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

[CasiraghiTrio]

Originally Posted by mkgs

Diana's Historical Significance lies in her having been a member of the Royal Family whether she felt like she "fit in " or not. At her death she was Diana, Princess of Wales. She was the mother of a future British Monarch.

In the first place, being buried at Althorp does not identify one with the lower classes.

In the second place, there is no such title as The People's Princess. She was Diana, Princess of Wales.

You're right that it's not a real title to be "People's Princess" but just because it's not "real" does not mean it can't be used or considered a good reference by some people. I am not one of the people who like to call her that, but some people like to do it, and that is their right.

One's place of burial can add importance and significance to one's place in history. It secures their memory as among those who were important. For instance, if one were to be buried at Westminster Abbey it would be assumed that they had "Historical Importance."

It is my understanding, that the Queen was willing to bury her at Frogmore. The Queen understood her significance as a future Monarch's mother and as Diana, Princess of Wales. Earl Spencer acted like a child throwing a tantrum and proved himself to be a HISTORICAL pinhead by not securing his sister's place of importance in the Royal Family. She may not have been styled HRH any longer, but she certainly had a place among the Royal Family. She is Prince William's mother. She had not remarried. Her title was still Diana, Princess of Wales. Earl Spencer treated her as a "Pop Princess", not a Real Princess.

It is what it is. Anyone might treat her as they wish. No one can change how anyone treats her memory by just saying it's wrong or it's whatever it is. Everyone has an idea of their own as to how is appropriate to treat her.

Forty years from now not many will remember Princess Diana the way she is remembered now. Those who remember her will be old and many people will not have actual memories of her. Placing her at Frogmore, however, would be evidence of her significance. Earl Spencer devalued her historical importance by burying her at Althorp.

She was no longer Lady Diana Spencer, but Diana, Princess of Wales, mother of William V. She belongs at Frogmore.

I think she belongs where she is, and it should end, and the debates don't do anyone or anything any service. In any case, she never ceased being Lady Diana because Lady is a life title. Once it is obtained by being daughter of an Earl or above, it is for life, and marriage and divorce don't take it away. She was Lady Diana, Princess of Wales.

[ysbel]

Originally Posted by mkgs

It is my understanding, that the Queen was willing to bury her at Frogmore. The Queen understood her significance as a future Monarch's mother and as Diana, Princess of Wales. Earl Spencer acted like a child throwing a tantrum and proved himself to be a HISTORICAL pinhead by not securing his sister's place of importance in the Royal Family. She may not have been styled HRH any longer, but she certainly had a place among the Royal Family. She is Prince William's mother. She had not remarried. Her title was still Diana, Princess of Wales. Earl Spencer treated her as a "Pop Princess", not a Real Princess.

I think Diana was treated as a Pop Princess way before her brother interred her at Althorp. Although they had their difficulties later in her life, the Earl was the closest to Diana when they were growing up and young adults. He quite understandably was angry at the Royal Family for the perceived mistreatment of Diana and while I think he was wrong in blaming the Royal Family, I can definitely understand why he would have felt that way.

I also think if Diana's main contribution to the British Royal Family was being the mother of William, then it is entirely appropriate if the choice to move her is left up to her son when he is King as William V. I'm a bit uneasy at the Queen using her position as monarch and chief of state to grant honor to Diana after Diana so publicly lashed out against the Royal Family but I think its entirely appropriate for William when he is King to honor Diana by a re-burial to Frogmore simply because she was his mother. By that time, I believe bygones will truly be bygones.

[Henri M.]

Originally Posted by mkgs

She was no longer Lady Diana Spencer, but Diana, Princess of Wales, mother of William V. She belongs at Frogmore.

What if she had married Dodi Al-Fayed or Hasnat Khan? And thus became Lady Diana Al-Fayed or Lady Diana Khan. Imagine that she would have been married for 40 years to Dodi. Should she still be buried at Frogmore? Between Kings and Queens, Princes and Princesses, Dukes and Duchesses?

When you look to other examples of divorced Princesses, like Princess Marianne of the Netherlands (divorced Prince Albrecht of Prussia): she was neither buried in the royal mausoleum in Berlin nor in the royal mausoleum in Delft.

Like it is most unlikely that Princess Irene of the Netherlands, eldest sister to Queen Beatrix, who was married from 1964 until 1981 to The Duke of Parma and is mother to the next Duke of Parma, will ever be buried in the Bourbon-Parma burial crypt.

If Diana and Charles would not have divorced, it is clear she would be given the utmost possible royal, official, military and civil honours and be buried at Saint George's Chapel or at Frogmore. No: Althorp, her beloved ancestral site, is a great place for Diana's unique last resting place. It was the best choice.

[TheTruth]

Originally Posted by CasiraghiTrio

You're right that it's not a real title to be "People's Princess" but just because it's not "real" does not mean it can't be used or considered a good reference by some people. I am not one of the people who like to call her that, but some people like to do it, and that is their right.

I don't really like to call her that either but it's a fact that she was very close to people. Frogmore is too 'ordinary' so to speak. Diana was far from being a royal who didn't mark the world (every royal does something but we can't deny that Diana was a phenomenon), it's why she has a part in History like you said, mkgs. And by that she couldn't be buried in Frogmore, a place where we bury royals like in a cemetery. Even if she was the mother of the future King of England, she was no more wife of the man who will succeed to QEII. There's also ambiguity around her position : she was no more an HRH, but she was known as Diana, Princess of Wales. She had lost her royal position although she had a national funeral.

I know that Althorp does not represent low social class but Frogmore is still on top, as a royal land. mkgs, by saying that people won't remind her the same way as today, do you imply that she needed a royal support to exist and stay present in History ?
If yes, I don't think she needed it. People will remind her, in good or bad but she can't be forgotten like that. Some think she modernised the monarchy, others think she damaged it, in any case it will be written in History books, etc.

[pinkie40]

Originally Posted by sirhon11234

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

According to Paul Burrell's book, the Royal Standard was replaced with the Spencer Standard when Diana's coffin was received at Althorp for burial.

[pinkie40]

Originally Posted by mkgs

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.

Ten years on, I am still shocked somewhat a such modern music being played at Westminster Abbey....yet I am sure it comfortably recognized the "modern" aspect of Diana's legacy.

The associations of Diana and Marilyn are, in my mind, quite eerie. They both died at almost the same age TO THE DAY. Ken Wharfe once jokingly made the comment her "detectives" code name for her was "Marilyn" in reference to Miss Monroe. They both had a Kennedy family connection and both wanted to be seen as more serious than they appeared. If I ever run accross the website that compared both the princess to the pin-up I will post the link.

[sirhon11234]

Earl Spencer has denied that claim Pinkie40.

[pinkie40]

How interesting!

Is there some mention of this somewhere on the web? I wonder why Mr. Burrell didn't retract this from subsequent printings of his book.

My problem with the re-issuance of "HRH" post mortem was it was not offered immediately upon the resting in the chapel at St. James'...because I still think "how odd" for a "commoner" to rest in a royal residence and be resting under the Royal Standard when the Spencer Standard was more appropriate given the Royal Family's view she should be given a private family service mentioned in the media during that time....

I felt the timing of the royal family's offer of reinstatement a bit uncomfortable for the feelings for the Spencer family. But then these factions can still barely contain bitterness and strife even a decade hence.

[sirhon11234]

As Diana, Princess of Wales it was more apporiate for a royal standard to adorn the princess' coffin then the spencer family standard.

[Skydragon]

I think Henri M answered your other post regarding the site I posted.

Originally Posted by sirhon11234

The english peerage system is confusing so both Diana and Camilla are only Princess of Wales by courtsey

Yes, they both have the title only because they were/are married to The Prince of Wales.

Originally Posted by mkgs

It is my understanding, that the Queen was willing to bury her at Frogmore

On what do you base this?

She was no longer Lady Diana Spencer, but Diana, Princess of Wales, mother of William V. She belongs at Frogmore.

That would be the same as saying every EX wife within an aristocratic family, should be buried within the family crypt, or any ex wife should be buried within the family plot, which would be unacceptable to 99.9% people.

[pinkie40]

Yes, you are quite correct. I wonder if any mention was made to Diana about the issuance of a new coat of arms post-divorce (she did get new writing paper...)....or that the Royal College of Arms was about such a task when she passed away.

Another thought on her burial.....

Perhaps since it is unknown to the public where William or Harry wishes to be buried, they might have thought to incorporate their mother's remains with theirs some time hence. Just a thought. May she rest in peace.

[sirhon11234]

The Princess of Wales used her family's coat of arms adorned with a royal cornet with permission of her majesty after the divorce.
heres a pic of her current coat of arms its at the bottom.

College of Arms

[CasiraghiTrio]

Originally Posted by CasiraghiTrio
You're right that it's not a real title to be "People's Princess" but just because it's not "real" does not mean it can't be used or considered a good reference by some people. I am not one of the people who like to call her that, but some people like to do it, and that is their right.
Originally posted by TheTruth
I don't really like to call her that either but it's a fact that she was very close to people.

"People's Princess" is fine if some people consider her as a princess (no harm there and the sentiment is founded on goodness of heart). But a "Queen in People's Hearts" were her words, not the words of a politician and his writers. She is not a Queen in everyone's heart, but she is in mine, and I think some (like the Truth) will feel the same.

[TheTruth]

"People's Princess" is fine if some people consider her as a princess (no harm there and the sentiment is founded on goodness of heart). But a "Queen in People's Hearts" were her words, not the words of a politician and his writers. She is not a Queen in everyone's heart, but she is in mine, and I think some (like the Truth) will feel the same.

That's true for me also and it's hard to explain how she touched all these persons (I know some people don't feel anything toward her and that's their absolute right, you love who you want). Still I can't determind this effect she had on the world. That was her wish to be reminded as "Queen of Peopl's Hearts" so I believe the ones who liked her should think of her this way and forget about all the things said by the media, etc.

[Charlotte1]

Originally Posted by sirhon11234

Earl Spencer has denied that claim Pinkie40.

Earl Spencer denied Paul Burrell's claim that the Royal Standard was yanked off Diana's coffin, with Charles Spencer rudely saying something like 'she's a Spencer' and placing the Spencer family standard over the coffin. Earl Spencer said that the Royal Standard was removed with respect and folded correctly, then replaced with the Spencer family standard.

Diana was buried as a Spencer and Earl Spencer stated that, her birth family reclaimed her, there was no question of her being buried at Frogmore.

The term "People's princess" wasn't even an original one, the princess previously known as "The People's princess" was Princess Mary Adelaide the mother of Queen Mary. Royal historians don't automatically think of Diana when they hear that phrase, in years to come some other princess will probably also be known as that.

[TheTruth]

Originally Posted by Charlotte1

Earl Spencer denied Paul Burrell's claim that the Royal Standard was yanked off Diana's coffin, with Charles Spencer rudely saying something like 'she's a Spencer' and placing the Spencer family standard over the coffin. Earl Spencer said that the Royal Standard was removed with respect and folded correctly, then replaced with the Spencer family standard.

And I say : "Who cares ?"
It's only a standard. People didn't crowd in London streets to see a Royal standard on a coffin. If it had been the Spencer Standard they wouldn't have made a fuss about it. People came to say goodbye to her. For me it's just a detail that doesn't worth a discussion of Paul Burrell affirming this or that. We will never know and honestly there are more important things to think about.

[Henri M.]

Originally Posted by TheTruth

And I say : "Who cares ?"
It's only a standard. People didn't crowd in London streets to see a Royal standard on a coffin. If it had been the Spencer Standard they wouldn't have made a fuss about it. People came to say goodbye to her. For me it's just a detail that doesn't worth a discussion of Paul Burrell affirming this or that. We will never know and honestly there are more important things to think about.

It is no detail for me.
It is part of last honours given to a person.
Princess or pauper, such things should go with the utmost respect.



That Diana's coffin was decked with her personal standard as Princess of Wales, was a great honour.

[CasiraghiTrio]

Originally Posted by Henri M.

It is no detail for me.
It is part of last honours given to a person.
Princess or pauper, such things should go with the utmost respect.



That Diana's coffin was decked with her personal standard as Princess of Wales, was a great honour.

Diana's entire funeral was well-done. Even Elton John in the Abbey, I mean what is the big deal with that? I never understand what is so offensive about this. Who cares that he and his co-writer used the same music and basis for the son for Marilyn? They had to write the song in a week's time, and this music that they chose was a good piece, in my opinion. The music was good, and their reworking of the lyrics was appropriate.

[TheTruth]

Originally Posted by Henri M.

It is no detail for me.
It is part of last honours given to a person.
Princess or pauper, such things should go with the utmost respect.



That Diana's coffin was decked with her personal standard as Princess of Wales, was a great honour.

I know that but people didn't follow her everywhere during her lifetime to see her wearing a royal standard as a mantle like superman. I agree it was an honour and now when you look at the funeral videos you pay attention to these things because it has been 10 years. But on September 6, 1997 people felt so many different feelings that I don't think the royal standard was the most important thing they remember on this day IMO. I agree it was a great honour though.
The royals, when attacked by the press on that week and reading : "Where's the Queen's flag ?", should have answered : "It's not up there because it's on Princess Diana's coffin". That would have shut some mouths.

[CasiraghiTrio]

The only thing slightly whack about the funeral, for me, was the guest list. What was up with inviting the most random celebrities? I can understand the celebrities like Liza Minelli (a very close friend for Diana) but then there was Tom Cruise, Nicole Kidman? Steven Spielberg, Tom Hanks? I can only ask, Why?