The Spencer Family, Ancestry and Althorp 1: Ending Aug. 2023

[Zonk]

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.

 

[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 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.

 

[MRSJ]

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

 

[Zonk]

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.

 

[jdcharlie]

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.

 

[georgiea]

...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.

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.

 

[Madame Royale]

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.

 

[georgiea]

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.

 

[Madame Royale]

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.

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

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.

 

[PrincessKaimi]

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.

 

[georgiea]

So if I were American, I may have been more inclined to have formed a similar opinion?.lol.

American loved Diana, Princess of Wales. When she danced with John Travolta at the White House that was her making here.

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.

Again in this thread it is mentioned that he was asked. I can not remember if it was at the abbey or a reception.

So yes, we will have to agree to disagee

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.

I don't think blood relatives should be seated after friends. Sorry.

 

[Madame Royale]

American loved Diana, Princess of Wales. When she danced with John Travolta at the White House that was her making here.

Many Australian's adored Diana, but I fail to see what one's nationality has to do with it. That's all.

I don't think blood relatives should be seated after friends. Sorry.

And I would not endeavour to query that opinion

 

[georgiea]

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.

The press was relentless with Princess Diana since she dated Prince Charles. The press became ruthless after she got rid of her police protection.

As stated in Diana by Sarah Bradford Princess Diana decided after losing Garden House at Althorp to get rid of her protection. The relationship with her brother Charles after the house situation was not close. Near then end of her life Diana visited him in South Africa and they were friends again. I think to this day his speech in the abbey was to protect his sister in death after all he is head of the Spencer household and wanted the world to heard Diana's side.

Off topic. Princess Diana's mother was not on speaking terms with Diana when she died. I think her death was hell for Francis.

 

[Mirabel]

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.

IMO, they'll be as far from the RF as it is possible to place them, without the snub becoming obvious.
As it is now, it's still possible to argue either way.

(If Earl Spencer gives a reading, I may faint from the shock! I think it's equally likely Kate's Uncle Gary would be asked to give one!)

 

[Zonk]

From the seating chart it doesn't appear that they are sitting behind the Middleton family and friends. They are actually sitting across the aisle from them. Charles, Jane, Sarah and their spouses (and fiance) are actually sitting in the front row...how is this a snub?

Below is a chart provided by Madame Royale in the Guest list thread. I hardly qualifiy this as behind.

The Royal Wedding

Furthermore, I see absolutely nothing wrong with the seating plan.

The Spencers are seated across the way from foreign royal representation. To have some people suggest they have been treated inappropriately is just rediculous imo.

And I am sorry, if Diana was alive...the Spencers still would NOT be sitting with the British Royal Family. The only people who sit with the BRF are members of the BRF.

 

[Nice Nofret]

Maybe if anyone can drag up the setting-arrangements from Charles & Dianas Wedding? .. but that wouldn't help that much probably, as DOE's Family is also Royal -

To poor me - the seeting looks fine - I can see no slight to Charlie Spencer .. who seems keen enought to slight the BRF whenever he can.

 

[Zonk]

Actually what would be helfpul is to see the seating chart of Peter Phillips wedding (which we know is private). Since his parents were divorced, one does wonder where the Phillips sat. But then again, it wasn't like they had to invite foreign royals and government ministers.

 

[Nice Nofret]

True good point, Zonk

 

[Zonk]

I certainly understand the concept that family and friends of the bride sit on one side and those associated with the groom sit on another side. That is what happens in normal weddings. But this isn't a normal wedding. If William was William Wales or Joe Smith, I would imagine that the Spencers would merge in the crowd with the Wales's and/or the Smiths. But again, this isn't a normal wedding. This is a royal wedding.

William is the heir's heir and there is protocol that must be accounted for. I mean, does anyone remember Charles and Camilla not going to the Westminister wedding because the Queen was going and as result Charles couldn't sit with Camilla? There are different rules involved.

Again, I repeat my earlier statement. If Diana was alive, the Spencers still would not be sitting with the BRF.

 

[Madame Royale]

It's interesting to think where infact Diana would have sat. As the grooms mother I would think she'd have sat beside the royal family. In any case I'd like to think she'd have taken, given the nature of the ceremony, precedence over any other women beside the Queen in the abbey.

Anyway, that's a guessing game that is endless.

 

[Zonk]

Without a doubt in my mind, if Diana was alive she would be sitting with the Royal Family in the front row. Didn't the Queen insist that upon her divorce (although she lost the HRH title) she was still considered a member of the BRF?

There is no way that William would have allowed her to be treated any differently than the Mother of the Groom.

But I agree, we can talk about that for days and it doesn't change the fact that Diana is no longer here physically.

 

[Madame Royale]

Without a doubt in my mind, if Diana was alive she would be sitting with the Royal Family in the front row. Didn't the Queen insist that upon her divorce (although she lost the HRH title) she was still considered a member of the BRF?

I do believe it was something to that effect.

 

[georgiea]

Where Princess Diana might have sit is a loaded question.

I think it would depend on these factors:
Princess Diana and Prince Charles are friends now.
Diana, Princess of Wales was still close to her grow up sons after the divorce.
She had another husband and family and move on from the House of Windsor.
Diana might have bad feeling towards Camilla and not want to sit near her.
I think she would have sat with her siblings. And the Spencer siblings and Diana would be seated on the grooms side. She was very proud of her heritage.

Getting back to the wedding and the Spencer siblings. I feel that they should have sat with the royal family to honor Diana. It is my opinion that 3 seats would be no problem to reserve in Westminster Abbey.

I guess with everyone I have to disagree to agree.

 

[Madame Royale]

It is my opinion that 3 seats would be no problem to reserve in Westminster Abbey.

Six seats actually, and they have been reserved. All three of Diana's siblings are either married or soon will be.

And then theres the question of their respective families, if they have been invited to attend which as it stands, we currently do not know.

So it's not a matter of three seats at all and as the seating arrangements which have been released clearly indicate, the Spencers are seated across from foreign royals and the Middleton attendee's. A prime position it would seem.

 

[Zonk]

Actually 7 seats...don't forget Great Aunt Anne. And then why would they (Sarah, Jane and Charles) be separated from their children. Were they expected to sit with the BRF as well?

 

[MRSJ]

American loved Diana, Princess of Wales. When she danced with John Travolta at the White House that was her making here.

I am an American, I liked Diana, I like Will and Kate- I hate Earl Spencer but I don't believe they are being snubbed bc this wedding is different then a wedding you or I may attend it isn't brides side /grooms side, it's Royals and non Royals period.....

Again in this thread it is mentioned that he was asked. I can not remember if it was at the abbey or a reception.

An article did,when they were first engaged, suggest the Earl would give a speech and you're right we did discuss....luckily I believe that articles proven false

 

[Zonk]

Articles also suggested that Kanye West was also going to attend. So far nothing.

In regards to the Earl giving a speech, if he was close to William and was going to be mindful of the place (not using it as an opportunity to rehash old issues) than I wouldn't have a problem with giving him a speech. He is after all William's uncle, but it appears that his giving a speech is not the cards.

Thats not to say that Sarah or Jane or another Spencer could give a reading. Eugenie, did after all, give a reading of a scripture at Peter's wedding.

 

[Madame Royale]

Actually 7 seats...don't forget Great Aunt Anne.

How remiss of me

And then why would they (Sarah, Jane and Charles) be separated from their children. Were they expected to sit with the BRF as well

I agree.

 

[georgiea]

Actually 7 seats...don't forget Great Aunt Anne. And then why would they (Sarah, Jane and Charles) be separated from their children. Were they expected to sit with the BRF as well?

If you want to be technically correct 7 seats. But my reasoning is if seating is limited to just four. I think for the wedding if seating is limited their spouses, fiancee and children could sit else where. I don't think that would be a problem. At the receptions that would be a problem.

Like I have stated in the past, Diana, Princess of Wales would have been honored if her siblings would sit with the royals. This might be a royal wedding, but Diana, Princess of Wales in my opinion is not being represented at the wedding. And I guess being a Diana fan is more important than being American. I guess that fan part is the REAL REASON FOR MY FEELINGS OF A SPENCER SNUB.

 

[Nice Nofret]

mhh.. when I got married, my father was allready dead - do you think I should have invited his sister and her kidds to represent my father at my wedding? Of course I didn't. I mean, they where invited and there of course - but as themselves .. as family .. ... why should it be diffrent with Dianas family?