Diana's Relationships with The Queen and Other Members of the Royal Family

[Curryong]

How happy the QM would have been with that scenario rather than being widowed at 51. Although she didn't make half the fuss about it that Queen Victoria did her widowhood lasted almost ten years more than Victoria's. And Elizabeth and Philip would have been able to live a bit in more of a relaxed way.

The King's Court would have remained a bit more conservative than the Queen's was, even in the 1970's. Who knows, Charles might have married into a European Royal family in his twenties. I agree that had King George lived to be 99 Charles and Diana could have taken a year or so to get to know each other and therefore there would have been no marriage.

 

[Ish]

Had George VI lived longer, Charles' life would have likely been drastically different. The Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh lived a rather different life than the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh lived....

I mean, you can start with the fact that as the Duke and Duchess, the couple had a more traditional power dynamic in that the DoE has his naval career and the Duchess supported him.

Then you can add in the fact that when they were in Malta, their children were in Britain with the Duchess's parents.

Then you can add in the fact the influence Lord Mountbatten had following George VI's death...

Had George VI lived into, say Charles' teenage years, you have to wonder if he would have had the same negative upbringing. If he would have had Mountbatten as a mentor over his grandfather - and if George VI, who had a monogamous marriage, had been more of a mentor than Mountbatten, who had a polygamous one, would Charles' attitudes towards marriage been different? Would he have still attended Gourdonston or might he have been sent to Eton - George VI and most of his brothers just went to the Royal Navy College, which closed in the 1920s, but Henry, Duke of Gloucester went to Eton, as did the Queen Mother's father and brothers.

 

[Westfield Bakery]

Had George VI lived longer, Charles' life would have likely been drastically different. The Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh lived a rather different life than the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh lived....

I mean, you can start with the fact that as the Duke and Duchess, the couple had a more traditional power dynamic in that the DoE has his naval career and the Duchess supported him.

Then you can add in the fact that when they were in Malta, their children were in Britain with the Duchess's parents.

Then you can add in the fact the influence Lord Mountbatten had following George VI's death...

Had George VI lived into, say Charles' teenage years, you have to wonder if he would have had the same negative upbringing. If he would have had Mountbatten as a mentor over his grandfather - and if George VI, who had a monogamous marriage, had been more of a mentor than Mountbatten, who had a polygamous one, would Charles' attitudes towards marriage been different? Would he have still attended Gourdonston or might he have been sent to Eton - George VI and most of his brothers just went to the Royal Navy College, which closed in the 1920s, but Henry, Duke of Gloucester went to Eton, as did the Queen Mother's father and brothers.

True. I know that George VI would have been protective with Anne. He would have been Mark's worst nightmare in 1973!

 

[Denville]

That is something no one will ever know. There's a lot of "what ifs" that could figure into that scenario. The logical answer I think would be if George VI lived that long, his daughter Elizabeth would be heir presumptive and most likely Charles would never have married Diana. He wouldn't be under as much pressure to marry and would have found someone else.

No reason to suppose that IMO.
Charles would still have been under pressure to marry by a certain age, and it is possible that George VI would have been quite as strict or even more strict, about the idea of "no woman with a past" marrying his grandson who was heir to the throne.. so the essential problem, that Charles was shy with women and preferred women a bit older, but was going to have to marry a young and inexperienced girl, would remain.
and I think that Charles, being shy with women, and a bit of a loner, and perhaps emotionaly "fixed" on Camilla, would have been slow to marry, and ended up at 30 or so, unwed and needing to find a wife.
I think that George VI would have probably liked Diana as the QM intitially did and thougt she was a ladylike charming pretty little thing, who seemed perfect

 

[Leopoldine]

OK, well how about this. Say that Mountbatten wasn't murdered and was around to meet Diana and pass judgment. Charles was listening to him, not his parents about such matters, what would an 80-something Mountbatten have to say about Diana Spencer?

 

[Denville]

Oh please don't be cross but youre tempting me to make a Policie squad reply!!
but to be serious, I thin that Moutnbatten would have thought that Diana was fine.. unless he got to know her very well. I think he would have been a bit annoyed that Charles had not opted for Amanda K but I tink that people who met Diana briefly, In the RF, seemed to like her and think she was fine as a future Princess.
MAYBE Mountbatten was shrewd enough to see that under the surface Diana was a lot more complex and brittle but I don't know.
He was the one who told C to have girlfrends and then to marry a virgin bride who didn't have much experience of the world or men. ANd he must have realised that in the 1970s a sutiable well bred virgin bride was likely to be very young and not that easy to find

 

[Leopoldine]

Denville, I was thinking that Mountbatten would have been a little peeved that Diana wasn't a member of The Old Family. He was like Queen Mary, perusing those family trees.

I certainly wasn't posting this notion about Mountbatten to get a Policie Squad reply. It was more an alternative topic to the idea of King George VI living longer, that kind of thing. I don't want to have Policie Squad trouble.

 

[Ish]

Had Mountbatten lived, Charles would have married Amanda Knatchbull - Charles proposed to her after Mountbatten's death, but she turned him down.

I'm not sure what you mean when you say that Mountbatten and Queen Mary were "perusing those family trees". Three of Queen Mary's children married members of the aristocracy; George VI married the daughter of an Earl, Mary married an Earl (or the eldest son of one), and Henry married the daughter of a Duke. Only George (of Kent) married another royal. Further, Lord Mountbatten didn't marry all that high - Edwina Ashley was the daughter of the son of the second son of an Earl - nor did he push his daughters into grand marriages - Patricia married a Baron, and Pamela married a man with no title at all.

Diana likely would have been seen as very acceptable by Mountbatten (if he moved past the idea of Charles marrying Amanda); she was a British aristocrat from an old family that was well connected to the BRF, was young, and had no "past" to speak of. She was exactly what Mountbatten encouraged Charles to look for in a wife.

 

[Denville]

I the idea of King George VI living longer, that kind of thing. I don't want to have Policie Squad trouble.

I was joking about the Police Squad TV series? YOu know that right?
Sorry if it fell flat.
I don't know, I think that Ld M would have LIKED Charles to marry one of his family, rather than other royals. he knew that German or foreign Princesses would nto go down well in the UK any more.. so I think he must have accepted that then the best wife for Chas was a well bred Enlglish aristocrat. and he had a granddaughter just the right age..
so if Charles had turned down Amanda or she had refused him, I would imagine that M would have wanted him to settle for a nice English lady of good birth and a titled family, like Diana.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Yes, I agree. He'd probably have liked the idea of Charles settling down with Diana once it was clear that Amanda Knatchbull didn't want to be the Princess of Wales. Diana appeared to be perfect for the role, at least on paper; and I think that the elderly Earl would have been charmed--at least until the problems developed.

 

[Denville]

He was not IMO a very likable man, possibly he would have pestered poor Amanda to consider Charles. However I think she was firm in nt wanting to. So then I think he would have thought that Diana was fine, pretty, charming, sutiable, able to humanise Charles to the public etc.

 

[Ish]

I wonder if Amanda would have still turned Charles down or been uninterested had Lord Mountbatten not been assassinated....

I mean, if you look at it, Amanda lost her maternal grandfather, paternal grandmother, and one brother in one instant, and injuring both her parents and another brother. There's no way that didn't cloud her attitude towards becoming a public figure by marrying Charles.

 

[Denville]

from what I've heard her mother said that ther was "no spark" between her and Charles . ANd I think that she did not want to be a princess, even before the tragedy. but that probably really made her absolutely opposedto the idea.

 

[Westfield Bakery]

I wonder why Alexandra never became close with Diana

I wonder why Princess Alexandra of Kent never became close with the Princess of Wales and Great Stewardess of Scotland during her marriage to her cousin, Charles.

Alexandra could have advised Diana more and could have been an aunt-like figure to Diana.

Alexandra should have had more visibility at the funeral of the Princess of Wales.

 

[Curryong]

Princess Alexandra was about twenty five years older than the Princess of Wales. People with that sort of age gap don't usually develop a close relationship, especially as they probably didn't have much in common.

They wouldn't have seen that much of each other either. Members of the BRF don't go visiting each other a lot informally, or at least they didn't in the 1980s and 90s when Diana was alive. Diana probably saw the Princess on family occasions like Christmas and at the Trooping of the Colour, and that would be it. Why should Alexandra have been visible at Diana's funeral, given that the two women scarcely knew each other?

 

[Nico]

And Princess Alexandra has always been very supportive to Charles, his favourite cousin, during the divorce and after ...

 

[Osipi]

Princess Alexandra was about twenty five years older than the Princess of Wales. People with that sort of age gap don't usually develop a close relationship, especially as they probably didn't have much in common.

They wouldn't have seen that much of each other either. Members of the BRF don't go visiting each other a lot informally, or at least they didn't in the 1980s and 90s when Diana was alive. Diana probably saw the Princess on family occasions like Christmas and at the Trooping of the Colour, and that would be it. Why should Alexandra have been visible at Diana's funeral, given that the two women scarcely knew each other?

This I agree with. I think a big misconception with people is that with the BRF being a large, extended family is that they are all socializing amongst themselves in private which, from what I've come to see, is totally the opposite. While some members of the family are closer than others, they're not a group of people that interact, socialize and gather as a family on many occasions other than what we, the public, see.

Diana, herself, wasn't one to be outgoing all that much to establish and nurture private relationships with the extended members of the BRF. Discounting the troubles in her marriage, she herself had her boys, her charity work and her official engagements that filled up a lot of her time. Down time was more likely to be spent with Diana's close personal friends rather than seeking out extended members of the BRF. Diana would no more be close with Princess Alexandra than Charles forming a close friendship with Countess Raine Spencer or Lady Jane Fellowes. Of course they knew of the other family members and respected them and were friendly when they did meet and interact but it wouldn't ever be classified as a private close relationship.

Even in many normal, familial relationships, a husband's or a wife's extended family, for the most part, just gathered for family occasions such as weddings and funerals. I had a second cousin growing up that I really liked and enjoyed talking with but over the years, would only see this person when a family gathering was called for. Mostly funerals. Other than that, we did not interact in our everyday lives.

 

[Ish]

This I agree with. I think a big misconception with people is that with the BRF being a large, extended family is that they are all socializing amongst themselves in private which, from what I've come to see, is totally the opposite. While some members of the family are closer than others, they're not a group of people that interact, socialize and gather as a family on many occasions other than what we, the public, see.



Diana, herself, wasn't one to be outgoing all that much to establish and nurture private relationships with the extended members of the BRF. Discounting the troubles in her marriage, she herself had her boys, her charity work and her official engagements that filled up a lot of her time. Down time was more likely to be spent with Diana's close personal friends rather than seeking out extended members of the BRF. Diana would no more be close with Princess Alexandra than Charles forming a close friendship with Countess Raine Spencer or Lady Jane Fellowes. Of course they knew of the other family members and respected them and were friendly when they did meet and interact but it wouldn't ever be classified as a private close relationship.



Even in many normal, familial relationships, a husband's or a wife's extended family, for the most part, just gathered for family occasions such as weddings and funerals. I had a second cousin growing up that I really liked and enjoyed talking with but over the years, would only see this person when a family gathering was called for. Mostly funerals. Other than that, we did not interact in our everyday lives.

Well put.

The only thing I would disagree with is the idea that Diana/Alexandra are comparable to Charles/Raine or Charles/Jane. Charles logically would have had a degree of a relationship with Raine - his wife's stepmother - and Jane - his sister-in-law. But there's no reason at all Diana would have had any real relationship with Alexandra, who isn't Charles' cousin, but rather the Queen's cousin.

Think about how close people typically are with their parent's cousins. The BRF is probably more interconnected than most families, but there are still limits.

 

[Mirabel]

I wonder why Princess Alexandra of Kent never became close with the Princess of Wales and Great Stewardess of Scotland during her marriage to her cousin, Charles.

I doubt age difference had much to do with it.

When a marriage breaks down, nine times out of ten people choose sides.
Alexandra was on Charles' side.
She and Charles are family and that usually trumps all.

(Even Margaret, sympathetic to Diana at one time, closed ranks and sided with Charles. It's usually what families do).

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

The personalities of Princess Alexandra and Diana could not mismatch more. Alexandra was completely loyal to the Crown, committed to royal duties and the sort of lady that always and ever has "discretion" in her DNA. So completely the opposite of Diana, beside her many talents and qualities, also a lady with tantrums, manipulative, destructive, unfaithful and even openly attacked the suitability of the future Sovereign. All acts which -to me- look so out-of-the-world with the personalities and mindsets of the three Kent cousins of the Queen.

 

[shastalucie]

When thinking of which sides people took in the war of the Wales, it's useful to think of pre-Panorama and post-Panorama. I think quite a few royal family members like Pss Margaret were sympathetic toward Diana, but after the 1995 television interview she lost any sympathy from inside the family.

 

[Dman]

Diana's relationship with the royals were shaky from the start. She said that after the wedding, the family's attitude towards her weren't all that great. She was close to the Kents though and Princes Edward & Andrew.

They had some good times though. No matter the titles, families have their ups and downs like the rest of us.

 

[Denville]

You've just said that according to Diana Her relationships with most of the RF were shaky from the very beginning. I imagine that there were times when they met at parties and so on and had a pleasant enough time, but IMO there's no indication that there was more than this.. that from early on, the RF became uneasy about Diana and dd not develop any close relationships with her. I think she got on a ibt better with Kate Kent, and for a time with Pss Margaret, but gradually the relationship with Margaret unravelled.. and as for Andrew and Edward, I think that they were young men, Ed a few years younger than Diana, and were mostly "out leading their own lives" when Diana was a young mother.. so I doubt if they were all that close... Overall, her relationship with the RF was pretty shaky wth tehm being uneasy about her volatile personality..adn her finding ti hard to find any common ground with them

 

[Queen Claude]

According to the article about the tapes Diana recorded in 1997 - the year of her death, Diana maintained a friendship with Prince Edward, and it was Edward that she approached for a recommendation of a videographer to record her.

 

[Denville]

What is a videographer? I don't think that she was that close to Edward, sicne she seemed quite cool on his girlfriend who eventauly became his wife.

 

[Mermaid1962]

What's also called a "camera man."

 

[Kronprinz]

If Diana moved to Clarence House after the engagement in February and lived there until her wedding, how did she get along with the Queen Mother? Did they even have any contact?

I'm sure it must have been daunting for her, being thrown into the court life of the 1920s with no support from Charles.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

If Diana moved to Clarence House after the engagement in February and lived there until her wedding, how did she get along with the Queen Mother? Did they even have any contact?

I'm sure it must have been daunting for her, being thrown into the court life of the 1920s with no support from Charles.

I thought that was not the case, that she actually moved into BP and only stayed at Clarence House the night before the wedding.

 

[Osipi]

If Diana moved to Clarence House after the engagement in February and lived there until her wedding, how did she get along with the Queen Mother? Did they even have any contact?

I'm sure it must have been daunting for her, being thrown into the court life of the 1920s with no support from Charles.

Actually, Diana did not live at Clarence House with the Queen Mum. She did however, spend the night before the wedding there. After the engagement was announced, Diana was given her own apartment (rooms) at Buckingham Palace.

Some sources say that Diana took up residence at Clarence House on the eve of her engagement to Charles but this is incorrect. She may have stayed there the evening before the engagement was announced but moved to BP once that happened and wouldn't return to Clarence House until the night before the wedding.

 

[dgtns]

Diana didn't live in CH after the engagement

If Diana moved to Clarence House after the engagement in February and lived there until her wedding, how did she get along with the Queen Mother? Did they even have any contact?

I'm sure it must have been daunting for her, being thrown into the court life of the 1920s with no support from Charles.

hi, check your facts. Diana remained in CH with the QM for a few days at the time of the engagement. I can't remember where I source that info, but read it several times in different places.