Charles Spencer to publish memoir of Diana

[OccasionalHope]

Could be interesting.

Yes - I know, but I’m just saying that William’s words were wise in any case. M, though she really ought to have known better herself, does seem to have been very ignorant about what her life as a royal would be like. If the’d taken their time she would have had more opportunity to learn that a) the press will go for you, b) yes,you WILL need to walk behind Catherine always, so get used to it and c) you can’t just bunk off royal garden parties because you’re easily bored.

And you won’t get paid for it (in the sense she meant) and no, people won’t be always asking if you’re OK.

Could there become a Mumsnet copy whereby someone buys it , reads it and gives it onto another poster and then they pass it on, imagine how many people will read it yet he will have only got the money once, why put money into the coffers of someone who is so shallow.

I think the biggest issue for M is that she relied on him, understandably, to educate her on what royal life was life.

He didn’t, either through choice or ignorance, didn’t teach her that the assumptions she had (and some of them weren’t outrageous - thinking that they only curtseyed to each other in public for example isn’t ridiculous) were incorrect.

I’ve said before on here that he badly let her down, and I think it’s really quite telling that the woman he did get down the aisle appears to have been the one that new the very least about the inner workings of the royal family. If that was deliberate on his part it’s absolutely appalling. And if it was accidental (and I do think with their comments about Archie’s title when he was born Harry just doesn’t know a lot about his own family) he owes her massively apologies for allowing his arrogance to make her think she didn’t need guidance from Sophie as he had it covered.

I hope the marriage last but they are both impetuous and impulsive, never a good mix. Im both and reckless (Hence my username), dh isn’t, luckily and calms me down. In my youth and still occasionally (in my 60’s) I still have that streak. It isn’t always for the best. I do at times regret stuff.

It’s no surprise imo that both William and Harry, married who they did. One who wouldn’t rock the boat, and the other who would. Had their mother not died in such tragic circumstances, who knows? I think they’d have married different women imo.

@JustAnotherWhinger

i agree with your comments- H does not come out if it well, however we interpret things.

I’ve criticised M above for her lack of interest in cultural things bipartisan H’s “!’m a thicko, me!” act has also come back to haunt them. His history master at Eton expressed amazement at his total lack of interest, even ignorance, about his own family history. That’s forgiveable in a stroppy teenager but pathetic for a grown man whose work and status is completely bound up with it.

The level of pig- ignorance about say, the Letters Patent, which they both displayed on the OW interview and which led them to accuse the Queen of withholding titles for their children because they were mixed-race, was no joke.

Boasting about being ignorant as a 14 year old is one thing but to actually be an idiot when you’re in your mid-30s and supposed to be doing an official job is pathetic.

Oh God! I don’t know where these typos are coming from! Sorry.

What’s “bipartisan” doing in that last post? 😳

@CoffeeCantatai know people will say they she should have done more research, but it’s absolutely natural that she would believe what he was telling her about his family and how they work.

If she had posted on here saying that she’d got engaged to a man who worked for his family firm and he’d totally misled her on how things work and she was expected to defer to his Granny, Step-mother and sister in law everywhere, not just at work functions, people would have told her to run a mile on the basis he tried to mislead her.

The weird thing was that he didn't seem to know! Complaining that the family is hierarchical? Really? He just comes across as so ignorant.
She was given a folder of information, but obviously relied too much on Harry, a mistake.

From what everyone has worked with her says, you can’t tell M anything. She knows it all. She was going to walk in and show the RF how it should be done!

I promised myself I would never comment on H and M again on Mumsnet (having been sucked into a COVID vortex of threads when they first fled) here I am commenting.

I agree re Harry. If I were KCIII I would be appalled I'd raised such an entitled kid who didn't fully understand the workings (and costs) of the infrastructure around him (which would have fed into decisions on his security, once he'd exited) as well as important things like barriers between KCIII and government departments who make decisions about their funding etc (again, security.) The idea that an adult who had grown up in the family could believe King could just override any internal decision making they may undertake, is gobsmacking.

I'm sure he told Megan all sorts. (Though: if it sounds too good to be true...)

I don’t really know on the “if it sounds too good to be true” front with a lot of it.

Things like “Dad and Granny treat me and Willian equally in private” doesn’t sound outlandish.

The issue with the title for Archie was also very clearly, imo, a total misunderstanding of why the then-Cambridge kids were all given the HRH Prince/ss titles. Thinking that they were given them later because their grandad was going to be King so to save changes they got them from birth is kinda logical. If that was the reason then the assumption that H & M’s child would be treated in the same way has a logic to it.

However, in the Oprah interview it was clear that neither of them clocked that William’s children were titled to save the absolute outcry about the sexism if a first born daughter was going to be future Queen, but her future younger brother would have a better title.

I think M’s biggest failing in this whole thing (prior to any reactions and selling out etc) is that she completely trusted him, and he’s absolutely clueless about how his own family works.

Which also adds to it making sense that she thought his confidence was a good thing, rather than utterly misplaced.

On the title, it's hard to know if they didn't understand about the rules (which are very clear, and Archie did have a title, just not the one they wanted) or thought it would play to their advantage on the PR front to position it in a different way.

OR most likely: that the rules would simply be bent for them and letters patent issued so he got the Prince title straightaway.

Very convenient that it was linked to skin colour.
"whaaaat?!"

To be clear @JustAnotherWhinger those are two separate things.

Yes, the rules of succession were changed so that it was by birth order not by sex.

But the rule that only William's children would have the HRH and prince/princess titles because they are the great-grandchildren of the monarch AND the grandchild and child of the direct heir, on my understanding, predates this.

Then they all move up with PC became KING and they are all grandchildren rather than just greats of the monarch.

I can't remember where I read this, but I did at the time somewhere.

The thing is that QEII was on the throne for so long relative to other monarchs this sort of situation never arose before, I believe. The theoretical then hit reality and was perceived (by some) to be unfair.

I mean Victoria might have had great-grandchildren but I think they would have been covered under the prince princess thing by virtue of marrying into other families.

Maybe Lucy Worsley will give me an internship some day (unpaid.)

The rule at that point, from the 1917 LP’s, was that William’s eldest son (the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of wales) would be HRH Prince. All other children of William would be Lady/Lord, same as Harry’s children.

However, the change from primogeniture meant that there could be the situation that had William’s first child been a girl she’d have been Lady, despite being the future queen, whereas her first younger brother would be HRH Prince. So while Kate was pregnant it was changed so that all children from William’s marriage were HRH Prince/Princess from birth.

Oh, I see. Got it. You'll get the internship!

That chopped a bit of my sentence.

William’s eldest son would be HRH Prince from birth, whereas siblings, even a future Queen born first, would be Lady until Charles became king.

But the other part I think is true, that until Harry's children were grandchildren not greats, they would never have been p or p-cess.

So if they didn’t realise why all of William’s kids got it early, and thought it was just because as grandkids of the future king they got it, you can see why they’d think Harry’s kids would also get it.

when in fact William’s kids got it so that the sexism in the 1917 LPs didn’t cause a storm

Yes.

Yes, none of Charles grandkids bar George and could have been HRH or Prince/Princess until Charles was king.

meghan did say in the Oprah interview about the other grandchildren being given it early so I do think that one was something they thought all the grandkids of Charles were being given, clearly not realising why it had been done as it had.

But I mean - it's one thing for outsiders not to understand the ins and outs of this - I find it hard to believe it wasn't explained to people actually affected by it and I do believe it was explained.

It's not that hard to get your head around.

Reading the Times articles on the DM trial and the costs - which I find sooo interesting from the perspective of the legal advice angle - did Sherbourne just carry on because they insisted? Or was PH et al misled?