045  
Old 05-21-2011, 08:43 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 2,236
What do you think- would things have worked out better if Charles had married Jane?
He dated Sarah, wed Diana, but Jane married young to a much older man.
Yet it seems the marriage has been very happy.

I realize What If? questions are impossible to answer; still, I can't help wondering.
__________________
  #1046  
Old 05-21-2011, 11:40 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,248
This makes sense to me. Those pictures we saw of her in the fall of 1980 and early in 1981 have a bitter-sweet quality in retrospect. At that time, she had work that she liked, she was a healthy weight, and she had an unspoiled prettiness that make those pictures a joy to look at now. There are also no stories from that time that hint at the trouble inside her.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sirhon11234 View Post
I remember reading once that one of Diana's old rommmates said that Diana once said the years she spent living in london with her flatmates was her happiest.
__________________
  #1047  
Old 05-21-2011, 11:51 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by scooter
Well he certainly green-lighted his friends to villify her in the press, such as Fatty Soames. Let's also not forget that Camilla, during the Mistress decades, gave regular briefings to the Editor of The Sun "to get Charles' side out". That's hardly taking the high road.
I did not say Charles was innocent. He did exactly what Diana encouraged her friends to do. In the end, those friends were adults and made their own choices regardless of what either Diana and Charles said to them.

I chose my words very carefully. He had made a few embrassing comments about Diana but in the thick of things he absolutely did not go on public record or an interview and villify the former PoW. At least not to my recollection.

As I said before, Charles and Camilla will never have my full on backing because privately, to this day I stand by Diana's actions 90%. I get it. But this is not what this thread is about.

It is about the point where you changed your mind about Diana. And while I did not feel this way about her when the Bashir interview happened-as stated previously-my point is that Diana had a duty as did Charles to maintain the dignity of the crown and respect for what Queen Elizabeth had worked her royal butt to maintain. And she had an opportunity not to stoop low-at least publicly-and remain on the High Street. It does not make her evil but her actions just as accountable as Charles imo. And when it counted, he didn't slam her.
__________________
"I had this garden party for my father's birthday, I said to RSVP cause it was a sit-down dinner, but people came who did not RSVP and so I was totally buggin'...but, by the end of the day, it was like, the more the merrier...So, if the government could just get in the kitchen, rearrange some things, we could certainly party with the Ha-ti-ans." Cher--Clueless
  #1048  
Old 05-22-2011, 08:25 AM
olebabs's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Århus, Denmark
Posts: 283
My opinion has never changed about Diana. I was just really sadend to hear how damaged she actually was emotionally. I actually think that applies to Charles as well. Either of them were not able to give anything to other people, because they both needed so much.

The reason I think it works for him and Camilla, is beacause she seems to be the one in charge.
__________________
  #1049  
Old 05-22-2011, 01:48 PM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 4,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by georgiea View Post
Moonmaiden we agree. That is what I was trying to write in my post. Diana unhappiness and emotional turbulence began after her parents divorce.

Okay then..I apologize if I misunderstood what you were posting.

Mermaid I agree with you about Diana in 1980...she was just sooo pretty in her late teens, when she looked much the way she did in georgiea's avatar.

It drives me mental when people say she was "overweight" when she met Charles! She had never looked healthier, happier or more lovely.

In retrospect, it is awful to realize that there was so much emotional torment just underneath the surface.
__________________
  #1050  
Old 05-22-2011, 03:53 PM
georgiea's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 1,644
Made a mistake in posting.
__________________
Watch your actions, for they become your habits. Watch your habits because they become your character. Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny.
  #1051  
Old 05-22-2011, 04:04 PM
georgiea's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: N/A, United States
Posts: 1,644
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Any person who says a mother is there for her sons when they are at boarding school for 9 months of the year has a funny idea of what 'being there' means in my opinion.
The Princess Diana was mothering the princes during their formative years. We all know that the first years are the most important and Diana was there for her sons. Until the separation in 1992 Diana and the boys went to be with Prince Charles at Highgrove on weekends. After 1995 the boys were shared. I believe that would make Prince William about 10 and Prince Harry 8. I think Diana, Princess of Wales parenting touch affected her sons by then.

I just read the new Andrew Morton book on William and Catherine and the first chapter is on how Diana, Princess of Wales' parenting skill influenced her boys. ( BTW Andrew Morton is not a Diana fan. He is out for selling his book. He sold out on Princess Diana a few days after she died telling the world that his book on Diana in 1992 was her own words not her friends) Whatever else Princess Diana did in her private life she loved her boys and help guide them into the men they now are.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Having gone to a boarding school I know who had the greater influence on my growing up and it wasn't my parents but rather my house mistresses and the other girls in my year because they were the ones who were there every day, who were there when I was told my grandmother was dying of cancer, who were there when I was told that my best friend had died, who were there when I heard the news that my cousin was getting engaged etc - they were the ones who picked up the pieces on a day to day basis - my parents were the ones who came and told me things but after they left, a couple of days later, it was the school that actually had to deal with things. The same thing happened with the Diana when she did the washing the dirty linen in public e.g. the Morton book and the Panorama interview - she went to the school to talk to William but who actually dealt with the issue on the day to day basis when the other boys were talking about it (and yes I know that the book and interview weren't supposed to be available in the school but if you believe that I have a Harbour Bridge you can buy - the book would have been in that school by recess and well hidden - like all contraband in schools) - the house master and they other teachers. Even dealing with the situation after Diana died - who would have dealt with the day to day issues that arose after that all happened - the school not Charles - they were the ones who were there first and thus the ones to deal with it.
This above beautifully written paragraph I agree with.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Diana - like her parents before her - handed the raising of her sons over to other people. That doesn't mean that she didn't love them but more that she was a product of her own class - and that class believed in having boarding schools raising their kids, along with the nannies etc. Diana might have been slightly more hands on then most in her class but she only had to be with them for about 6 weeks a year (and also in the Squidgeygate tape refers to looking after her own sons as 'babysitting').

No one doubts her love for her sons but I do question whether or not she was actually a good mother in many ways. Fortunately for them the decision about which schools would actually raise the boys was right for them.
Well the decision about schools was made by Diana, Princess of Wales. Prince Charles went along with her. I don't know how you can say Princess Diana was not hands on. She loved children. She was devoted to her sons.
As I have said she arrange her royal duties around the princes. She took them to school and pick them up most days.

Yes after the boys went away Princess Diana was alone and the loneliness and mental troubles came to a head. But her boys were everything to her. Andrew Morton writes better than me, so get his book and you can see that Diana, Princess of Wales as a parent was always there to guide her sons.
__________________
Watch your actions, for they become your habits. Watch your habits because they become your character. Watch your character, for it becomes your destiny.
  #1052  
Old 05-22-2011, 05:04 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,351
Quote:
Originally Posted by MARG View Post
I would suggest that lying in the face of proof of 300 + calls to him goes way past "infatuated", she was stalking him and his family was irrelevant, just as irrelevant as Will Carling's wife was when she was "infatuated" with him. Being in love does not give anyone license to invade someone Else's life and marriage, and the extremes to which she went in the case of Oliver Hoare were criminal.

I loathed that Diana was a total hypocrite. She vilified Charles and took every opportunity to bring him down in public, all the while portraying herself as an innocent, hurt and abandoned wife. Yet her own behaviour was truly appalling. What Diana wanted Diana got, and to hell with the consequences. Wife? Children? Irrelevant!
This is another situation where I started to doubt the image of Diana that she herself portrayed. She wanted everyone to believe she was the wounded wife whose husband was cheating on her with another woman, yet she had no problem doing to other women what supposedly was being done to her. That just screams to me that something is wrong with this "Perfect Little Saint Diana" portrait. For me, I have to take the stories from Diana's side and combine them with the stories from Charles' side and somehow find the truth that lies in between. Diana was mentally unstable and I don't know if any man could have made her happy. Who knows when Charles and Camilla started their physical relationship again, but I do believe that no matter when it got sexual again, that he never stopped loving her and he refused to see or was unable to understand that about 99.9% of women would have a hard time dealing with their husband being in love with another women especially when that woman is still a part of their lives. As I have gotten older I have seen some really strange marriages; Hilary and Bill Clinton being one of them. I believe that for a marriage with Charles to work the woman would have to be like Hilary Clinton, Jackie Kennedy, or Rose Kennedy...and according to some QEII. Diana wasn't that type of woman, she wanted what she wanted and if you didn't give it to her then all he11 would break lose.
__________________
  #1053  
Old 05-22-2011, 05:20 PM
sirhon11234's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 2,464
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
This is another situation where I started to doubt the image of Diana that she herself portrayed. She wanted everyone to believe she was the wounded wife whose husband was cheating on her with another woman, yet she had no problem doing to other women what supposedly was being done to her. That just screams to me that something is wrong with this "Perfect Little Saint Diana" portrait. For me, I have to take the stories from Diana's side and combine them with the stories from Charles' side and somehow find the truth that lies in between. Diana was mentally unstable and I don't know if any man could have made her happy. Who knows when Charles and Camilla started their physical relationship again, but I do believe that no matter when it got sexual again, that he never stopped loving her and he refused to see or was unable to understand that about 99.9% of women would have a hard time dealing with their husband being in love with another women especially when that woman is still a part of their lives. As I have gotten older I have seen some really strange marriages; Hilary and Bill Clinton being one of them. I believe that for a marriage with Charles to work the woman would have to be like Hilary Clinton, Jackie Kennedy, or Rose Kennedy...and according to some QEII. Diana wasn't that type of woman, she wanted what she wanted and if you didn't give it to her then all he11 would break lose.
I always found the marriages of Jackie and Hillary to be quite sad. They stayed with men who cheated on them. What's the point of marriage if one has a spouse that cheats on her or him. I am very happy that Maria Schriver is leaving Arnold.
__________________
"I think the biggest disease the world suffers from in this day and age is the disease of people feeling unloved."
Diana, the Princess of Wales
  #1054  
Old 05-22-2011, 06:13 PM
Mia_mae's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: SP, Brazil
Posts: 1,092
Every story has 2 sides and I'm very much aware that non of them were perfect. But my point of view has changed and then it changed again.
When it comes down to it the one thing that is always on my mind when reading about the former couple is: She was the 19 year-old, he was 32 and the rest of the family, well not only older but more experienced. They should have know better!
While she was the virgin bride with aristocratic background she was perfect, once the problems started to appeared she was the devil?? sorry but that won't never cut out for me!
__________________
There's not much of a difference between a stadium full of cheering fans and an angry crowd screaming abuse at you. They're both just making a lot of noise. How you take it is up to you. Convince yourself they're cheering for you. You do that, and someday, they will - Sue S.
  #1055  
Old 05-22-2011, 06:25 PM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by sirhon11234

I always found the marriages of Jackie and Hillary to be quite sad. They stayed with men who cheated on them. What's the point of marriage if one has a spouse that cheats on her or him. I am very happy that Maria Schriver is leaving Arnold.
sirhon,

Personally, I agree. But everybody has different motives for staying. Jackie's motives may have been partially due to the time she was raised as well was her being the wife of a power political icon. Women in her position had sometimes even less power than the everyday woman. Her family and especially her father could have swayed her to grin and bear it (not trying to be clever as this is the Middleton's motto).

Hillary's reasons were probably different and more about the political power she was not willing to yield as her husband's climb to the highest US position meant more for her entry into the political circus.

By the time Diana's divorce rolled around it was common even in higher social circles and I think Diana and Charles knew stayimg together was both unhealthy and maybe even dangerous for her mental stability. Diana knew she would not be royal anymore but she also knew she was walking away with beaucoup bucks and with the majority of the public always considering the "people's princess." It probably made the decision a lot sweeter.

I am sorry if I offended anyone with my views on this but I believe my family raised me to see marriage as a business contract (and I came to feel this way when I turned fifteen) and that love is nice but not everything. It's about what both people are bringing to the table and ending it is based on how much you can take with you. Sometimes the things that cannot come with you outweigh the betrayal or whatever issues are there and you stay.
__________________
"I had this garden party for my father's birthday, I said to RSVP cause it was a sit-down dinner, but people came who did not RSVP and so I was totally buggin'...but, by the end of the day, it was like, the more the merrier...So, if the government could just get in the kitchen, rearrange some things, we could certainly party with the Ha-ti-ans." Cher--Clueless
  #1056  
Old 05-22-2011, 06:38 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,248
I agree with this 100%. I think that Diana had an immature "love" for Charles--more based on his image and his role than who the man was inside; and if Charles was uneasy about where the relationship was going, he shouldn't have continued seeing her and definitely not have proposed. If the man could command a mine-sweeper and jump out of planes, surely he could have said "no" to the forces pushing him toward this marriage.


[QUOTE=Mia_mae;1256438When it comes down to it the one thing that is always on my mind when reading about the former couple is: She was the 19 year-old, he was 32 and the rest of the family, well not only older but more experienced.[/QUOTE]
__________________
  #1057  
Old 05-22-2011, 09:42 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mia_mae View Post
Every story has 2 sides and I'm very much aware that non of them were perfect. But my point of view has changed and then it changed again.
When it comes down to it the one thing that is always on my mind when reading about the former couple is: She was the 19 year-old, he was 32 and the rest of the family, well not only older but more experienced. They should have know better!
While she was the virgin bride with aristocratic background she was perfect, once the problems started to appeared she was the devil?? sorry but that won't never cut out for me!
Charles should have realized that a 19yr old high school drop out was not right for him or the royal family. But I'm not going to deny that Diana wanted to be Princess of Wales.
As for Hilary, Jackie and women like them, I am not going to say their marriages are sad; I will say their marriages are more modern and realistic and perhaps better suits the kind of person they are/were. There have been many women throughout history who have stayed with men who were womanizers, I personally don't think I could do it; but I do think that the women who do stay find fulfillment and satisfaction in other areas that keep them content and happy. My parents are thankfully still married and I don't think there is a divorce in my family; but not every marriage is the same and what one couple does may not work for another. I don't fault women who decide to stay with a cheating husband for whatever reason works for them.
__________________
  #1058  
Old 05-22-2011, 11:51 PM
MRSJ's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: ******, United States
Posts: 1,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vita

. But everybody has different motives for stayingJackie's motives may have been partially due to the time she was raised as well was her being the wife of a power political icon. Women in her position had sometimes even less power than the everyday woman. Her family and especially her father could have swayed her to grin and bear it (not trying to be clever as this is the Middleton's motto).
I am one of the biggest Jackie Kennedy fans out there so keep that in mind when I say- it has been pretty well accepted Joe Kennedy paid Jackie 1million dollars to not leave Jack when she first learned of his liasons (this was pre - presidency while he was in Senate) Just an FYI about why she may have chosen to stay. ....And her father died in 1957 she had not spoken to him since her wedding in 1953 ......
__________________
  #1059  
Old 05-23-2011, 01:37 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 161
Quote:
Originally Posted by MRSJ

I am one of the biggest Jackie Kennedy fans out there so keep that in mind when I say- it has been pretty well accepted Joe Kennedy paid Jackie 1million dollars to not leave Jack when she first learned of his liasons (this was pre - presidency while he was in Senate) Just an FYI about why she may have chosen to stay. ....And her father died in 1957 she had not spoken to him since her wedding in 1953 ......
I am aware of that but did not want to go into details as this is not what the thread is about. But you reinforced my point.
__________________
"I had this garden party for my father's birthday, I said to RSVP cause it was a sit-down dinner, but people came who did not RSVP and so I was totally buggin'...but, by the end of the day, it was like, the more the merrier...So, if the government could just get in the kitchen, rearrange some things, we could certainly party with the Ha-ti-ans." Cher--Clueless
  #1060  
Old 05-23-2011, 11:34 AM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 4,714
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
Charles should have realized that a 19yr old high school drop out was not right for him or the royal family. But I'm not going to deny that Diana wanted to be Princess of Wales.
As for Hilary, Jackie and women like them, I am not going to say their marriages are sad; I will say their marriages are more modern and realistic and perhaps better suits the kind of person they are/were. There have been many women throughout history who have stayed with men who were womanizers, I personally don't think I could do it; but I do think that the women who do stay find fulfillment and satisfaction in other areas that keep them content and happy. My parents are thankfully still married and I don't think there is a divorce in my family; but not every marriage is the same and what one couple does may not work for another. I don't fault women who decide to stay with a cheating husband for whatever reason works for them.
I don't want to veer off topic but ICAM. I think it is a bit simplistic to label those marriages as "sad" because they do not conform to what would work for us.

From what I have learned of both marriages, they involved relationships and circumstances that were incredibly complex. Everyone involved(Jack and Jackie, Hillary and Bill) is or was highly intelligent, ambitious and complicated.

Hillary and Bill have a marriage that works for THEM apparently, and Jacqueline Kennedy is said to have mourned her unfaithful (first)husband to the end of her life, requesting in her will to be buried at his side.

I especially admire the fact that both women refused to discuss or justify their choices to the public.

In the end, nobody really understands what happens in the intimacy of a relationship between husband and wife, except the two people involved.
__________________

__________________
Closed Thread

Tags
andrew morton, diana princess of wales, dodi fayed, james hewitt, jonathan dimbleby, oliver hoare, prince charles, prince of wales, princess diana, squidgygate


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
The Change of the Act of Succession - 1979 Constitution Change GrandDuchess Royal House of Sweden 276 06-30-2014 12:52 AM
What would you change? Lena Royal Chit Chat 20 06-23-2010 06:31 PM
Change of name of our community to TRF... Andy R Forum Announcements and Admin 2 08-29-2004 04:29 PM




Popular Tags
abdication belgium birth brussels carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta leonor infanta sofia jewellery jordan king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg nobility official visit olympics ottoman pieter van vollenhoven president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess mabel princess margriet princess mary princess mary fashion queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:31 PM.

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]