Kate & William

[kareng57]

Ok, now I have a question, if you don't mind:

When Charles and Diana divorced, I recall there being a formal statement (I forget by whom) saying, "There is no reason why Diana cannot still become queen." 

How could that be?  I realize that if she and Charles had stayed married, and he eventually became king, she would be queen, but obviously not in the same way that Elizabeth is.  But how could she still be queen if she and Charles were divorced?  And would it only be possible if they did not remarry - to other people?   

I know it's a non-issue since Diana's gone, I just have always been curious about it.  It would be pretty strange, I would think, to have a King, Queen, and "king's wife." 

Perhaps that was when the separation-agreement came through?  That's all I can think of.  If they were still technically married if/when he succeeded to the throne, it might have been a non-choice.

However, I do believe that it was the Queen who recommended the separation and subsequent divorce.  It couldn't have been easy for her, but she is a pragmatic woman and she must have realized that the situation was hopeless.

[kglory]

Thanks all for the history points - very interesting!

[Paper Roses]

Ok, now I have a question, if you don't mind:

When Charles and Diana divorced, I recall there being a formal statement (I forget by whom) saying, "There is no reason why Diana cannot still become queen." 

How could that be?  I realize that if she and Charles had stayed married, and he eventually became king, she would be queen, but obviously not in the same way that Elizabeth is.  But how could she still be queen if she and Charles were divorced?  And would it only be possible if they did not remarry - to other people?   

I know it's a non-issue since Diana's gone, I just have always been curious about it.  It would be pretty strange, I would think, to have a King, Queen, and "king's wife." 

Perhaps that was when the separation-agreement came through?  That's all I can think of.  If they were still technically married if/when he succeeded to the throne, it might have been a non-choice.

However, I do believe that it was the Queen who recommended the separation and subsequent divorce.  It couldn't have been easy for her, but she is a pragmatic woman and she must have realized that the situation was hopeless.

You know what?  That's probably what I'm thinking of.  Maybe that was said when the officially announced that they would separate, and it meant she could become Queen even though they were separated. 

Thank you!

[DoubleTrouble]

Ok, now I have a question, if you don't mind:

When Charles and Diana divorced, I recall there being a formal statement (I forget by whom) saying, "There is no reason why Diana cannot still become queen." 

How could that be?  I realize that if she and Charles had stayed married, and he eventually became king, she would be queen, but obviously not in the same way that Elizabeth is.  But how could she still be queen if she and Charles were divorced?  And would it only be possible if they did not remarry - to other people?   

I know it's a non-issue since Diana's gone, I just have always been curious about it.  It would be pretty strange, I would think, to have a King, Queen, and "king's wife." 

Perhaps that was when the separation-agreement came through?  That's all I can think of.  If they were still technically married if/when he succeeded to the throne, it might have been a non-choice.

However, I do believe that it was the Queen who recommended the separation and subsequent divorce.  It couldn't have been easy for her, but she is a pragmatic woman and she must have realized that the situation was hopeless.

You know what?  That's probably what I'm thinking of.  Maybe that was said when the officially announced that they would separate, and it meant she could become Queen even though they were separated. 

Thank you!

I believe that it could also be that if Diana was still alive when William became king (after Prince Charles), he could have give her the title of Queen Mother or Queen Dowager since Prince Charles had been king. However, if Prince Charles died before taking the throne then William could not give Diana that title because Prince Charles had never been king. Again, it all goes back to the title the husband (or former husband) holds at death. In the case of divorce it's a bit more muddled but given Diana's popularity, I don't think anyone would have objected.

Sounds like a very interesting book, I just requested it from the library!  Thank you.

Don't forget to request Sex with Kings as well, it was her first book written and with both you get both sides of the issue

[stargazer]

Going back to the ring for a moment, not only is it gorgeous and looks like it was practically made for Kate, and not only was it a sweet gesture from William in rememberance to his mom, but I heard it was also a good political move as it would not be smart to spend 30,000+ pounds on a flashy ring with the state the economy is in.

[djinnidjream]

On another note:

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/40273760/ns/today-today_people

I kind of sympathize with the brides to be- they've had their dates booked for months and will now face a logistical nightmare if the happy royal couple chooses the same date as them.

I don't have any sympathy for brides who are worried about competing with the glamour of the event though, or the "I'm the princess that day" stuff- that's just silly.

I hope that whatever date Will and Kate choose, the venues in that area will work with the other brides to either give them a different date or work out the security nightmares.

[rose red]

I agree Charles and Diana never should have married, but I also believe it was she (and that marriage) that forced the royal family kicking and screaming into the modern age.  It's made it possible for William to marry Kate (a commoner) and he's not pressured into marrying someone more "appropriate."

Of course I could be waaaaay off  .

[DoubleTrouble]

On another note:

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/40273760/ns/today-today_people

I kind of sympathize with the brides to be- they've had their dates booked for months and will now face a logistical nightmare if the happy royal couple chooses the same date as them.

I don't have any sympathy for brides who are worried about competing with the glamour of the event though, or the "I'm the princess that day" stuff- that's just silly.

I hope that whatever date Will and Kate choose, the venues in that area will work with the other brides to either give them a different date or work out the security nightmares.

I have to admit I was a very laid back bride but even I would be close to freaking out and throwing tantrums if they got married on the same day & in the city as me for the very reasons the article states. I do feel sorry for the brides and I would hope that William & Kate pick a date soon so people can start working around their date. Should be interesting to see how it plays out.

[hardia]

Yeah, for me it wouldn't be about sharing the date (there's only 365 days in the year ... you're going to have to share with someone!) or being the only princess on the day or whatever ... I like to think that my wedding would be more important to my loved ones, even if they were interested in the royal wedding.  But I can't even begin to imagine the logistical issues of having a royal wedding in the same city on the same date as mine.  Traffic, crowds, security ... it would be a nightmare.

I read that they were supposed to announce the date and location today, so hopefully they will soon and people can begin doing what needs to be done to adjust and adapt.

[Browyn]

On another note:

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/40273760/ns/today-today_people

I kind of sympathize with the brides to be- they've had their dates booked for months and will now face a logistical nightmare if the happy royal couple chooses the same date as them.

I don't have any sympathy for brides who are worried about competing with the glamour of the event though, or the "I'm the princess that day" stuff- that's just silly.

I hope that whatever date Will and Kate choose, the venues in that area will work with the other brides to either give them a different date or work out the security nightmares.

I have to admit I was a very laid back bride but even I would be close to freaking out and throwing tantrums if they got married on the same day & in the city as me for the very reasons the article states. I do feel sorry for the brides and I would hope that William & Kate pick a date soon so people can start working around their date. Should be interesting to see how it plays out.

In the UK are most weddings held on a weekend day like they are in the US?  Maybe if they have their wedding on a week day it will interrupt fewer other weddings.

[kareng57]

On another note:

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/40273760/ns/today-today_people

I kind of sympathize with the brides to be- they've had their dates booked for months and will now face a logistical nightmare if the happy royal couple chooses the same date as them.

I don't have any sympathy for brides who are worried about competing with the glamour of the event though, or the "I'm the princess that day" stuff- that's just silly.

I hope that whatever date Will and Kate choose, the venues in that area will work with the other brides to either give them a different date or work out the security nightmares.

I have to admit I was a very laid back bride but even I would be close to freaking out and throwing tantrums if they got married on the same day & in the city as me for the very reasons the article states. I do feel sorry for the brides and I would hope that William & Kate pick a date soon so people can start working around their date. Should be interesting to see how it plays out.

In the UK are most weddings held on a weekend day like they are in the US?  Maybe if they have their wedding on a week day it will interrupt fewer other weddings.

That was my thinking as well - I believe most Royal weddings are on weekdays.  However, if they were to pick, say, a Tuesday then hotels would probably be full the prior weekend anyway.

[It's good to be Queen]

Hmmm .... appropriate wedding gifts.... perhaps a lovely sterling silver pickle fork or a set of finger bowls?  They will need service for how many.... 96 or so?

[DangerMouth]

On another note:

http://today.msnbc.msn.com/id/40273760/ns/today-today_people

I kind of sympathize with the brides to be- they've had their dates booked for months and will now face a logistical nightmare if the happy royal couple chooses the same date as them.

I don't have any sympathy for brides who are worried about competing with the glamour of the event though, or the "I'm the princess that day" stuff- that's just silly.

I hope that whatever date Will and Kate choose, the venues in that area will work with the other brides to either give them a different date or work out the security nightmares.

I have to admit I was a very laid back bride but even I would be close to freaking out and throwing tantrums if they got married on the same day & in the city as me for the very reasons the article states. I do feel sorry for the brides and I would hope that William & Kate pick a date soon so people can start working around their date. Should be interesting to see how it plays out.

What, it's not like they'd have to hire out a venue. Don't all of their country estates come with their own chapels?

Can an English poster enighten me here?

[djinnidjream]

What, it's not like they'd have to hire out a venue. Don't all of their country estates come with their own chapels?

Can an English poster enighten me here?

It's not a question of venues but of hotel accommodations (I don't think there is room in the castle for everyone), and the fact that they will be getting married in the heart of London- a logistical security nightmare- esp if they choose to do the open carriage ride thing like other royals have done.  That means street blockage and no parking, probably for miles and miles.  That and vendors possibly getting large orders for that wedding and letting little ones fall by the wayside (yes, not the other Bride's problem, but it could happen). 

[Everlee]

Someone on the other royal wedding thread said the date is April 29.

So I just put the Sex With Kings book on my library hold list since I'm a history major and it sounds interesting.  Except I accidentally typed in Sex With Kins.  I realllllyyy hope my library doesn't keep track of their searches or they'll think I'm some kind of creeper...