Last Hours, Death, Transfer from France, Funeral and Interment


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Moonmaiden23 said:
Dear Honeybees..."you called it" translates to "you got it exactly right"...or SPOT ON!!;)
Click to expand...
. Dear Moonmaiden, thank you for the cultural sensitivity there, I am battling Irish and England at the moment and as for ' giving someone the cheese', I remain at a complete and utter loss.
 
GracieGiraffe said:
My cousin cried here in the U.S. She wasn't feigning anything. She (and I) were both pregnant, and I did wonder if it weren't hormones on her part, as I routinely cried at sentimental commercials at the time.

As I recall, there was genuine shock, horror and sadness at her death. She died at 36 for chrissake, and she left two young sons. I think I felt very sad for her children. When I saw that bouquet of roses on top of her coffin with the words "mummy" I thought I would lose it, and I'm not a member of the Diana fan club.

Were some people just emoting for the sake of it? Likely. Were some people truly grieved by her loss and her sons' loss - very much so. It's not an either-or.
Click to expand...

I was quite young when Diana died (I was a pre-teen - old enough to know what was going on and really mesmerized by it, but not old enough to have memories of Diana and Charles' wedding or anything), and I remember seeing my mother cry at the time, and I also saw the mother of one of my best friends crying. I'd spent the night at my friend's house the night before the funeral, and woke up the next morning to find her mom weeping in front of the television and clutching a box of tissues. I found this quite surprising, as my friend's mom was generally a bit of a tough person, if anything. However, it had been quite an extraordinary week. I'd seen my mom be tearful, too, and she's not the sort of person who typically cries a lot, and certainly not at things she's watching on TV.

I found it to be a very shocking and emotional time and, like I said, I was only young and was quite startled that this vibrant, glamorous woman who was so incredibly famous could suddenly be gone. I can certainly understand that it was emotional for those who had been paying attention to her since her wedding and since her children had been born. I think seeing that card addressed to "Mummy" on top of the coffin was what did a lot of people in. I even remember my grandmother being very sentimental about it, and that's really not her style.
 
GracieGiraffe said:
My cousin cried here in the U.S. She wasn't feigning anything. She (and I) were both pregnant, and I did wonder if it weren't hormones on her part, as I routinely cried at sentimental commercials at the time.

As I recall, there was genuine shock, horror and sadness at her death. She died at 36 for chrissake, and she left two young sons. I think I felt very sad for her children. When I saw that bouquet of roses on top of her coffin with the words "mummy" I thought I would lose it, and I'm not a member of the Diana fan club.

Were some people just emoting for the sake of it? Likely. Were some people truly grieved by her loss and her sons' loss - very much so. It's not an either-or.
Click to expand...

It was indeed a difficult time for a great many. I certainly cried over Diana's tragic passing.

Over the years since her death; I've seen, heard and read people trying to analyze the peoples grief. Some thought it was all drummed up by the PM and press, but I think it was just pure sadness over the tragic loss of young, beautiful mother, well known British royal and humanitarian. She was human and humans sometimes die from very difficult circumstances, but Diana touched many people for nearly seventeen years and her death reflected that.

It's rather unfortunate that people have capitalized on her death (a thousand times over) and have steered her memory through many mazes to fit their narrative and benefit. I think it has caused a great deal of confusion and tarnishing, IMO.
 
Last edited:
As I recall, the sadness in Canada was real as well. There were line-ups to sign books of condolences, and many Anglican churches had memorial services. There was a lot of disbelief and sadness over the whole situation.
 
I had no television then (was loaned one for the time of the funeral) and had never read any of the women's magazines that featured Diana, so was certainly not "manipulated by the media".
It was a genuinely tragic event: ten years later and quite unprompted, an older male member of my family commented how heart-rending it had been to see and hear the funeral procession.
 
Last edited:
I think a lot of people were totally bamboozled by the press. Charles Spencer's eulogy refers to the battering and really bad press his sister had taken over the last year about her "change in lifestyle", no more the Perfect Princess but more like Fallen Angel with a lot of adverse press about her indiscreet love life.
Charles Spencer said:
"There is no doubt that she was looking for a new direction in her life at this time. She talked endlessly of getting away from England, mainly because of the treatment that she received at the hands of the newspapers. I don't think she ever understood why her genuinely good intentions were sneered at by the media, why there appeared to be a permanent quest on their behalf to bring her down. It is baffling.
Click to expand...
May I say the immediate swing from "who's paying her bills, etc. back to "Queen of Hearts" to "The Peoples Princess", was dizzying.

Cynically, they also deflecting public horror from their culpability in general back on to the BRF. The spin was amazing, within 48 hours she went from a pariah to a candidate for sainthood. The Guardian article from 2007 gives a fair view of the situation, which covered many of the points you raised, wyevale.

Mourning Diana: A moment of madness? | UK news | The Guardian
 
Amazing how different our experiences can be. As a British 12 year old at the time I didn't see anyone shed even the slightest tear when Diana died, literally not one person. People weren't glad she died but it didn't actually impact on our lives at all.

The only people I saw crying were on TV; that was a surefire way of getting your 15 minutes at that point.

I do distinctly remember my dad watching the whole mad show leading up to the funeral and saying "the whole bloody country's gone mad".
 
I remember talking to someone who was in London that week and she was made to feel like a pariah because she wanted to do normal 'touristy' things and not go anywhere near the Diana stuff.


I have also spoken to many Londoners and British people over the years who say that in hindsight they now realise just how much they were manipulated by the press that week.


I also have very clear memories of the press's initial reports from KP where the crowd were calling the press 'murderers' etc. The press was then faced with a real problem - how to turn the death into something that didn't cost them in the long run and so they fuelled the fires against the Queen and the royal family which many people still hold to, to this day.
 
I was in London at the time of the funeral and leading up to it and saw plenty of tears, and resentment at both the Press and the royals, especially Charles. It was in many ways a very odd sort of mood, and I've been in many crowds in my life, both rejoicing and sad ones, but never experienced anything else quite like it.

Back home in Australia there was great sadness also. I remember phoning home and my niece, then in her 20's, speaking about the sorrow she and her friends felt and how people were mourning Diana. They would hardly have been whipped up by Blair and/or the British media.
 
Curryong said:
I was in London at the time of the funeral and leading up to it and saw plenty of tears, and resentment at both the Press and the royals, especially Charles. It was in many ways a very odd sort of mood, and I've been in many crowds in my life, both rejoicing and sad ones, but never experienced anything else quite like it.



Back home in Australia there was great sadness also. I remember phoning home and my niece, then in her 20's, speaking about the sorrow she and her friends felt and how people were mourning Diana. They would hardly have been whipped up by Blair and/or the British media.
Click to expand...


Your so right nobody whipped up me. I continually wonder why people that didn't like Diana insist everyone felt like they did. If you didn't like her fine your choice but don't tell me how I was whipped up by the media. Etc etc
Why can't we leave her to rest in peace and let us that loved her remember her that's the respectable way to behave.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community
 
why people that didn't like Diana insist everyone felt like they did
Click to expand...

ABSOLUTELY no-one is saying that, rather you are insisting no-one felt browbeaten into expressing emotion that they didn't genuinely feel. Well, they certainly did..

I went to a party the week after her funeral, and naturally the [deeply uncharacteristic for the British] outpouring of grief was widely discussed. Many, many people there felt they had had to mourn 'because it was expected', for a woman they never knew, and whom they [in many cases] had reservations over aspects of her character and conduct.
 
Last edited:
I certainly don't think the media directly encouraged people to show their emotions or were pro-actively responsible for the national outpouring of grief. Early in the morning the media were outside the palaces and within a couple of hours of Diana's death, a trickle of people started to bring flowers to the palace gates. People saw this and thought they would do the same and within a day it grew and grew into the mass of flowers.

Other than that, and the initial shock people felt, people pretty much got on with their lives, went back to work after the weekend, talked about it a lot etc. Everything remained open, cafe's, theatres, shops etc, and they were all as busy as normal. No one should have felt awkward about doing normal things - I certainly did. It was a strange week, though and our lives were saturated with the news and TV reports.

Most shops shut on the morning of the funeral, and if they didn't they would certainly have had a loss of trade for a few hours. I lived in my home city of Norwich at the time and after about 1pm-2pm the shops in the city centre were open again and everything seemed back to normal.

What the media did do that week was to whip up a storm against the Queen, which I think many people did take notice of. Headlines such as "where is the Queen, where is her flag" and "the nation needs you ma'am" - or some such thing - really caused a problem. I really don't think most people would have thought or worried that the Queen and her family were still at Balmoral had it not been for the media.

ETA - for my part I was very frustrated at having to go back to work because I just wanted to stay at home and watch the news. I had spent all the Sunday trying to take in the news and changing channels all the time to see as much coverage as I could. There was definitely a quiet atmosphere in the office on that Monday morning.
 
Last edited:
Jacknch said:
I certainly don't think the media directly encouraged people to show their emotions or were pro-actively responsible for the national outpouring of grief. Early in the morning the media were outside the palaces and within a couple of hours of Diana's death, a trickle of people started to bring flowers to the palace gates. People saw this and thought they would do the same and within a day it grew and grew into the mass of flowers.

Other than that, and the initial shock people felt, people pretty much got on with their lives, went back to work after the weekend, talked about it a lot etc. Everything remained open, cafe's, theatres, shops etc, and they were all as busy as normal. No one should have felt awkward about doing normal things - I certainly did. It was a strange week, though and our lives were saturated with the news and TV reports.

Most shops shut on the morning of the funeral, and if they didn't they would certainly have had a loss of trade for a few hours. I lived in my home city of Norwich at the time and after about 1pm-2pm the shops in the city centre were open again and everything seemed back to normal.

What the media did do that week was to whip up a storm against the Queen, which I think many people did take notice of. Headlines such as "where is the Queen, where is her flag" and "the nation needs you ma'am" - or some such thing - really caused a problem. I really don't think most people would have thought or worried that the Queen and her family were still at Balmoral had it not been for the media.

ETA - for my part I was very frustrated at having to go back to work because I just wanted to stay at home and watch the news. I had spent all the Sunday trying to take in the news and changing channels all the time to see as much coverage as I could. There was definitely a quiet atmosphere in the office on that Monday morning.
Click to expand...

This. I think the grief and tears were genuine. What really shocked me was the anger expressed toward the Queen. The media chased her like a haunted animal IMO. I am young, and have very few memories of that week but I based on my recollection and info,etc. (and movei "the Queen") I really believe people desperately needed a scapegoat: omeone to let the steam off to... and that scapegoat was her Majesty. I felt very sorry for her and the whole family.
 
A friend of mine wept because she had lost her mother as a young child like Prince Harry. Another wept because she had found out her husband had been having an affair throughout their marriage and I wept because I believed a flawed human being, the same as the rest of us who had used her position to do good, who had worked hard on so many diverse causes was gone. She had known happiness, duty and unhappiness but whatever anyone does or does not think of Diana, Princess of Wales her legacy lives on. She was not a saint, which of us is? She had a work ethic and brought good into the world. For whatever reason and I suspect alot were highly personal, her death touched alot of people. I know people who took up voluntary work after Diana's death as a mark of respect for her and continue until this day. No one in the media forced them into that.
 
Well, here in America, when something tragic happens, we look to our Head of State (President) to give us some words of comfort and help us come to terms to what has happened. I think the British people and even the American people looked for The Queen to pretty much do the same when Diana suddenly died. Emotions were high, but I don't think people really understood (early on) that The Queen and royal family were pretty busy helping Charles, William and Harry cope with her loss at Balmoral. When The Queen & Prince Philip made their way to London, inspected the flowers and interacted with the crowds of mourners, things did calm down and Her Majesty's message broadcast was a step in the right direction in giving some comfort to the people.

Also, Diana's passing happened a year after her drama-filled divorce from the Prince of Wales. Emotions were still high after all of that.
 
Last edited:
I wonder sometimes whether the mourning over Diana was a much-needed catharsis for many people. No doubt people were sad and some grief-stricken at her death. However, as those of us who've experienced grief at close quarters knows, each death makes the next close one harder to bear. Many people like to cry over sad movies and books; and I think that, for some, it's an excuse to have a good cry and get some emotion out. Possibly that was part of the mass grief as well: people being sad over things and channeling their grief in Diana's direction, particularly since it was encouraged by the all-consuming coverage during the death week.
 
Newly published transcripts of phone calls between then-President Bill Clinton and the U.K.'s former Prime Minister Tony Blair reveal that the political leaders discussed their concerns over Prince William and Prince Harry after the death of their mother, Princess Diana.

..."She was such a rock of stability in the sense she connected them with the outside world," he said. "The eldest boy, William, is quite like her in a way, he is very 'feet on the ground,' he does things kids his age do."

...He also spoke of the constant press attention Diana received during and after her marriage, and how her sons kept her going.

"The problem was the way she lived, in a press frenzy," Blair said. "It's impossible to contemplate how intrusive it was, into every single aspect of her life. The last time I spoke with her, she said that were it not for the boys, she'd be off the board."
Click to expand...
Read more: Bill Clinton, Tony Blair Discuss Princes William and Harry After Diana's Death : People.com
 
Last edited:
And many of us join in your sentiments, Dman. Diana was gone far, far too soon.
 
Mermaid1962 said:
I wonder sometimes whether the mourning over Diana was a much-needed catharsis for many people. No doubt people were sad and some grief-stricken at her death. However, as those of us who've experienced grief at close quarters knows, each death makes the next close one harder to bear. Many people like to cry over sad movies and books; and I think that, for some, it's an excuse to have a good cry and get some emotion out. Possibly that was part of the mass grief as well: people being sad over things and channeling their grief in Diana's direction, particularly since it was encouraged by the all-consuming coverage during the death week.
Click to expand...

It was very much the angle of the camera's. In front of Buckingham Palace, Kensington Palace, the tunnel at the Pont d'Alma: all camera's focused there and the growing sea of flowers. Hysterical people, the mass-media jumping on it: "Show us you care!!!! Where is your flag???"

But the camera's just had to turn around and they could show us London as usual, people commuting, shopping, sightseeing busses driving around, a music festival in Hyde Park, mounted police calmly passing by, the offices and the shops just going their everyday routine.

So what was shown in the media was a very zoomed-in focus on very specific parts of a gigantic city. While the media were zooming in on the Pont d'Alma they did not turn the camera just a few dozen metres below to see the queues of chatting and laughing tourists, waiting to board the sightseeing boats in a sun-soaken Seine river, just next to the place of the accident, like nothing special at all had happened. Media can give a very deformed image.
 
Last edited:
Let's be real hear--not everyone was in morning over Diana's passing, but it was an event that effected many people though. Some people laid flowers and moved on, some people laid flowers and held vigils. The same can be said about many famous people and royals who have passed on.

I just remember it as a very tough couple of days. Feelings have mellowed and folks have moved on, but when I take a good look back, a lump develops in my throat and a tear comes to my eye. A life young life taken too soon.
 
I don't know what's happening here. Is Charles Spencer somehow arranging tours now to visit Diana's burial place with the renovations? Is he going to charge tourists to actually visit the island? Something just doesn't sound right to me. IIRC, his touring exhibit of Diana memorabilia closed. The word "temple" kind of threw me off along with Hello! still referring to her as "Princess Diana". Americana at its best. :bang:

At the time of Diana's death, I thought it was pretty fitting that she would find peace in resting on that island where many of her favorite pets were buried. It was isolated, on family grounds and in a place where she wouldn't be hounded forevermore by people and cameras and to be seen as a sideshow.

I do agree with Harry that after almost 20 years, memories can and do fade and one remembers the special good times. Not many of us retain vividly that much of our childhood as we get older but we do carry with us everyday how we were raised and I see both Diana and Charles and their grandmother in Harry and William each time I see them. I think its kind of rude and crude of the media to ask the boys about their mother for the simple reason that her death is one memory they can and do recall vividly as it had such an instant impact on their lives and just brings those feeling to the forefront once again. Harry handles this so well with grace and honesty.

Then again, I'm of the opinion that once someone has died, the remains are similar to hair we've cut off or toenails and fingernails we've clipped. I do believe that Diana's spirit and influence does live on and we see it through the people she's touched.
 
:previous:

No, no one visits Diana's actual burial place other than her loved ones. There's a temple on the Althorp Estate with a bench where people can go and visit and reflect on her life and memory. The Spencer's and Windsor's would never allow her actual resting place be disturbed by anyone.

William and Harry enjoy talking about their mother. There are some sad memories of her problems and tragic passing, but the princes like to reflect on the good memories and her legacy. They have been inspired by her love and care for others. They continue on supporting some of her causes and also do things that they think she would be doing today.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
While one could say Britain was just trying out national catharsis with this event, had things gone different with the funeral or if it wasn't such an unprecedented thing, the republicans might have won the day.

I am greatly indebted to Charles for finally doing right by her and arranging a proper funeral. I don't know if it was just for the boys, or his guilt, or love for her, but knowing his history, it must not have been easy to go against his mother and the palace machine. God knows I sure dislike a lot of what he did to her, but I'll give him his due where its warranted.

I think a lot of people saw her, depending on your age and when in history you first came across her, as the mother, aunt, daughter, big or little sister, girlfriend, wife, etc. that they always wanted, thanks to her unique ability to draw people in and want to protect and nurture her.

As for the recent news of the restoration of the Oval, cautiously hopeful about it, seems comments about its upkeep have spurred Earl Spencer into action, hoping the hype over the 2017 anniversary will be for charity and not...well lets see, am saving my pennies to try and make it over there then.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I cannot see tourists being allowed on the island after the refurbishments. It will be left as a place of reflection and memories of Diana for her loved ones, IMO. I just hope that when everything is cleared and cleaned of moss etc that it won't be allowed to get into a rather neglected state again. There were those rumours of course of beliefs in the nearby villages that Diana was in fact interred in the family vaults of the estate church, near to her adored grandmother Cynthia.

I too would love a tribute section here to Diana, so that those of us who do miss her and admired her wonderful qualities and inner beauty can do so without dissension.
 
Osipi said:
I don't know what's happening here. Is Charles Spencer somehow arranging tours now to visit Diana's burial place with the renovations? Is he going to charge tourists to actually visit the island? Something just doesn't sound right to me. IIRC, his touring exhibit of Diana memorabilia closed. The word "temple" kind of threw me off along with Hello! still referring to her as "Princess Diana". Americana at its best. :bang:

At the time of Diana's death, I thought it was pretty fitting that she would find peace in resting on that island where many of her favorite pets were buried. It was isolated, on family grounds and in a place where she wouldn't be hounded forevermore by people and cameras and to be seen as a sideshow.
Click to expand...

i agree, it would be wrong to allow visitors into the island. it was a good move by the family to have her interred in their private property, and in an island specifically.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Blog Real
King Louis XVIII of France and Marie Joséphine of Savoy
Replies
2
Views
598
An Ard Ri
An Ard Ri
Blog Real
King Carlo Felix (1765-1831) and Queen Maria Cristina of Naples and Sicily
Replies
2
Views
387
Tatiana Maria
T
Blog Real
King Henry V (1386-1422) and Queen Catherine of Valois
Replies
7
Views
1K
CyrilVladisla
CyrilVladisla
Blog Real
King Henry VI (1421-1471) and Queen Margaret of Anjou
Replies
7
Views
993
CyrilVladisla
CyrilVladisla
M
Orders and Decorations of the Prince and Princess of Wales
Replies
8
Views
329
Somebody
Somebody

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom