Princess Margaret Chat

Jonquil · November 08, 2009, 12:37:58 PM

Somewhere in some thread I pointed out that the Cabinet documents released in 2005, show that the government of the day as well as the Queen were prepared to let Princess Margaret marry Peter Townsend. In the end the 2 of them decided that they wouldn't marry. Margaret was never forced to 'give him up' it was a mutual decision.

Now it seems a letter that Margaret wrote to the Prime Minister of the day has surfaced where she writes that she hasn't made up her mind in regards to wanting to marry Peter Townsend. (She was obviously aware of the government's efforts to make it possible for the 2 of them to marry)

Princess Margaret rejected marriage to Townsend 'because she was unsure, not out of duty' | Daily Mail Online

Lucy · November 11, 2009, 03:58:08 PM

Thank you, Jonquil....Yes, Margaret has been portrayed as robbed of her true love when it somply is not true..
It's like Charles being robbed of a marriage to Camilla Shand...not true. At the time he didn't wish to marry....and in fact may have never married had he not been expected to produce heirs.

daibando · November 11, 2009, 04:07:43 PM

How do you know that 'at the time he didn't wish to marry'? Not that Prince Charles' marriage problems have anything to do with this thread.

whisperofsound · November 11, 2009, 07:48:26 PM

i read about this what a sad outcome nonetheless, wonder where she and mr. townsend would have end up had she said yes . . .thanks for the article information. : )

Lucy · November 11, 2009, 07:59:25 PM

Quote from: daibando on November 11, 2009, 04:07:43 PM
How do you know that 'at the time he didn't wish to marry'? Not that Prince Charles' marriage problems have anything to do with this thread.

Isn't it pretty obvious? Had he wanted to marry her, he would have done. He was a free agent. So many people think she married Andrew Parker Bowles on the rebound but I doubt that. I think she preferred him to Charles and preferred being mistress to Charles. Since she was his mistress for decades, please don't tell me she didn't want to be...She never tried to divorce Andrew Parker Bowles...he was the one who asked for a divorce after Charles exposed his wife on television.

Hale · November 11, 2009, 08:28:19 PM

I see the revisionist's are at play.

Princess Margaret at the time was told that if she married Peter Townsend she would be forced to relinquish her privileges and possibly her title. What PM did not know at the time was that if she had held her ground she would have won the day. The RF and courtiers pulled a bluff and won. What I am curious to know is what was Prince Phillip's role in all this? It is said that from this moment relations were constantly strained between them.

daibando · November 12, 2009, 01:07:31 PM

Quote from: Lucy on November 11, 2009, 07:59:25 PM
Isn't it pretty obvious? Had he wanted to marry her, he would have done. He was a free agent. So many people think she married Andrew Parker Bowles on the rebound but I doubt that. I think she preferred him to Charles and preferred being mistress to Charles. Since she was his mistress for decades, please don't tell me she didn't want to be...She never tried to divorce Andrew Parker Bowles...he was the one who asked for a divorce after Charles exposed his wife on television.

It isn't obvious at all. He was not a free agent. The establishment insisted that he must marry a virgin and everyone knew that this particular lady was not a virgin. Times have changed but we cannot apply today's conditions to the past.

Kate · November 12, 2009, 02:58:13 PM

Camilla NEVER even thought of marrying Charles as she knew what was required at the time,for the bride of a royal Besides, for a couple of years, previously to meeting Charles, she was totally crazy about APB...She only set her Cap for Charles once APB was having a relationship with Princess Anne!!Oneupmanship.. I would imagine, once she saw that Prince Charles fell for her "womanly ways" and he was easily led, she enjoyed the perks, especially later, after her marriage to APB,, on becoming Charles's full time mistress.. Oh! Except for the time off to have her two children.. Talk about planning...

Margaret and Peter's relationship was totally innocent, in comparison with the others...No manipulations or cunning..

sandy · November 12, 2009, 03:00:51 PM

Charles may have been required to marry a "virgin" but it should not have given him carte blanche to sleep with someone else's wife. I think no matter how times have change one would think adultery is still very wrong.

daibando · November 12, 2009, 04:20:57 PM

Sandy, we all know how you feel about Prince Charles and his adultery. Isn't it about time that you gave us a rest?

sandy · November 12, 2009, 06:18:04 PM

Give it a rest?Excuse me? I believe we have free speech on this board and his adultery was wrong -- I was your addresssing your "times have changed" phrase and I'm maintaining some thngs don't change with time.

But OTOH our former Governor who cheated on his wife with call girls is speaking at Harvard University about Ethics. Maybe Charles will eventually be called to speak there too.

lilibet80 · November 12, 2009, 06:46:49 PM

Of course we have free speech on this board and his adultery was wrong. But this is supposed to be a thread to discuss Princess Margaret and Peter Townsend, which I for one find a very interesting subject. Why must Charles and Camilla come into every discussion when the subject has already been covered.

As far as Peter and Margaret, I think that Prince Philip was probably against their marrying as Peter was probably, in his mind, far below the Princess. I have never thought that Philip was a sentimental person and probably thought that any talk of love between royals was superfluous.
I also believe that Philip knew that if the King was still alive there would have been no negotiations about this matter. He simply would have put his foot down and thrown Peter out of Margaret's life. After Margaret gave Peter up she used the rest of her life to behave as she pleased knowing she would be excused for her great renunciation of the love of her life. Very sad story. However, I doubt that she would have been happy for long with Peter Townsend or that he would have been happy with her in the long run. She was too spoiled and too used to getting her own way. He could not have supported her in the style to which she was accustomed and she would probably have gotten tired of just being a wife. Of course I am not a mind reader, it is just my opinion.

sandy · November 12, 2009, 06:55:28 PM

It's hard to say. If they loved each other why not? I don't think she ever felt the same with Snowdon. Margaret I doubt had any idea she would be "excused" for "giving up her love." In any case, I think the secret went with Margaret and Townsend to their graves.

I think Philip WAS sentimental. He and Princess Elizabeth kept playing "People will say we're in Love" as "their song." It was not all duty.

lilibet80 · November 12, 2009, 07:36:53 PM

I base my opinion on Philip's sentimentality on his behavior when Princess Margaret died. As the Queen was following her sister's coffin out of the chapel she was crying. Philip turned to her and snapped "Stop that". I was frankly shocked to see how insensitive he was to his wife who had just lost a beloved sister and companion of her youth. I doubt that Prince Philip had anything to do with playing that song. Both Lilibet and Margaret had show tunes playing all the time, this sounds more like Lilibet's doing than anything to do with Philip. Considering some of the nasty things he has said in the past to and about people, I see no sentimentality and quite frankly very little sense in his behavior. I don't begin to understand a man like him and I can understand just how difficult it must have been for Prince Charles to have such a father.

sandy · November 12, 2009, 08:07:58 PM

Charles hasn't exactly been a sterling character in the fatherhood dept. either. He loves his sons but if he really should have tried to work things out with his wife and not had the mistress constantly lurking int he background. I also think he should have put his sons before getting the mistress accepted and not used them in the spin to get her accepted.

And what goes on behind closed doors, we'll never know. His children (other than Charles) never complained about him. I think part of Charles' nature is to be a grievance collector. And remember Charles DID compliment Philip publicly on his advice to have Charles spend time working in Australia (and I recall studying there).

Margaret too was not the height of warmth, she didn't bow her head at the passing of Diana's coffin (even though she was at one time friendly with the Late Princess) and lipreaders read her saying rather derogatory things about the Diana Funeral DURING the funeral!

lilibet80 · November 12, 2009, 08:26:31 PM

It is hard for me to imagine just how long a nice man like Peter Townsend would have put up with a girl like Pss. Margaret. She was difficult, but perhaps he had the misfortune of falling for the same type of woman. His first wife was certainly no bargain. I have his book and he really was a good person. I am glad he found a nice wife and hope his life was happy.

Hale · November 12, 2009, 09:31:35 PM

lilibet80, I have vague memories of that book. If I recall, Townsends wife bore a slight resemblance to Margaret in some of the pics I saw of her.

I don't know if their relationship would have lasted, but what people forget is PM took her fathers death very badly. I always thought that with PT she saw a sort of father figure.

PS. This topic has nothing to do with Charles & Diana.

sandy · November 12, 2009, 09:42:21 PM

Margaret's father really liked Townsend and trusted him. Had he lived Margaret and Townsend might have married. Some said Townsend was like the son he never had.

Hale · November 12, 2009, 09:46:24 PM

I read that to. That for me is one of the things which drew PM towards Townsend.

lilibet80 · November 12, 2009, 09:50:15 PM

Absolutely the King like Peter very much. That is a far cry from allowing his daughter to marry him, he was divorced, and the King wanted her to marry into the Duke of Buccleuch's family. As for Tony, he would have thrown him out faster than he would have thrown out Peter. However, if the King had lived the Townsend affair would never have progressed. There was an instance when Peter and Margaret planned their own picnic away from where the family was picknicking. The King heard about it and went over to them and put a stop to it. The Queen and the QM were walking on eggs around Margaret after the King's death so they looked the other way. This would never have happened if the King had lived.

sandy · November 13, 2009, 01:41:01 AM

I read a story that in the presence of the King, Townsend picked up Margaret and carried her down stairs. The King didn't seem to mind that Margaret aand Townsend were an item. Townsend even accompanied the family on the 1947 Royal Tour and was said to spend much time with Margaret there. If her father really were so disapproving IMO he would have separated them and/or not invited Townsend anywhere near the family. The King also wanted Princess Elizabeth to marry someone other than Prince Philip (and had some candidates) but Elizabeth wanted to be with Philip.

Kate · November 13, 2009, 03:09:57 AM

I believe, had Margaret really wanted to marry Peter Townsend and The King was still alive , had she stomped her Royal little foot , she would have gone up against her father in the way the Elizabeth held out for Philip. NOW , in ELizabeth's case, she was head over heels in love with Phillip for a very long time, but I would think, that perhaps Margaret, with her own strong Leo personality, would have played a game with her Father, with her winning, even if she had doubts about marrying Peter. Peter Townsend was a very decent , mature and experienced man... I'm sure he could read between the lines and see the true Margaret and knew what motivated her and what didn't. I think, after reading his book and seeing how happy his life turned out, that he also did not want to marry Princess Margaret, but put her in the position of saying it first.I also think, he was such a gentleman, after that year away and had Margaret insisted they continue the relationship and marry, he would have....commitment and all that...

lilibet80 · November 13, 2009, 05:59:04 PM

Philip was a royal, never married, a member of the family. The King would not have given in no matter what Margaret said. He would have known the trouble such a marriage would cause within the church and the government. He did not want Margaret to marry a commoner and certainly not a divorced man. It may have broken his heart to deny her anything, but I think he would have said no to her. However, I am not in a position to know, nor is anyone else.

Trudie · November 14, 2009, 02:12:33 AM

Unless Margaret married another royal even the aristocracy are considered commoners so even if she did marry into the Duke of Buccleuch's family she still would have married a commoner as her Aunt Princess was a daughter of a Duke of Buccleuch and was a commoner until her marriage to Prince Henry.

lilibet80 · November 14, 2009, 06:14:27 PM

There are commoners and then there are commoners. There is a vast difference between marrying an untitled commoner and marrying a Duke's son or daughter. King George V gave his permission for his children to marry aristocrats as after the first world war there were very few royal houses left.