The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f38/)
-   -   The Spencer Family and Ancestry (inc. Althorp Estate) (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f38/the-spencer-family-and-ancestry-inc-althorp-estate-2919.html)

wymanda 04-18-2004 05:53 AM

Princess Diana's Ancestry and Family
 
The following appeared in the Daily Mirror and is written by James Whittaker

ARROGANCE IS THE MARK OF SPENCER Apr 17 2004

I HAVE warned about Earl Spencer previously. In fact, more than once.

I didn't like the way he treated his first wife, the anorexic, much-troubled Victoria; I hated the way he went off for a dirty weekend with another woman within weeks of the wedding.

I positively loathed the way he rejected Princess Diana when she begged him for a bolt hole on the family estate, while I don't believe I've ever witnessed such a level of insolence as he displayed when chiding the Queen and her family during his eulogy to Diana at Westminster Abbey.

Since then things have not improved. Spencer who, I have to say, can charm the pants off anyone he meets when he chooses so to do, has horribly over-commercialised the life and times of his sister to a pitch that could be considered exploitative, if not vulgar.

He also spends too little time in this country to efficiently run his beautiful Northamptonshire estate, opting instead to spend sunny days in South Africa doing I'm not sure what.

He does knock out books from time to time but I'm doubtful whether he makes much dosh out of them. They're worthy (the latest is about the Battle of Blenheim, focusing on one of his ancestors, the Duke of Marlborough) but hardly money-spinners.

They certainly wouldn't be able to make up the sort of revenue he's losing now that the public are drifting away from visiting Althorp and the shrine he made to Princess Diana.

In 1998 150,000 visited the museum which remembers her childhood and the man-made island on which she is buried.

Last year, paying customers totalled 80,000. To break even, Spencer says he needs 120,000 visitors in the two months the place is open in July and August. So what's a chap to do?

In Spencer's case the answer was simple. Flog off 508 acres of his inherited estate for a housing development, a scheme that includes a Tesco superstore, a bus station, a medical practice and a state school.

When this idea was mooted five years ago, and quickly rejected by the locals and the council, the noble earl hoped to receive around £50million. But with building land in short supply and houses needed, prices have improved since then. Now he can expect maybe £250m for his troubles.

Conservationists hate the idea of this development; villagers know their life will be ruined for ever but, hey, who cares if Spencer's in the money?

Of course there'll be a public enquiry, naturally all and sundry will be consulted but few doubt what the final outcome will be.

By ploughing ahead, ignoring all the wails going on around him, Spencer will be acting purely in character.

Elspeth 04-19-2004 07:21 PM

And he complained when his stepmother sold family heirlooms to renovate the house. Now he's selling land. Raine must be loving this.

It was bad enough that he saw fit to use the Princess's funeral to criticise the royal family in public - the fact that he was there with his latest mistress rather than his wife made it hypocritical beyond words.

I finally read Paul Burrell's book, expecting to really dislike it but I was actually pleasantly surprised by his even-handedness. I noticed that Earl Spencer was one of only a handful of people in that book about whom Mr Burrell was uniformly negative.

tiaraprin 06-13-2004 03:02 AM

Good Lord, he is at it again!!

I have never been a fan of Earl Spencer. He seems like a spoiled brat.

Has anyone ever read his book about the Spencer family??

sara1981 06-14-2004 01:40 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by tiaraprin@Jun 13th, 2004 - 1:02 am
Good Lord, he is at it again!!

I have never been a fan of Earl Spencer. He seems like a spoiled brat.

Has anyone ever read his book about the Spencer family??

i dont think so! he not as BRAT!!!

but i dont read about Spencer legacy no! i will get books soon when i done read book of Diana's mum maybe i would get books in December or i would get order from Majesty magazine maybe!

Sara Boyce

kelly9480 06-20-2004 01:29 PM

I read his book about Althorp. Once you get past his attempts to prove Diana's family isn't dirt, it's a good book about the house.

wymanda 06-20-2004 10:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by kelly9480@Jun 21st, 2004 - 12:29 am
I read his book about Althorp. Once you get past his attempts to prove Diana's family isn't dirt, it's a good book about the house.
I agree kelly. Earl Spencer certainly has a way with words. It is a shame that his actions don't always back them up.

His new wife seems to be a mature, level headed lady who wants to make Althorp memorable for more than Diana. In some ways she is in a similar position to Raine. Her son will never inherit the estate which will go to the present Viscount Althorp. Thankfully she has heaps more taste than Raine so we wont see the house painted "Cartland Pink" upstairs and down and regilded to within an inch of it's life! :P :P :P

KingArthur55 03-31-2006 07:33 PM

Princess Diana Ancestry and Relations
 
I recently read a small tidbit that Diana was a descendant of an Illegitimate son of Charles II. This would mean that when William succeeds, a direct bloodline to the Stuarts will be on the throne again after 300 years.


Since I read this bit on a site that I don't consider 100 percent reliable, I was wondering if anyone here could provide any links or info on this topic? I knew Diana had a fascinating lineage, but the connection to the Stuarts was news to me.


Thank you.

Jackswife 03-31-2006 08:25 PM

AFAIK, the connection arises from a liason between Charles II and the Duchess of Cleveland, Barbara Villiers, who had a son together, Henry Fitzroy. Can't really recall the line of descent but I think Henry was the great-great-great-great grandfather of Diana's father Johnny.

Vanesa 03-31-2006 08:29 PM

Yes. You are right. She descended from the Stuarts. And this make me happy, for, when Williams should be the King of England, the Stuarts and the Windsors blood will be reunited over U.K 's throne. This is very interesting in an historical point of view. Isn't it? :)

Vanesa.

Lord of Cowley 04-06-2006 01:46 AM

I agree that Stuart blood has never left the royal family. Indeed, the present royal family, as well as Sarah Ferguson, Diana Spencer AND Camilla Parker-Bowles are all descendants of Charles the Second. (The Queen Mother might have been as well, but I'll need to check up on that!) All of the mentioned people are about fifth and sixth cousins.

crisiñaki 04-06-2006 02:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord of Cowley
I agree that Stuart blood has never left the royal family. Indeed, the present royal family, as well as Sarah Ferguson, Diana Spencer AND Camilla Parker-Bowles are all descendants of Charles the Second. (The Queen Mother might have been as well, but I'll need to check up on that!) All of the mentioned people are about fifth and sixth cousins.

One big and happy family, wonder what would Jerry Springer say:rolleyes: :D
One consecuence of having an aristocracy like the British and German is that if you marry within your circle you'll eventually end up with someone blood-related even if it is in a far way;) :D

light85 04-15-2006 06:08 AM

that's kinda nasty, no wonder genetic diseases like hemophelia is known as the royal disease. lol.

Furienna 05-04-2006 06:18 PM

But anything beyond first cousin should be okay. Second, third, fourth, fith, sixth etc cousins can very well have children together without fearing inbreading.

Chris922 05-04-2006 07:30 PM

Still, it's not a very good idea to have a family tree with just a few branches!

Lovelydiana 08-21-2006 01:29 PM

Did Diana have cousins?
 
I was thinking about this a couple days ago I know a lot about Diana but I was jst wondering if Diana had any cousins? I don't think i've read that her father and mother had sisters or brothers and I hve never heard of her aunts or uncles. So did Diana have any aunts or uncles or any cousins growing up?

Yennie 08-21-2006 01:35 PM

Didn´t Dianas mother had a brother who comitted suicide? I have no idea about any cousins though...

Oppie 08-21-2006 01:48 PM

ETA I kept adding information and my original post became very messy so I re-edited everything

Father Side
Lady Anne Spencer b. 1920 married Christopher Wake Walker b. 1920
Children
Elizabeth b. 1944 married Anthony Duckworth-Chad, children James, William and Davina
David b. 1947 married Jenni Vaulkhard, children Frederic and Nicholas
Richard b. 1951 married Sharon Little, children Kate, Olivia and Robert
Michael b. 1958 married Catherine Hazlitt, child George
Diana b. 1958 married Christopher Macfarlene, children Thomas and Geogrina


Mother Side
Mary b. 1934 (Frances older sister) married Anthony Berry b. 1925 d. 1984
Children
Alexandra b. 1955
Antonia b. 1957
Joanna b. 1957 married Peter Tufnell, 3 children
Edward b. 1960
They divorced in 1966. She married then married Denis Geoghegan, they divorced in 80, she then married Michael Gunningham and they divorced in 89. I don't believe that she had any more children. 2

Anthony Berry was killed in an IRA attack at the Brighton Hotel, my understanding is that Joanna has been in contact with the bomber and made a documentry about it. Article with pictures of her https://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/1704600.stm

Edmund (Frances younger brother) (b. 1939 d. 84) Married Lavina Pitman.
Children
Patrick (b. 1967) who is the current Baron Fermoy he married Tessa Kayall, children Arabella and Eliza

Interesting that she has two sets of twin cousins Micheal and Diana on her father's side and Antonia and Joanna on her mother's side.

Quote:

Didn´t Dianas mother had a brother who comitted suicide


Peter Shand Kydd, Diana's stepfather had a son named Adam (Diana's step brother) he died of a drug overdose which was suspected as suicide.

1 https://www.thepeerage.com/p10512.htm#i105115
2 en.wikipedia.com

Lovelydiana 08-22-2006 04:12 PM

Thanks for the helpful information. Do you know if any pictures of them could be found as a family? Did Diana take any pictures with them? Do you know if she saw them much? Or if they ever came to visit? Sorry for all the questions. :)

CATS 08-23-2006 03:33 PM

Sophie also has a Stuart blood line, I believe. I do know Sarah, Diana, and Sophie share a bloodline. If you go to House Wessex you can see the chart a well as others. There is a link on this forum in the links section. This may explain why some people think sophe and diana look alike.

Iluvbertie 08-23-2006 07:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vanesa
Yes. You are right. She descended from the Stuarts. And this make me happy, for, when Williams should be the King of England, the Stuarts and the Windsors blood will be reunited over U.K 's throne. This is very interesting in an historical point of view. Isn't it? :)

Vanesa.


As Charles is a direct descentent of James I (Charles II's grandfather) this is actually not the case - the Stuart line has never left the throne.

The Hanoverians claim is based on direct protestant descent from James I - George I was the great, great (and another great maybe) grandson of James I.

This claim comes up every so often but people do need to realise that the Windsors are descendents of the Stuarts in their own right.

magnik 08-24-2006 03:42 PM

She was related to
- Stewart by Susan wife of 5th Duke of Marlborough and descendant of Alexander Stewart, 4th High Steward of Scotland
- Stuarts bu Frances Fitzroy daughter of 3 Duke of Grafton and PM of GB and greatgreatgreat-granddaughter of Charles II and Barbara Villiers, Duchess of Cleveland
https://geneweb.inria.fr/roglo?lang=e...olor=;i=103286
- Cavendish by Arabella (d. 1698) daughter of 2 D. of Newcastle and by William Cavendish, 5 D. of Devonshire
- Howard by Henry Howard, 4 Earl of Carlisle after Thomas, 4 D. of Norfolk (1538-1572)
- Seymour by Adelaide with 1 Marquess of Hertford and with Edrwad Seymour, 1 D. of Somerset (1506-1552)
- with Hamilton by Cynthia daughter of 3 D. of Abercorn
- with Beauclerk by Topham great-grandsdon of Charles II
- with Grey by Charles Grey, 2 Earl Grey, PM of GB
- with Montagu by Henry Montagu, 1 Earl of Manchester
- with Russell by Caroline Russell daughter of 4 Duke of Bedford

Diana's ancestors:
- 15th generation https://geneweb.inria.fr/roglo?lang=e...before=&cgl=on
- 69th generation https://geneweb.inria.fr/roglo?lang=e...before=&cgl=on

Zara04 08-30-2006 10:12 PM

Even when they were engaged, it was said that Diana had more royal blood in her than her husband-to-be. Diana and I share a portion of our family tree. My Temple-Spencer links with hers. My great+ grandmother Susannah Spencer Temple was the daughter of Dorothy Spencer-Spencer and Thomas Spencer (2nd cousins once removed) through Dorothy's brother to Diana.

Coincidences happen like with Diana, Sarah, Sophie and Camillla sharing genealogy. My (former) husband and I were married 2 weeks before Diana and Charles and William was born a few months before my son. My son is 6'4", blond with reddish goatee and looks alot like a combination of William and Harry. My sister's son looks alot like Harry. My aunt has a picture of me in her winter home in Florida that years ago people said I looked like Diana. I still have no idea what photo it is, but Diana and I have the same eyes and nose, though I was born with my father's dark hair (which changes shades of
blonde/light brown/redhead as my fickle personality decrees... :rofl: )

We are related at some point I believe and others on this board may have a more direct link to Diana and her family, but they aren't aware of it.

peace.

iowabelle 09-22-2006 10:37 PM

I'm a distant cousin of Camilla's, and probably of Diana's too (someone on the board told me I was but I don't know how for sure).

Anyway, I wanted to know if anyone knows what has happened to Diana's nephews and nieces?

And does anyone know much about Sir Robert Fellowes? He seems like such an enigmatic character -- Sarah's cousin, Diana's brother-in-law, and Queen's secretary. He must have a cast iron stomach to have worked for the Queen and endured these family turmoils!

Emily 09-22-2006 10:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yennie
Didn´t Dianas mother had a brother who comitted suicide? I have no idea about any cousins though...


Yes, I remember reading that Frances Shand-Kydd's brother committed suicide but I don't have further information on that. He had drink and depression problems, as I recall.

sirhon11234 09-23-2006 06:26 PM

I read somewhere that Diana was also related to former u.s. secretary Colin Powell. I wish I could remember the link.

Penny Lane 10-16-2006 03:55 AM

I didn't like that he refused Diana a private place while she was alive but them built a shrine to her after her death like he was the loving brother:mad: .I don't think it was right for him to badmouth the royal family at the funeral it was neither the time or the place and considering the kind of brother and husband he was very much out of line.I wish if he was of the mind to pay tribute to his sister he would have done it in a more positive way.
Just a personal opinion of my own but I wish given Diana's love of dance those in a position to would have honered that in some way by opening a dance school or something like that.:sad:

sassie 10-16-2006 09:21 AM

I lost patience with him after his eulogy at Diana's funeral. That he could take the shots he did at the RF while William and Harry were sitting there, forced to listen, on the day they buried their beloved mother-it showed how little consideration he had for Diana and his nephews.

A eulogy is intended to pay tribute to a life-not seek revenge. Diana would have been horrified, I have no doubt. She deserved better than that.

gfg02 03-03-2007 12:03 PM

The Spencers – Diana's Dynasty

channel4.com - Real Lives - The Spencers

gfg02 08-19-2007 03:01 PM

Earl Spencer, a £500,000 painting dug up on his estate ... and questions the taxman might ask

Earl Spencer, a £500,000 painting dug up on his estate ... and questions the taxman might ask | the Daily Mail

TheTruth 08-10-2008 08:38 AM

Pretty good article on one of Diana's ancestors who shares many similarities with the late Princess. The movie, The Duchess, starring Kiera Knightley, retrace the life of Georgiana Cavendish, the Duchess of Devonshire.

Princess Diana and the Duchess of Devonshire: Striking similarities - Telegraph

Incas 08-10-2008 10:12 PM

Unfortunately, Chris Hasting mistakenly claimed Diana was born at Althrope, instead of Park House. That took the wind out of his argument for "similarities".

Mermaid1962 08-11-2008 02:03 PM

Any Diana-watcher could have told him that!:rolleyes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Incas (Post 809608)
Unfortunately, Chris Hasting mistakenly claimed Diana was born at Althrope, instead of Park House. That took the wind out of his argument for "similarities".


Menarue 08-11-2008 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord of Cowley (Post 415249)
I agree that Stuart blood has never left the royal family. Indeed, the present royal family, as well as Sarah Ferguson, Diana Spencer AND Camilla Parker-Bowles are all descendants of Charles the Second. (The Queen Mother might have been as well, but I'll need to check up on that!) All of the mentioned people are about fifth and sixth cousins.

Just out of curiousity could you tell me how the present royal family is descended from Charles II. Sarah Ferguson, Diana Spencer and Camilla are but I am missing something here, I thought if the Queen was descended from Charles II it would be through her mother.
Can you help out here?

andrew 08-11-2008 03:03 PM

.
 
"I agree that Stuart blood has never left the royal family"

Elizabeth II descends in the paternal line from James I Stuart through his daughter Elizabeth and granddaughter Sophia.

Menarue 08-11-2008 03:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrew (Post 809876)
"I agree that Stuart blood has never left the royal family"

Elizabeth II descends in the paternal line from James I Stuart through his daughter Elizabeth and granddaughter Sophia.

I totally agree, they are descended from James I, I was curious how Lord of Cowley could say they were descendants of Charles II. That would be really be something new to me.

Elspeth 08-11-2008 03:46 PM

Yes, like Andrew said, she's descended through Charles II's sister Elizabeth, not through Charles himself. At least, not legitimately. Chances are that the Queen Mother's ancestry has some illegitimate Stuart blood but I'm not certain.

Jo of Palatine 08-11-2008 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Menarue (Post 809873)
Just out of curiousity could you tell me how the present royal family is descended from Charles II. Sarah Ferguson, Diana Spencer and Camilla are but I am missing something here, I thought if the Queen was descended from Charles II it would be through her mother.
Can you help out here?

Charles II. only had illegitimate children through his mistresses - so while there is a relationship, it comes from the wrong side of the blanket. While Charles descended from CharlesII.'s aunt Elizabeth Stuart, princess of Scotland and England, mother of the Electress Sophie.

Menarue 08-11-2008 05:03 PM

Lord of Cowley please come in. You said the royal family is descended from Charles II all I want to know is how you came to that conclusion or if you made a mistake. As far as I know they are not descended from any of Charles II´s mistresses. I know very well how Sophie the Electress of Hanover comes into it, that is not what I am interested in. Any descendants of Charles II´s mistresses have Stuart blood wrong side of the blanket or not. Diana, I believe is descended from more than one of them. Both Louise de Keroualle and Barbara Villiers, but I would have to look that up.

GillW 08-11-2008 05:38 PM

Diana descended from several different lines from illegitimate children of Charles II. Henry Fitroy, 1st Duke of Grafton, son of Barbara Villiers Palmer (Countess Castlemaine, Duchess of Cleveland) has two lines of descent to Diana. Charles Lennox son of Louise de Keroualle (also ancestor to Sarah Duchess of York and Camilla Duchess of Cornwall). Lucy Walter's son James Crofts was also an ancestor of Sarah Duchess of York.

Menarue 08-11-2008 05:53 PM

Thanks GillW that is what I thought. Now I am trying to remember if there are descendants through Nelly Gwynne, her eldest boy died young but there was a second. There were so many mistresses and Charles II was a very benevolent father. In fact the more I read about him the more I like him, he had his faults but he was a kind person and had a wonderful sense of humour.

GillW 08-11-2008 06:36 PM

For a quick summary you should visit the Wikipedia site for Charles II. The you can look up other links & track down the other information. It lists all Charles II acknowledges offspring. But I don't believe Diana descended from Nell Gwynne's children.
Charles II of England - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

(I'll just throw in the comment on Charles II-
John Wilmot, 2nd Earl of Rochester, joined the "Restoration Court". Of Charles, Wilmot wrote:
God bless our good and gracious king,
Whose promise none relies on;
Who never said a foolish thing,
Nor ever did a wise one.
To which Charles is reputed to have replied:
"That is true; for my words are my own, but my actions are those of my ministers.")

colynsmomma 08-11-2008 08:00 PM

I am reading a book about Harriet Spencer. I have not finished it so I dont know how the realtion is but she is the sister of Georgiana. I also read a book about the duchess of bedford which has Georgiana in it and these are some very intresting women.:smile: It was said that these women were rivals being one tory and one wig.:rolleyes:

georgiea 08-14-2008 12:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GillW (Post 809941)
Diana descended from several different lines from illegitimate children of Charles II. Henry Fitroy, 1st Duke of Grafton, son of Barbara Villiers Palmer (Countess Castlemaine, Duchess of Cleveland) has two lines of descent to Diana.

The book that I read, about King Charles II, mentioned that the Countess Castlemaine was very sexual, beautiful, selfish and headstrong redhead. She used her charms to keep the King's attention from his Queen for a very long time till Charles got tired of her whining.:flowers:

GillW 08-14-2008 02:30 AM

There are individual biographies of the various important mistresses of Charles. For Castlemaine I read a book called "The King's Whore" which was a real revelation, and if you also read ones about "pretty witty Nell" (Gwynne) and Louise de K (never can spell it right!) you get a really good all around picture of how the menage worked.

pinkie40 08-14-2008 05:02 PM

I'm looking forward to the movie starring Keira Knightly as Georgiana! I've met the late Duke of Devonshire(he was a guest at a private art exhibit of the Bloomsbury Group here in Dallas at Southern Methodist University in 1984) and the current Duke of Devonshire (he brought the treasures of Chatsworth a small museum neraby) and some local horticulturists developed a "Duchess of Devonshire" rose. Too bad they are a bit scary in their proximity of Hitler (Debo's sisters) and to the Fascist movement. When the current Duke was a guest speaker at a lecture, the audience members were forbidden to ask questions regarding Diana (the inquest was pending) but were encouraged to ask about Prince William as he was then "working" the farms at Chatsworth.

georgiea 08-17-2008 06:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pinkie40 (Post 811414)
I'm looking forward to the movie starring Keira Knightly as Georgiana! I've met the late Duke of Devonshire.

How exciting pinkie to meet the Duke. I can not wait to see the movie too!:flowers:

pinkie40 08-30-2008 06:47 PM

Yes, it was exciting both times to rub elbows with the aristocracy!

Also, Georgiana's famous portrait was used on several invitations to events of the current Duke. Later, the exhibit went to New York City where it was met with much more sophistication, imo. The reason the exhibit was held at such a small venue was because of an introduction of some local people thru Sophie, Countess of Wessex to the late Duke at the wedding festivities of she and Prince Edward. One of her former flatmates who is now a godmother to James is from my hometown.



I believe at the time the current Duke was here another movie was also filming at Chatsworth.

Sasha3 10-11-2008 03:44 PM

I heard on TV the other day that Sarah Palin is related to Diana now which tree did she come from. President Roosevelt is old news but Palin is new. Just Curious.

magnik 10-11-2008 04:00 PM

Sasha3 about presidents try here Worldroots.com

I found an article https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/news...Roosevelt.html

Here you go link to John Strong's descendants https://geneweb.inria.fr/roglo?lang=e...t=L&bd=0&color=

Mermaid1962 10-25-2008 03:42 PM

It might be a "stretch" to put this under Earl's Spencer's Family (his ex-step-grandmother), but this is a fascinating article. Barbara Cartland believed that Raine's father was the late Duke of Kent.

A drunken husband and five secret lovers: The novel Barbara Cartland never wanted you to read | Mail Online

Skydragon 10-25-2008 05:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mermaid1962 (Post 843133)
It might be a "stretch" to put this under Earl's Spencer's Family (his ex-step-grandmother), but this is a fascinating article. Barbara Cartland believed that Raine's father was the late Duke of Kent.

:ohmy:Oh my! :ohmy:

Mermaid1962 10-25-2008 06:53 PM

Yes, exactly!:eek: That would make Raine the Queen's biological first cousin, and the current Duke her half-brother. The mind boggles. Ms. Cartland certainly had an interesting life. Perhaps her sugary novels were as much a refuge for her as they were for countless other women.:flowers:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skydragon (Post 843183)
:ohmy:Oh my! :ohmy:


iowabelle 11-06-2008 02:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mermaid1962 (Post 843133)
It might be a "stretch" to put this under Earl's Spencer's Family (his ex-step-grandmother), but this is a fascinating article. Barbara Cartland believed that Raine's father was the late Duke of Kent.

A drunken husband and five secret lovers: The novel Barbara Cartland never wanted you to read | Mail Online

The mind boggles at the scenario of Earl Mountbatten marrying Barbara Cartland. :eek:

The whole article is incredible, about all the tangled lives of the British upper crust. Somehow I just can't see Raine Spencer being the half-sister of the great Princess Alexandra of Kent.

iceflower 02-27-2009 05:00 PM

Lady Raine Spencer attending the launch ceremony for an in-store
promotion of Malaysian craft at Harrods, London, UK. 26/02/2009

** Pic 1 ** Pic 2 **

Vasaborg 06-03-2009 10:51 AM

Princess Diana
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by GillW (Post 809941)
Diana descended from several different lines from illegitimate children of Charles II. Henry Fitroy, 1st Duke of Grafton, son of Barbara Villiers Palmer (Countess Castlemaine, Duchess of Cleveland) has two lines of descent to Diana. Charles Lennox son of Louise de Keroualle (also ancestor to Sarah Duchess of York and Camilla Duchess of Cornwall). Lucy Walter's son James Crofts was also an ancestor of Sarah Duchess of York.

She was also descended from Henrietta an illegitimate daughter of King James II, (brother of Charles II )by Arabella Churchill.

georgiea 07-02-2009 03:43 PM

Daily Express | Express Yourself :: The illegitimate royals

Interesting article about illegitimate royals:rolleyes::smile::rolleyes:

Sengreal 10-24-2009 05:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lord of Cowley (Post 415249)
I agree that Stuart blood has never left the royal family. Indeed, the present royal family, as well as Sarah Ferguson, Diana Spencer AND Camilla Parker-Bowles are all descendants of Charles the Second. (The Queen Mother might have been as well, but I'll need to check up on that!) All of the mentioned people are about fifth and sixth cousins.


Oh wow! Sorry for eavesdropping! I just joined & am from an Pacific Island Nation that was ceeded to Queen Victoria and was always interested in learing more of the Royal Family of Great Britian ever since I can remeber.
In your post you mentioned that Camilla Parker Bowles & Sarah Ferguson together with Diana were all descendants of a royal being - Charles II. Do you mean that are also of royal bloods too??

iowabelle 10-24-2009 07:07 PM

Sengreal, they would not be not considered to be of royal blood, since they are descendants of a person who was not married to a royal. Camilla, Sarah and Diana are all descendants of children "born on the wrong side of the blanket", to put it politely.

Most of their ancestors would have been given titles but would have been considered noble/aristocratic, versus royal

gfg02 03-29-2010 06:04 PM

Princess Diana family offers Rubens in £20 million sale
Princess Diana family offers Rubens in £20 million sale - Yahoo! News UK

gfg02 06-21-2010 01:19 PM

This is the latest issue of World of Interiors (the British ed.).
It includes a wonderful photo report about Althorp House from cellar to attic...
What a beautiful start Diana had in life ...
https://www.worldofinteriors.co.uk/

georgiea 06-21-2010 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gfg02 (Post 1100176)
This is the latest issue of World of Interiors (the British ed.). It includes a wonderful photo report about Althorp House from cellar to attic...
What a beautiful start Diana had in life ...
https://www.worldofinteriors.co.uk/

Diana, Princess of Wales moved to Althorp in her teens when her father inherited the estate and title of Earl. She did not like the house and was only there when school was not in session. This house you see is not the original Althorp. Raine, Princess Diana's step mother redecorated the whole house and sold many antiques and paintings to do it. Princess Diana's brother inherited the estate and title in 1992 and has put his imprint on Althrop.

Princess Diana had all the wealth you can want starting out in life, but was lonely inside and craved love.:flowers:

Thena 06-21-2010 03:56 PM

Diana's childhood was spent at Park House on the Sandringham Estate. Today, Park House is a hotel offered by a charity for people with disabilities, so it is possible to see the where she got her start in life.

gfg02 07-03-2010 12:12 PM

Now THAT'S cash in the attic! From a priceless Rubens to an old loo seat, Diana's brother is having a £20million clearout


Read more: Now THAT'S cash in the attic! From a priceless Rubens to an old loo seat, Diana's brother is having a £20million clearout | Mail Online

Zonk 07-03-2010 12:52 PM

Can you imagine having that much "junk" in the attic. And I use the word junk very loosely, what a lovely treasure of historical items.

Lumutqueen 07-03-2010 01:14 PM

He's selling off what looks like 4 garter stars.
Some of the stuff I can't believe it's being sold.

Warren 07-03-2010 01:21 PM

:previous:
The Garter Stars aren't the originals (which are returned on the death of the holder), they are replicas made for and paid by various Spencers. The making of replicas is not uncommon.

Zonk 07-03-2010 01:25 PM

I wonder why he is selling this stuff? Did he settle with the 2nd Countess, Caroline?

But I totally understand the need to get rid of things he isn't using. How many of us have BOXES of stuff in storage with things we haven't (or anyone else for the matter) touched in years?

gfg02 07-08-2010 12:06 AM

earl spencer’s heirlooms raise £14m at auction
Express.co.uk - Home of the Daily and Sunday Express | UK News :: Earl Spencer’s heirlooms raise £14m at auction

muriel 07-09-2010 05:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gfg02 (Post 1108221)

Oh well, for all the carping at the sale of artefacts from Althrop by his step-mother, Charlie Spencer did not appear to have any qualms himself!

Lumutqueen 07-09-2010 09:12 AM

Earl Spencer makes £21m selling off 'family jewels' through Christie's | Mail Online

Quote:

Earl Spencer's estate was more than £21 million better off today after a three-day auction of Old Master paintings, carriages and other treasures owned by the family.
The items from Althorp, the ancestral home of Earl Spencer and his sister, the late Diana, Princess of Wales fetched a total of £21,076,288 during the sale at Christie's in London.

Opal 07-10-2010 09:03 PM

There seems to be a discrepancy as to how much was made at the auction. The two articles posted state different amounts. :question:

georgiea 07-10-2010 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Opal (Post 1109550)
There seems to be a discrepancy as to how much was made at the auction. The two articles posted state different amounts. :question:

The discrepancy is because the articles are from different days of the auction. The sale made the larger sum.:flowers:

Lumutqueen 07-12-2010 06:04 AM

Is the Earl Spencer Rubens a £9m fake? Experts cast doubt over provenance of painting | Mail Online

gfg02 08-25-2010 10:37 PM

Princess Diana's childhood home under repair
Princess Diana's childhood home under repair - Female First

LadyKatherineGrey 12-01-2010 07:55 AM

Is Diana a Tudor?
 
Hi all,

I've just signed up and this is my first posting so go easy please. I've traced Diana back to the great Princess Mary Tudor through her paternal grandmothers side, Cynthia Elanor Hamilton. I see there is quite a bit of talk about whether or not Diana is a Stuart via Charles II progeny but I am correct in that she is in fact a legitimate Tudor descendant but mostly down female lines? Does a legitimate Tudor connection top a illegitimate Stuart claim?

Warren 12-03-2010 08:36 AM

Discussion of the topic "who is Royal?" has been moved to the Members of the Royal Family thread.

gfg02 12-09-2010 01:45 PM

Royal relation Father Ignatius Spencer could become a saint

BBC News - Royal relation Father Ignatius Spencer could become a saint

PrincessKaimi 02-08-2011 08:29 PM

Diana is also a descendant of the Este House of Ferrarra. I have the genealogy somewhere (it's mentioned on wikipedia under House of Este, I believe, but I did go verify that particular line).

Of course, over a period of something like 700 years, the Estes had plenty of time to distribute their genes/blood.

gfg02 02-26-2011 03:38 PM

New restoration plans for Althorp
New restoration plans for Althorp - Features - Northampton Chronicle & Echo

scooter 03-16-2011 03:10 PM

Here is the ecatalog of christies Althorp sale last year. It is fun to see the coronation robes, etc www.christies.com/LotFinder/searchresults.aspx?intSaleID=22870 .

georgiea 04-12-2011 07:08 AM

Princess Diana's wedding earrings are to be worn by her sister for Prince William's big day | News

georgiea 04-25-2011 11:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mirabel (Post 1217962)
I have read that William was very unhappy about that eulogy, and considered it a direct attack on his father (to whom he is said to be exceptionally close).

As far as we know, William's Spencer cousins have no role in the wedding whatsoever. However, as the various wedding events occur, we may be able to get a better idea of William's relationship with the Spencers.

Well we now have the seating arrangement in Westminster Abby. The Spencers got a snub in my opinion, because they are sitting on the bride's side. All royal houses attending are on the groom's side after the royal family.

I guess we now know the relationship between Prince William and the Spencers.

Mirabel 04-25-2011 11:48 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by georgiea (Post 1238407)
Well we now have the seating arrangement in Westminster Abby. The Spencers got a snub in my opinion, because they are sitting on the bride's side. All royal houses attending are on the groom's side after the royal family.

I guess we now know the relationship between Prince William and the Spencers.


I think so too; I expected the Spencers to be seated behind the RF. The fact that they're not suggests they have deliberately been placed as far from the RF as they can reasonably be expected to get.

jdcharlie 04-25-2011 11:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mirabel (Post 1238439)
I think so too; I expected the Spencers to be seated behind the RF. The fact that they're not suggests they have deliberately been placed as far from the RF as they can reasonably be expected to get.

I didn't see it as a snub. I think William is honoring them by putting them in the first row but delicately maintaining the peace by separating them from the RF. Imo, it's a nice compromise.

georgiea 04-25-2011 03:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdcharlie (Post 1238447)
I didn't see it as a snub. I think William is honoring them by putting them in the first row but delicately maintaining the peace by separating them from the RF. Imo, it's a nice compromise.

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.:smile::smile::smile::smile:

MRSJ 04-25-2011 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by georgiea

By royal standards I think it is a snub. I think all aristocrats are on the groom's side.

It split Royals/NonRoyals NOT bride and groom like a regular wedding- the Spencers have not been snubbed they just aren't royals....

georgiea 04-25-2011 07:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MRSJ (Post 1238599)
It split Royals/NonRoyals NOT bride and groom like a regular wedding- the Spencers have not been snubbed they just aren't royals....

They might not be royals but they are aristocrats and from the grooms side. I feel like Diana, Princess of Wales is being shun in death like after her divorce.

Diarist 04-25-2011 07:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by georgiea (Post 1238688)
I feel like Diana, Princess of Wales is being shun in death like after her divorce.

In my humble opinion - and it is just my opinion though - I don't think that Diana Princess of Wales is being shunned in any way.

To me, the very fact that Prince William gave his late mother's ring to Catherine, stating that he wanted his mother to be part of his wedding is proof that Diana, Princess of Wales is not being shunned. I am also sure that there will be various touching references to the late Princess at the wedding. The appearance of Diana's earings is one possibility that has been mentioned; there might also be the use of one of Diana's tiaras...perhaps even a sprig of some flowers from Althorp in her bouquet.

In am also sure that in his Best Man's Speech, Harry may well allude to his late mother. I don't think there is any possibility whatsoever that Diana, Princess of Wales will not be mentioned at the Wedding.

The fact that Earl Spencer's placement does not seem particularly prominent does not necessary mean [in my view] that the memory of his sister Diana is being shunned at the wedding. I come to this view on the following basis:

Perhaps the clearest indication is that we are continually being told by Buckingham Palace that all decisions about the wedding are being made by Prince William and Catherine - in other words, that they have a very hands-on role in the organisation, and the RF is not just riding roughshod over their wishes. I am therefore sure that Earl Spencer's placement is entirely satisfactory to Prince William - in other words, Earl Spencer has been seated where Prince William wants him.

In my own view, I am also not entirely sure how close Prince William actually is to his Uncle. Obviously none of us is privy to precisely what goes on 'behind the scenes', but from what I have seen [or rather not seen] reported, there has been very little contact between the adult Prince William and his Uncle. For example, there has been no recorded visit at Althorp by the Prince in order to 'show his fiance' off to his Uncle. I also cannot think offhand of any recent visits to his Uncle by Prince William as an adult - for example to stay at Althorp, to shoot at Althorp etc.

My own interpretation - and I stress it is my own view - is that Prince William was probably not terribly happy in retrospect with Earl Spencer's speech at Diana's funeral. Whilst I have seen constant references to 'how marvellous the speech was', could I say here in my own humble view, that I was not entirely happy with what was being said by Charles Spencer. It was after all, a funeral, and it is just my own personal view that sometimes it is more dignified to leave out acrimonious comments, however heartfelt or even justified they seem to be. The gist of Earl Spencer's remarks could have been taken as being deeply insulting to the Prince of Wales - and the two Princes have always had a warm and loving relationship with their father, which to me suggests that the two Princes did not find the Prince of Wales the ogre that Earl Spencer appeared to me to be depicting.

There is another reason to me whilst Earl Spencer's funeral speech seemed to be inappropriate.... and it is this - at the end of the day, Earl Spencer's private life seemed to be no better than that of the Prince of Wales who he was apparently criticising: Later we learned about the allegations of the cruel treatment by Earl Spencer of his wife Victoria Lockwood; we also learned about Earl Spencer's own infidelities when Sally Anne Lasson revealed to the tabloids about Earl Spencer's adulterous relationship with her. In other words, Earl Spencer seemed to have been somewhat hypocritical, and I daresay that this will not have been lost on Prince William in hindsight.

In my humble opinion, these various things do indicate to me that the relationship between Prince William and Earl Spencer is not particularly warm...

Just my thoughts.

Alex

MRSJ 04-25-2011 10:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diarist
Perhaps the clearest indication is that we are continually being told by Buckingham Palace that all decisions about the wedding are being made by Prince William and Catherine - in other words, that they have a very hands-on role in the organisation, and the RF is not just riding roughshod over their wishes. I am therefore sure that Earl Spencer's placement is entirely satisfactory to Prince William - in other words, Earl Spencer has been seated where Prince William wants him.

Well said - I agree

Mirabel 04-25-2011 10:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diarist (Post 1238722)
The fact that Earl Spencer's placement does not seem particularly prominent does not necessary mean [in my view] that the memory of his sister Diana is being shunned at the wedding...

I agree; I don't think the placement of the Spencers has anything to do with shunning Diana; it's all about Earl Spencer.

There are those who say we simply don't know much about their relationship or what goes on behind the doors of the palace. But William is photographed everywhere he goes, and if he spent much time with the Spencers, we'd know about it! But I have only ever heard of William occasionally seeing his aunts...never any mention of his uncle.

William can't actually exclude Earl Spencer, but he can indicate he doesn't want him near his father or his father's family.

Zonk 04-25-2011 11:09 PM

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 04-25-2011 11:38 PM

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 04-25-2011 11:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 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 believe this was after her divorce she asked to come live w him- but I also may be remembering wrongly

Zonk 04-25-2011 11:46 PM

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 04-26-2011 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by georgiea (Post 1238567)
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.:smile::smile::smile::smile:

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. :flowers:

georgiea 04-26-2011 12:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zonk (Post 1238887)
...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.

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdcharlie (Post 1238915)
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. :flowers:

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 04-26-2011 12:47 AM

:previous: 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 04-26-2011 01:03 AM

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 04-26-2011 01:08 AM

Quote:

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.

Quote:

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 :)

Quote:

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 04-26-2011 01:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zonk (Post 1238900)
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.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:08 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises