Another former employee of Diana's flapping his gums.
QuotePRINCESS Diana's former chef has accused her brother Earl Spencer of "neglecting" her final resting place on an island at his Althorp estate.
Darren McGrady, a favourite of Diana who has also cooked for the Queen, has posted several pictures of the island with strongly worded comments.
On August 14 one tweet, accompanied by a picture, read: ''Sad to see Earl Spencer@AlthorpEstate has neglected Diana's resting place."
On August 13 he implored in a tweet: ''PLEASE tidy up the vegetation on the island @AlthorpEstate."
The pictures on his twitter page show that the pond around the island has a lot of algae, making it look quite dark.
A closer look at the memorial standing on the edge of the island shows that moss has formed in some areas on the stonework and a brick base can now be seen because vegetation has been cut away.
More: Diana's former chef says her grave is being neglected | Royal | News | Daily Express (http://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/500266/Shame-of-Diana-s-neglected-island-grave)
That is sad. There are probably not many gardeners working at Althorp any more and I guess visitor numbers are down. It needs a working party of volunteers to get stuck into it! Of course, it has been said that Diana isn't on the island but in the crypt of the local church with her Spencer grandmother.
This guy's just a publicity hound. If you've read his tweets you'd know that he also claims to be responsible for the plastic water bottle in the downton abbey promo shot. Lakes get moss on them from time to time, especially small man-made lakes like this one. It happens. The island itself looks exactly as it has in every other picture I've ever seen of it. This is one picture from one day. Other tourists have been to the house with no complaints.
He just happens to mention he has a cookery book out
Maybe the grave is neglected.
There go those tacky servants again....
So any comments from William and Harry?
Quote from: Jmax2 on August 17, 2014, 01:42:57 PM
This guy's just a publicity hound. If you've read his tweets you'd know that he also claims to be responsible for the plastic water bottle in the downton abbey promo shot. Lakes get moss on them from time to time, especially small man-made lakes like this one. It happens. The island itself looks exactly as it has in every other picture I've ever seen of it. This is one picture from one day. Other tourists have been to the house with no complaints.
I agree that the summer heat will cause the spread from the algae bloom. Perhaps the gardeners/estate workers would also like to avoid using harsh chemicals to treat the issue as well.
The estate has made a statement and IMO that is enough to show that they are aware of the issue.
Quote from: sandy on August 17, 2014, 06:28:23 PM
So any comments from William and Harry?
I wouldn't expect any. Even if the grave has gotten a little overgrown, I don't think they would want to criticize their uncle publicly over it or give any more attention to the comments by getting involved.
They are her next of kin actually. I doubt they'd speak out against their uncle but as her next of kin they could look in on the grave from time to time.
I agree with Sandy, W&H should have made sure her grave was and is taken care of.
Agreed. Very sad.
The property where Diana is interred doesn't belong to William and Harry. Would they legally be able to hire someone to care for it? Even if they asked permission from Charles Spencer, would he be agreeable to having someone on his property that he didn't personally hire or know?
Cindy
Well, I don't actually think it looks uncared-for. Ponds get algae in the summer, the Spencers said that they had been working on eradicating it.
But unless the grave was horribly neglected, then no, I wouldn't expect Will or Harry to get involved. Earl Spencer has a whole staff caring for the property, and he is, after all, the one who insisted Diana be buried there (so presumably he was happy to take on responsibility for keeping up the grave). I don't think he would take very kindly to criticism from his nephews on the issue, and unless there was a really serious problem with the caretaking, I don't think the boys would want to fight about it.
I understand what you are saying Canuck. However, Diana was their Mother and they should make damn sure her final resting place is always well cared for.
I agree SophieChloe. They are Diana's next of kin not her brother. They should care.
Who says there is even a problem? One person looking for publicity?
Quote from: cinrit on August 17, 2014, 09:41:19 PM
The property where Diana is interred doesn't belong to William and Harry. Would they legally be able to hire someone to care for it? Even if they asked permission from Charles Spencer, would he be agreeable to having someone on his property that he didn't personally hire or know?
Cindy
She's their mother. Of course they would have a say in what happens.
^^ Of course they should, but I was curious about legalities.
Cindy
Legally, they have no say. It's Charles Spencer's property, Will and Harry don't have any right to do anything with it, whether or not their mother is buried there.
As Diana's sons it might be possible for them to petition for her body to be reinterred elsewhere, but since she's currently on her brother's property with the consent of the rest of the family (including, at the time, Will and Harry), I think it would be pretty difficult to convince a court to agree to that. And I really don't think they would want to do that anyway, imagine the circus that would accompany a legal fight to move Diana's remains... :hide:
Let's just say that Charles Spencer tells his nephews they have no rights and can't do a thing. If this got out, Charles Spencer would be heavily criticized for being "heartless." Would he think legally blocking them (from getting some people to do some work on the grave) worth his name being dragged through the media mud? I doubt it.
I doubt Diana's body will ever be moved. If it ever happens it could come when William is King but at this point I doubt he'd have the body moved.
Quote from: Canuck on August 18, 2014, 12:06:28 AM
Legally, they have no say. It's Charles Spencer's property, Will and Harry don't have any right to do anything with it, whether or not their mother is buried there.
As Diana's sons it might be possible for them to petition for her body to be reinterred elsewhere, but since she's currently on her brother's property with the consent of the rest of the family (including, at the time, Will and Harry), I think it would be pretty difficult to convince a court to agree to that. And I really don't think they would want to do that anyway, imagine the circus that would accompany a legal fight to move Diana's remains... :hide:
Diana is buried there because at the time of her death the RF insisted that Diana was the Spencers problem and wanted her to have a small funeral till the public outcry that demanded more. At the time of her death William was 15 and Harry 12 did you really think they were consulted on arrangements?
It looks fine to me, actually he has ridiculed himself by posting his anger via twitter.
He could have written a private message, letter, and he would probably have received the summer pond algae and blanket weed reply.
Or a bit of internet research...
When I visited my aunt at the cemetery I was shocked at the state of some graves especially the ones who had died before the 20's life goes on people don't spend their time obsessing about graves ...
Quote from: Trudie on August 18, 2014, 12:59:45 AM
Diana is buried there because at the time of her death the RF insisted that Diana was the Spencers problem and wanted her to have a small funeral till the public outcry that demanded more. At the time of her death William was 15 and Harry 12 did you really think they were consulted on arrangements?
They are her sons. I would hope they were consulted, no matter their ages.
Cindy
Of course they were young, but it was reported that they were consulted. And no, the BRF did not just say it was Charles Spencer's problem -- he made the decisions because he was her closest adult relative. The fact that the BRF initially wanted to do a private funeral has nothing to do with anything.
Seems like we have an attention seeker here ... silly season doesn't help ... is this news really? With all that is going on in the World?
Quote from: Canuck on August 18, 2014, 11:28:30 AM
Of course they were young, but it was reported that they were consulted. And no, the BRF did not just say it was Charles Spencer's problem -- he made the decisions because he was her closest adult relative. The fact that the BRF initially wanted to do a private funeral has nothing to do with anything.
I think perhaps the BRF's initial attitude towards Diana's funeral was mentioned to give context around the decision making for Diana to be buried alone, on an island.
My perspective: the island doesn't look much different from when I visited Althorp three years ago. The lake has algae but that does happen to all lakes. Darren has added another tweet showing the memorial area looking like "a tatty old shed" which does, to be fair, seem like it need a bit of TLC.
However, I think the larger issue or point is the hashtag Darren used "ProveYouDidntWantHerForTheMoney," which may suggest that now that the Diana exhibit is no longer being displayed at Althorp, upkeep on Diana's grave and memorial have fallen by the wayside.
Finally, there are several "news" articles about his tweets-- and he is retweeting them-- leading me to believe he was so outraged he wanted Althorp to be "named and shamed" into cleaning up the area, which is why he didn't just write a letter to the estate.
My understanding of Diana's burial arrangements is that the decision was between the chapel where many generations of Spencers had been buried, or the island. Charles Spencer said he chose the latter because Diana had loved the estate and he didn't like the idea of her in a crypt, and also to provide more privacy for visitors (especially Will and Harry). I don't think the Royal family had anything to do with that (other than Will and Harry having been asked if they were okay with it).
Charles Spencer had his own very specific ideas of the situation, and I don't think any disagreement that might have happened about the funeral (which Spencer denied rumours of) had anything to do with it.
^^I understand that, and I think your perspective makes sense, though I also think the BRF did affect the decision process too.
I also think remembering the tension of the families at the time is helpful for context. It may-- dare I say-- predate some of the posters here!
Quote from: Canuck on August 18, 2014, 03:48:29 PM
My understanding of Diana's burial arrangements is that the decision was between the chapel where many generations of Spencers had been buried, or the island. Charles Spencer said he chose the latter because Diana had loved the estate and he didn't like the idea of her in a crypt, and also to provide more privacy for visitors (especially Will and Harry). I don't think the Royal family had anything to do with that (other than Will and Harry having been asked if they were okay with it).
My recollection was that the Spencer wanted a Private funeral and the RF were fine with that because they did not want to show any particular honour to Diana. But when the Spencer saw the public mourning for her they felt that ti would nt be right to deny the people a chance ot share in her send off. and a private place for her to be buried meant that Wil and H could visit her grave in privacy and security...
That's my understanding too, amabel.
Chef accuses Earl Spencer of "neglecting" Diana's grave
Chef accuses Earl Spencer of "neglecting" Diana's grave : Australian Women's Weekly (http://www.aww.com.au/news-features/news-stories/2014/8/chef-accuses-earl-spencer-of-neglecting-dianas-grave)
Double post auto-merged: August 19, 2014, 04:05:29 AM
I'm guaranteed William and Harry wanted kept private on Diana's grave because she is two of her sons if the brothers would stay out it on his mother's death since 1997 she been gone for 17 years when his mother's death anniversary the brothers wanted kept low profiles on Diana's death anniversary on august 31 William and Harry don't wanted heard about his mother's death negative stories and also Diana's family too I'm sure Diana's siblings don't wanted heard on Diana's stories on tabloids it's hurtful for William and Harry plus spence family..
What did Diana will to her sons ? Any property or money ?
Quote from: tiaras on August 19, 2014, 05:56:47 AM
What did Diana will to her sons ? Any property or money ?
Money when William and Harry reach 25-30 years old for money when his mom dies
Double post auto-merged: August 19, 2014, 06:28:19 AM
Prince William turns 30 years and receive Princess Diana's inheritance!
Prince William turns 30 years and receive Princess Diana's inheritance! (http://www.gossip-celebs.com/news/prince-william-turns-30-years-and-receive-princess-dianas-inheritance--8168.html)
:thanks: I knew about the trust fund but , no property ? She didn't own her own home befire she passed away ?
^^ No, she didn't. But aside from money, she also left jewels ... you can read the full text of her will here:
http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9803/04/diana.will/
Cindy
^^No, in a way it's odd that Diana never thought about buying a house in the country or on the coast. She did have friends who had properties in the country and of course her sons could go to Highgrove after the separation by themselves.
Diana would describe William as being like a caged tiger when he was at KP at weekends, but of course her sons were at boarding school for much of the year in her last years. Perhaps she was deciding where she would eventually settle.
She did try to find a country house for them, at Althorp but she a dn her brother got into a dispute about what house to have and if it was secure and he ddidnt want reporters clogging up the place so she and her bro had a big argument about this issue and Diana remained without a county House. For herself I think she didn't care, she didn't like the country but she knew that the boys did and wanted a home there.
:thanks: Cindy.
Quote from: cinrit on August 19, 2014, 10:33:09 AM
^^ No, she didn't. But aside from money, she also left jewels ... you can read the full text of her will here:
CNN - Diana's Will: The full text - March 4, 1998 (http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9803/04/diana.will/)
Cindy
Quote from: cinrit on August 19, 2014, 10:33:09 AM
^^ No, she didn't. But aside from money, she also left jewels ... you can read the full text of her will here:
CNN - Diana's Will: The full text - March 4, 1998 (http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9803/04/diana.will/)
Cindy
:thanks: , it is odd she didnt think about it but after her divorce she must have though she would have a lifetime ahead of her to plan all those things :cry:
I don't believe she cared about a country house for herself so she probably didn't want to tie up her capital in one. The boys were getting older, and she may have reasoned that she might not even want to live in the UK after they were grown up.. and they had Balmoral. Of course the will she made, was just a "settling things" one and probably would not have been her final disposition of her property, she just wanted to sort out her affairs for the time being and the best solution was to leave her money and jewels to the boys, As ou probably know she did also want to leave something to her many godchildren but the Spencers did not obey that wish proprelry.
No, the Spencers (Diana's sisters) did not behave properly with reference to the property and money Diana wished to be distributed amongst her godchildren, at all! Diana would have been very upset had she known. Even worse Sarah blew it off afterwards as if it didn't matter.
well that his the Spencer family for you. Always at odds with each other and pretty arrogant. but I think that while Di did get annoyed and upset with Charles S over hte house, in itself she did not really care about having a country house.. but she had alienated many of her own social class who had country homes and could have given her a place to stay with the boys...
I think those of her "class" alienated her by providing safe houses for Charles and Camilla. Generally these friends were Charles friends not her friends. I think these friends showed arrogance. I think the royals are not exactly a loving family to put it mildly--they are at odds too and it is not just the Spencers.
I am not knocking any of you. Bringing it back to the center.....
I agree with Trudie.
I think everyone has good points.
All of you stated FACTS.
The grave being not kept up...perhaps so.
Yes, chef has a cookbook to push.
Everybody always has something to push and some sordid story beforehand to link for their book, project , etc.
I too doubt the next of kin, her sons, teens, had much to say in arrangements. Her minor sons were next of kin and Fatty Spencer.
Too bad PD was not buried in the Abbey, etc. Altrope was her ancestral home.I get that. I know she was divroced. Not D,PofW anymore. Her name was actually , legally then back to Lady Diana Spencer. No HRH. No PDiana. No Diana PofWales. Not a member of the BRF. I think being mother for PW and 3rd and 4th in line, she should have been buried there at hte Abbey or some place easily accessable for the public and tourists to see.
Yes Fatty Spencer was looking for the biggest profit here.
Maybe when W is K, he will move his mother to a more esteemed place. He will have the power to do so.
He nor PH can do nothing about moving their mother's resting place if they wanted to. They are in no authority and I assume they even know, PC and QEII, why make trouble.
Neither W nor H could do anything about the upkeep at Altrope if they wanted to.
That is not their palace or castle. Fatty Spencer won't refuse any money though.
Very sad that even in the ground, PD has no respect . No proper attention for her grave. Nothing. BRF wanted nothing to do with that woman and Fatty Spencer needed some money and well, easy problem solved there for all.
When Camilla dies, even if she is not QofE then and still PofWales DofCornwall etc. etc. , she will have the burial place of highest esteem. Highest honor. Where Q's of E are buried? if she dies as QofE, well then of course she will be be buried in the most highest and public place. Maybe a national shrine will mbe built for by King Charles . Perhaps a palce has already been found for Queen Camila National Park. Rename a park. Rename Trafalger Square, Queen Camilla Square. There is no end to the honors for her and YES , SHE WILL BE DofCorn PofWales etc. if she dies before becoming Q and if after, YES, she will be QofE. I get that!!!!!! It is what it is! For all for all trourists to see. Her death date might me made a national holiday there or something tehre forever. Yes, I know she is wife of PC, still. Will her resting palce be off somewhere..in the Bruce-Shand family Mosuleum or something. NO WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
So be it.
As for royal burial sites they range from Westminster Abbey, Frogmore, St. George's Chapel, and other sites. Richard III's reburial site was being discussed after his remains were found and have now found a home.
I don't know where QEII and the DoE will be buried but I'm sure it has been planned. Charles and Camilla have likely considered their location too.
Camilla will be buried as a royal. Diana was buried in her family home.. as was befitting.
And, IMO, as she would have wanted.
Quote from: amabel on August 21, 2014, 07:21:44 AM
Camilla will be buried as a royal. Diana was buried in her family home.. as was befitting.
Diana was a royal too and unlike Camilla the mother of a future King.
Quote from: Canuck on August 21, 2014, 10:12:41 AM
And, IMO, as she would have wanted.
of course. I think that tht goes without sayig..
What Diana "wanted" went with her to her grave. I don't know if any such assumptions about what Diana wanted can ever be made. She perhaps thought naturally she'd live to a ripe old age and maybe William would have her buried on royal property right up there with Camilla.
Diana wasn't Royal when she died, sandy.
And you're right, we can't know for sure what she would have wanted. But we know she wasn't find of the Royal family when she died, and I personally believe she would have been happy with the choice of her family home rather than something like Westminster Abbey.
She was a royal but did not have the HRH. She kept her title Diana, Princess of Wales so in effect she was still a Princess. And the mother of a future King. You can't get any more royal than that. It is subject to speculation if she will get the HRH back posthumously. And in fact during the lead up to the funeral I actually read that Frogmore was considered as a burial place which is a Royal Burial place but her brother and the Spencers vetoed it. And BTW Walllis Simpson is buried in a royal grave side by side with the Duke of Windsor. She like Diana lacked the HRH but was still considered royal. So yes, Diana was royal.
The difference is the Duchess of Windsor was the widow of a Royal. Diana was the divorced wife of a Royal. Diana's title while married was HRH The Princess of Wales. After the divorce, she was Diana, Princess of Wales ... no HRH and no "The". Hard as it is for me to wrap my brain around, the "The" makes a world of difference.
Cindy
Not that any of this matters to the debate about her burial site (which, as you point out, was a decision made by the Spencers), but I don't think it's true that she was Royal when she died. She was no longer a princess at that point -- she was called Diana, Princess of Wales because "Princess of Wales" was treated as equivalent to a surname from her marriage (and if she had remarried, she would have had to stop using it), but it no longer had the effect of designating her a princess (if it had, she would have been "the Princess of Wales" -- dropping "the" indicates she's no longer actually that position and that she's just using it as a surname). And yes, she was mother to a future king. That doesn't make her Royal. If you're not born Royal, then it only comes from marriage, and once the marriage ends in divorce, so does your status as a Royal.
There are some interesting sources online about titles and how these designations work. I find this kind of trivia fun, and I'd recommend checking out some of that stuff of you're similarly interested in how BRF titles work.
I'm sure she would not have wished to be buried iwht the RF. She would have preferred to be with her own family on her private estate, where her sons could visit her in privacy. If she had remarried, she mgiht have chosen to be buried iwht her new husband's family..
To bring it to the center.
WE ALL KNOW whe she died she was not HRH.
I took it further in another post, her name really, to be technical , was NOT Diana, Princes of Wales. Princess Diana ,no. Absolutely no HRH.
Diana's name was Lady Diana Frances Spencer at the the time of her death to be technical, if I am not mistaken.
Common terms and incorrect from the media and people were Princess Diana or Diana , Princes of Wales. The People's Princess.
None of it matters . It does not not matter if she is called, is, was called Frances Spencer. Diana Frances. Barbie. Dutchy Spencer.
HER SONS ARE HRH. :windsor1: That trumps just about everything. It is a situation I do not think the BRF over centruies never had to deal with. A divvorced princess of he future K and mother to the heirs. Henry 8, no. Mary was a bas*****. Elizabeth was a bas****. Kingy Henry said so and so it was, LOL. Something like that.
With PD...HER SONS ARE HRH and when King William :windsor1: is in power, what he says will go. Who knows? In 20 or so years when he is KofE is a long time away and who knows what he will do Move her? Leave her? Push for a park named for her? When he is KofE, maybe he will move her grave to a more prominent , royal place. Maybe he won't . Maybe Fatty Spencer's son will not allow it or the fee to Althrope will be too much money.
Maybe King William will move his mother next to his father and move Princess Camila or Queen Camila elsewhere? Maybe he won't. He will be able to do anything he wants to.
Just as when Camila dies , if so before PC and even if PC is not King yet, when he is King Charles , goodness knows what he will do for Camila's burial place . A special shrine ? :angel: Clearance House renamed Camilla House? Her death date made a Nat. Holiday in TUK and TCommonwealth? Whatever , it will all be overly spectatcular :banana: for woman he :windsor1: loves.
To me, I posted somewhere else here, PD's body should
have been placed in a more royal grave site.
SHE :notworthy: WAS MOTEHR of the future KofE and his brother, both HRH.
THE MOTHER TRUMPS ALL!!!! Ask Sarah Ferguson , whatever name among many I cannot mention :lol:, how is that motehr thing working out for her? She is MOTHER TO B and E and she milks it for all she can and will do for life. EVEN QEII cannot stop that and not even PPhillip cannot stop that. She is here for all life's moments for B and E like their super birthdays' they had some years ago.
Rumor has it SF/Fergie/CarzyGirl/ Budgy was at Bamoral for an August visit, but had to leave before PPhilip got there. That is the deal, LOL. She is barred form all BRF things and she is not HRH, but anything BRF event for B and E, SHE MUST ATTEND. When HER DAUGHTERS do get married, it seems a long time from now, Sarah or Fergie or Budgy or That Crazy Girl or whatever will sit front and center with her ex for THEIR daughters ' weddings.
Wallis "That Woman" Simpson was a Nazi sympathizer who supported and didn't she and Eddie David meet with Hitler? She ,like Camilla, were winners in they got just what they wanted by any means necessary. Good for them I guess.
Goes to show how the BRF , TPTB, etc. really felt about PD's death. YES, Fatty Spencer saw profit could go his way. I just think it was aslight and not dignified enough for PD's place in histroy there at her ancestral estate. Altrope is an odd, hard to reach place for tourists . Correct? They go to London and the country sides of the nobility...
When PD died, these teen boys really , I am sure, common sense, had no input about some things like this.
I am sure TPTB, PC, PPhililip, The Spencers, and especially QEII saw to it they were told, maybe had some input like choosing a song for her funeral or a prayer. Minor details. HRH, BRF , TPTB and even the nobility were , of ourse, sad for the HRH Princes, but BRF and TTPB wanted this thing over and done ASAP!!!
Anyway, it is where it is. it is where it will be until W is K and THEN STILL, maybe he will just leave it be as is.
What I do not get again, is how some of us won't give PD,LDS, That Ridiculous Creature , Barbie a right to be placed before CPB Rotweiller as MOTHER to HRH, W n H.
This debate :catfight: is like when we all wondered if PD were alive , where would she have sat in the church for HER SON'S wedding. Some of you stoodfast and said, since they were divorced..she was not HRH...she was an attention seeker....she was tall...she was blond..she was everything BUT MOTHER TO HRH, PW that her place would have been with Spencer family, with the celebs' group in the outer part, a pub in the East End, LOL, or outside on the street curb waving the Union Jack with the crowds, LOL!!
Some of us said that adult PH, HRH would have had his mother front, center sitted with his father. Common sense here. :wellduh:
PD's mother sat with her father some of you said.
YES, TRUE it is moot discussion because she is dead.
True, YES, PD's place of burial is sort of moot discussion too because what is done is.
Quote from: Canuck on August 21, 2014, 02:49:32 PM
Not that any of this matters to the debate about her burial site (which, as you point out, was a decision made by the Spencers), but I don't think it's true that she was Royal when she died. She was no longer a princess at that point -- she was called Diana, Princess of Wales because "Princess of Wales" was treated as equivalent to a surname from her marriage (and if she had remarried, she would have had to stop using it), but it no longer had the effect of designating her a princess (if it had, she would have been "the Princess of Wales" -- dropping "the" indicates she's no longer actually that position and that she's just using it as a surname). And yes, she was mother to a future king. That doesn't make her Royal. If you're not born Royal, then it only comes from marriage, and once the marriage ends in divorce, so does your status as a Royal.
There are some interesting sources online about titles and how these designations work. I find this kind of trivia fun, and I'd recommend checking out some of that stuff of you're similarly interested in how BRF titles work.
so what was she and if she was not a royal how come she was still called Princess of Wales? She was not on the royal calendar doing duties as an ex but just because she and Charles divorced did not make her not the mother of a future King. And certainly she would have been front and center at Royal Events involving her Royal Sons.
The Queen apparently thought Diana a "royal" since she argued for Diana to be buried at Frogmore where royals are buried.
This is hairsplitting--the main thing was that had she lived she'd always be part of the family as William and Harry's mother.
She was more royal than Camilla considering that Diana had royal children and Camilla never did and never will.
Double post auto-merged: August 21, 2014, 07:22:04 PM
Quote from: cinrit on August 21, 2014, 02:48:32 PM
The difference is the Duchess of Windsor was the widow of a Royal. Diana was the divorced wife of a Royal. Diana's title while married was HRH The Princess of Wales. After the divorce, she was Diana, Princess of Wales ... no HRH and no "The". Hard as it is for me to wrap my brain around, the "The" makes a world of difference.
Cindy
I knew somebody would bring this up. It's the same. Wallis was deprived of her HRH even after she married the Duke of Windsor. Diana was deprived of the HRH too. Wallis was not the mother of a future King. Diana trumps Wallis that way despite the divorce.
If the Queen did not consider her "royal" why did she argue for burial at Frogmore with royals.
"The" makes no difference. It is hair splitting. I doubt William would have even thought of consigning his mother to "unroyal" seats at Westminster during his coronation.
I agree that Diana had an important role as Will and Harry's mother, and that if she's lived she would have been in attendance at many Royal events. But the fact is that she was not a Royal after her divorce. As I said before, she was called Diana, Princess of Wales because "Princess of Wales" acts as a surname that she can retain after her divorce (but not if she remarries). But she was no longer HRH and she was not "the Princess of Wales" -- and in the rules about titles and RF positions, that indicates she was no longer a princess and no longer a Royal.
Camilla, like her or not, is a Royal right now by virtue of being currently married to Charles. She is "the Princess of Wales" (but the BRF, knowing the public's attachment to Diana in that role, uses her additional Duchess of Cornwall title as the preferred form of address for her in England). If Camilla and Charles were to divorce, then She would become Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall (as well as Camilla, Princess of Wales, technically), just as Fergie is Sarah, Duchess of York.
Sandy, she was still called "Princess of Wales" because, as Canuck explained, it was used as a surname. She was allowed to use it until and unless she remarried, at which time she would have taken the surname of her new husband. It's the same as though Mr. and Mrs. Smith were to divorce, Mrs. Smith would still be allowed to use that surname until she remarried.
Cindy
Princess is not a surname. If it were like the samples you used, she would have been Lady Diana Wales or something to that effect. The Lady would be her own title. But she was still called a Princess after the divorce.
Quote from: Canuck on August 21, 2014, 07:28:14 PM
I agree that Diana had an important role as Will and Harry's mother, and that if she's lived she would have been in attendance at many Royal events. But the fact is that she was not a Royal after her divorce. As I said before, she was called Diana, Princess of Wales because "Princess of Wales" acts as a surname that she can retain after her divorce (but not if she remarries). But she was no longer HRH and she was not "the Princess of Wales" -- and in the rules about titles and RF positions, that indicates she was no longer a princess and no longer a Royal.
Camilla, like her or not, is a Royal right now by virtue of being currently married to Charles. She is "the Princess of Wales" (but the BRF, knowing the public's attachment to Diana in that role, uses her additional Duchess of Cornwall title as the preferred form of address for her in England). If Camilla and Charles were to divorce, then She would become Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall (as well as Camilla, Princess of Wales, technically), just as Fergie is Sarah, Duchess of York.
Diana still is one up on Camilla because she gave birth to a future King. Camilla will never be ancestress of monarchs.
Wallis was not an HRH and had a title but she still got a royal burial next to her husband.
Arguably william would have restored Diana's HRH had she lived and when he became King.
Quote from: Canuck on August 21, 2014, 07:28:14 PM
I agree that Diana had an important role as Will and Harry's mother, and that if she's lived she would have been in attendance at many Royal events. But the fact is that she was not a Royal after her divorce. As I said before, she was called Diana, Princess of Wales because "Princess of Wales" acts as a surname that she can retain after her divorce (but not if she remarries). But she was no longer HRH and she was not "the Princess of Wales" -- and in the rules about titles and RF positions, that indicates she was no longer a princess and no longer a Royal.
Camilla, like her or not, is a Royal right now by virtue of being currently married to Charles. She is "the Princess of Wales" (but the BRF, knowing the public's attachment to Diana in that role, uses her additional Duchess of Cornwall title as the preferred form of address for her in England). If Camilla and Charles were to divorce, then She would become Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall (as well as Camilla, Princess of Wales, technically), just as Fergie is Sarah, Duchess of York.
You're right Canuck, this is the correct style. When married Diana was
the Princess of Wales and after her divorce she became Diana, Princess of Wales.
Sandy, that's just not the case -- Fergie became Sarah, Duchess of York and not Lady Sarah York. It know it looks kind of weird to consider "princess of Wales" or "duchess of York" as a surname, but that's how it works.
Princess is still a title not a surname. She was known as princess Diana still at the time she died.
Had she lived arguably she would have gotten the HRH restored and been buried with royals.
She may have been called Princess Diana by members of the public, but officially it was specifically stated that she was NOT Princess Diana. In fact, she wasn't even Princess Diana during her marriage -- she was HRH Diana, the Princess of Wales, because the title was her husband's and not hers. Just as Kate is technically Princess William of Wales and will eventually become HRH Catherine, the Princess of Wales instead of Princess Catherine.
For example, there is only one The at a time. Kate is HRH The Duchess of Cambridge, if she and William divorce, she becomes Kate, Duchess of Cambridge and William's new wife would become HRH The Duchess of Cambridge.
[mod] Can we move away from the topic of titles, and back onto the subject of the thread? If you want to continue discussing Diana's titles, I've created a new thread here: Titles of Diana (http://www.royalinsight.net/forum/index.php?topic=71523.new#new) :hug: :flower: [/mod]
Quote from: Canuck on August 21, 2014, 08:01:19 PM
Sandy, that's just not the case -- Fergie became Sarah, Duchess of York and not Lady Sarah York. It know it looks kind of weird to consider "princess of Wales" or "duchess of York" as a surname, but that's how it works.
it is a title, rather than strictly speaking a surname. But it is the way that divorced and widowed peers wives are titled. If Di had married the Duke of X, and been divorced, she'd be Diana Duchess of X,and his new wife would be THE duchess of X. Di would be entitled to sing her name as "Diana wales"... it is not a ROYAL title per se, the HRH was the important royal part of it and that was firmly removed from her.
Double post auto-merged: August 23, 2014, 02:59:12 AM
Quote from: Canuck on August 21, 2014, 01:30:40 PM
And you're right, we can't know for sure what she would have wanted. But we know she wasn't find of the Royal family when she died, and I personally believe she would have been happy with the choice of her family home rather than something like Westminster Abbey.
of course she would. The RF did not like her, she did not like them. And the boys would not want her to be buried somewhere that was full of tourists, I'm sure they prefer to think that her grave Is a private place for them and her loved ones,
QuoteWhy Diana's Chef Spilt the Beans Over Her Neglected Grave
Royal chef Darren McGrady had already started preparing Princess Diana's welcome home dinner when he found out his beloved boss had been killed in a car crash in Paris. "At first I thought it was some sort of sick joke, that it was Comic Relief or something," recalls the man who cooked for the Queen for a decade before becoming Diana's personal chef following her separation from Prince Charles in 1993.
"I actually drove to Kensington Palace with the ingredients in the back of the car because I could not believe she was dead."
......
Next Sunday, August 31, it will be 17 years since Diana died. Earlier this month Darren plucked up the courage to visit his former employer's grave at Althorp, the Spencer family seat in Northamptonshire, where Diana was buried in 1997. What he found there made headlines around the world last week after the Sunday Express revealed he had tweeted several pictures of the "neglected" memorial on the 450-acre estate belonging to Diana's brother Earl Spencer.
Darren, who lives in Dallas with wife Wendy and children Kelly, 18, Lexie, 14, and Harry, 10, said: "I did what I did for William and Harry because if that were my mother's grave, I would want to know.
More: Princess Diana's chef Darren McGrady talks about her grave | Royal | News | Daily Express (http://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/502621/Diana-s-chef-spilt-beans-over-neglected-grave)
Cindy
Thanks for sharing that, Cindy. :hug:
why didn't he write to wil and Harry?
You're welcome, LA. :flower: Amabel, I thought the same thing. Writing to them directly would seem to be the better route than going to the media.
Cindy
Quote from: amabel on August 22, 2014, 05:51:10 AM
Quote from: Canuck on August 21, 2014, 08:01:19 PM
Sandy, that's just not the case -- Fergie became Sarah, Duchess of York and not Lady Sarah York. It know it looks kind of weird to consider "princess of Wales" or "duchess of York" as a surname, but that's how it works.
it is a title, rather than strictly speaking a surname. But it is the way that divorced and widowed peers wives are titled. If Di had married the Duke of X, and been divorced, she'd be Diana Duchess of X,and his new wife would be THE duchess of X. Di would be entitled to sing her name as "Diana wales"... it is not a ROYAL title per se, the HRH was the important royal part of it and that was firmly removed from her.
Double post auto-merged: August 23, 2014, 02:59:12 AM
Quote from: Canuck on August 21, 2014, 01:30:40 PM
And you're right, we can't know for sure what she would have wanted. But we know she wasn't find of the Royal family when she died, and I personally believe she would have been happy with the choice of her family home rather than something like Westminster Abbey.
of course she would. The RF did not like her, she did not like them. And the boys would not want her to be buried somewhere that was full of tourists, I'm sure they prefer to think that her grave Is a private place for them and her loved ones,
Well the boys are part of the royal family and they loved their mother. I would not say everybody in the RF did not like her.
Quote from: amabel on August 24, 2014, 05:35:33 PM
why didn't he write to wil and Harry?
Because he wouldn't get all this free publicity. Like Ken Warfe and others, I'm sure William and Harry have nothing to do with Darren Grady or anyone else who makes money off their dead mother's name.
Double post auto-merged: August 24, 2014, 08:06:39 PM
That came out wrong, I meant that Ken Warfe is another loser that uses Diana's name to make money for himself.
Perhaps he knows that letters are read by their staff and passed on if staff think it is of importance. Knowing how it all works he assumed William or Harry would never see a letter and staff would choose to deal with it.
Quote from: PrincessOfPeace on August 24, 2014, 07:09:08 PM
Quote from: amabel on August 24, 2014, 05:35:33 PM
why didn't he write to wil and Harry?
Because he wouldn't get all this free publicity. Like Ken Warfe and others, I'm sure William and Harry have nothing to do with Darren Grady or anyone else who makes money off their dead mother's name.
Double post auto-merged: August 24, 2014, 08:06:39 PM
That came out wrong, I meant that Ken Warfe is another loser that uses Diana's name to make money for himself.
well yes obviously. Sometimes seems like most of Di's staff have done something like this since her death, in the case of wharfe and Jepshon, they have been even nastier, using their time of working for her to write books that were critical of her.
Jephson did a number on Charles and Wharfe did too reporting how Diana was upset about Camilla.