She did not have the best of upbringings; parents divorced at 6; remarried both; did not get along with either step parents.
Seriously – that’s going way into conspiracy theorist territory.
I haven’t seen it either, but I can comment on the flag thing – the reason it wasn’t lowered is that the flag isn’t even flown unless the Queen is in residence. So it wasn’t even there to begin with.
As AK84 said, she didn’t exactly have a stable home life. Which, in some ways should have made her more prepared for the advent of a mistress in Charles’ life - and I suspect was part of the reason she was chosen - she couldn’t possibly have been innocent given the scandal her parents were involved in. She had to KNOW. But apparently, she bought into the fairy tale of “Prince Charles has fallen in love” that the rest of the world was sold, not the reality of “The Palace has arranged a marriage for Prince Charles to a Nice Girl with an Appropriate Background because otherwise he might Make A Fool of himself over the Now Married Camilla.” And when she discovered she’d been had, she reacted publicly.
Had she done her “job” of breeding two sons, visiting children’s hospitals, posing for official pictures, staying out of the limelight except when wearing really ugly hats to Ascot and ignoring her husband’s personal life - she’d have been the ideal princess. But she thought that maybe she should get treated with respect, enjoyed the company of celebrities, and she picked “troublesome” causes like AIDS instead of childhood leukemia.
I don’t buy the Queen being happy about Diana’s death. She seems to have a good relationship with her grandsons - how could she be happy to see those boys lose their beloved mother?
If anyone was hated by the royal family, it was the Duchess of Windsor. (And possibly the Duke as well). The Queen Mum hated her like poison, believing that the stress of being king drove her husband to an early grave, and never forgave Edward VIII for abdicating. She blamed Wallis Simpson for it.
Diana paled in comparison.
“Down with the American whore!”
Marrying someone 13 years older to you; when you are twenty is never a good idea.
Eh? He took his wife’s family name so, yeah, he’s a Windsor, unless marriage counts for nowt these days. Anyway he’s still Harry’s grandaddy.
Because it got their however beloved, but neurotic/crazy mother out of those boys lives before she could do anymore damage. I think Diana would have been the type of possessive, attention-whore mother who has a melt down of nuclear proportions over her sons getting married.
What in the world would ever lead you to think that? I actually think she’d have gotten on well with Kate, and have no doubt that she’d have been beyond delighted to see her sons happy and in love. Yeah, she had a streak of troublemaker in her, but when it came to those boys when was she anything but a loving mother who made sure they grew up healthy and happy?
And I think she would have squashed Harry’s chav-esque behavior he was displaying a few years back. Or it wouldn’t have gotten started at all.
Prince Phillip has not taken his wife’s name. Ever since he renounced his Greco-Danish titles his surname has been “Mountbatten”. In fact Prince Charles & Princess Anne were born with that surname. Then when his wife became Queen his uncle, Lord Mountbatten, started boasting that the “House of Mountbatten” was on the throne which pissed off the Queen Mother. She convinced the Prime Minister (Winston Churchill) to advise the Queen to issue a proclamtion “confirming” that the royal family’s name was still Windsor. Which she did resulting in her children’s surnames (if they were to ever use them) changing to Windsor (leading to Prince Phillip’s famous comment about being “a bloody amœba”). She later decreed that her male-line decendants wound have the surname “Mountbatten-Windsor”.
Historically a queen-regnant’s husband does not take her surname (or more properly become a member of her house). Both spouses retaint their birth name/houses and the offpring either become members of the father’s house (which gains possesion of the relevant crown) or a new house is formed by combining their names. Queen Victoria remained a member of the House of Hanover (which Prince Albert did not join), but her son (Edward VII) was a member of his father’s house, Saxe-Coburg-Gotha. This house is still on the throne, but it’s name was changed to Windsor. Charles can change it when he becomes king (unless of course the Prime Minister objects).
It’s interesting that Fergie has turned out to be exactly what they feared Diana would become. But Di never really took it too far. She did get the blame for them entering a more modern definition of themselves, and I think it’s hogwash. The royalty was nearly dead and was fading quietly. She made them relevant again, and her eldest son is their last hope. IMHO of course.
Charles was never popular and would never have become so; Di was just a startling contrast against which to view his faults.
I do think that EII has lived a life of duty and stoicism, and expects the same of others. Profiles often blame Charles’s cold early life on his Father’s educational decisions, but I’m not sure he’s solely to blame. I think deep down EII is iron and asbestos. She does seem to be becoming more emotional in her old age though. Will’s wedding was the first time I’ve ever seen her looking fondly at anyone. Phillip too strangely enough. They both looked more openly happy than I had ever expected to see them.
Mind you, this is all the opinion of an American who mostly just wants to see what hats everybody will be wearing. I haven’t researched the thing or even seen the movie. But these are my impressions.
I assumed Septimus was alluding to the theory that Harry was a product of one of Diana’s affairs, and not Charles’ biological son. I don’t believe this as Harry looks so much like his paternal grandfather.
I got the same from the film as Cliffy. Apparently the Queen liked it.