There has been a lot of discussion lately about removing Andrew Mountbatten‑Windsor from the line of succession. Outrage, opinion columns, and endless hot takes make it sound as though centuries of royal tradition are about to be rewritten in a single news cycle.
The truth is less dramatic and more revealing. Andrew may technically remain in the line of succession, but the conversation around him tells us far more about the monarchy than it does about any one man. The institution is both fiercely protective and surprisingly fragile. Ironically, the very actions taken to preserve it are the same ones that expose just how vulnerable it really is.
Yes, Andrew remains eighth in line. Titles gone. Duties gone. Reputation shredded. Yet technically, he is still a royal heir, a dusty footnote except when he makes headlines.
And that is the point. This story is not really about Andrew. It is about the monarchy itself. An institution already struggling for relevance has shown how easily it can dispose of one of its own. One misstep, one liability too many, and centuries of ceremony suddenly become optional. The machinery that sustains tradition is the same machinery that can quietly dismantle it.
Andrew’s place in the line of succession is purely academic. He will almost certainly never be king. But his sidelining sends a clear message. No member of the royal family is untouchable. Not the spare. Not the heir. Not the institution as a whole. The monarchy has demonstrated that it can remove pieces of itself when convenient, and once that precedent exists, it becomes difficult to argue that anyone is immune.
There is also a risk here. If the public can be persuaded that one royal is expendable, it becomes easier to ask why the rest should be spared. In attempting to protect itself, the monarchy has revealed how thin the protective layer really is.
And let’s be honest. This is shaping up to be one hell of a tell all. Books, documentaries, podcasts, and confessions are inevitable. Andrew is unlikely to be the final chapter. He is simply the most visible example of an institution willing to sacrifice its own to survive.
So yes, Andrew remains. The monarchy endures. But the real headline is larger than either of those facts. In showing how easy it is to remove one royal, the institution has exposed its own fragility.
The crown can protect itself, but it can just as easily devour itself.
It seems every few days brings another breathless headline: Prince Harry still estranged from his father and brother! As if we’re all waiting for a surprise reconciliation, when really, we’re five seasons deep into As the Tiara Turns.
Harry packed up the tiaras (and the rescue chickens) years ago and moved to Montecito, but the royal rift refuses to retire quietly. According to reports, Harry and King Charles aren’t on speaking terms, and Prince William remains perpetually incandescent with rage. Some say Harry wants to reconcile. Others say Charles is too busy. William, for his part, has “moved on." Or so the palace press machine would have us believe.
Let’s face it: we all have a “Harry” in the family. The cousin who dramatically declares they’re done with everyone. The one who talks about auras and essential oils. The grandmother who wears white to your wedding. The aunt who writes one too many memoirs. And of course, the sibling who moves halfway across the world, burns down the group chat, and then wonders why they’re not invited to brunch.
You’d think that after all this time, the royal family might want to be the bigger institution, especially now that grandchildren are involved. Maybe have their private secretaries sit down over tea and hash things out. “We’ve all said things we didn’t mean… especially in our memoirs.” Then drop a few carefully curated family photos into the Christmas broadcast to remind everyone: we remember, but we don’t forget.
Sure, the rest of us don’t have castles to hide in, but we do know how to smile through gritted teeth at family dinners, crop someone out of the holiday card, or “accidentally” forget their gift. Most families don’t need a press release when Uncle Peter feels snubbed, but when you're royal, it’s all tiaras, tabloids, and well-timed leaks to The Times.
To be fair, comebacks do happen. Just look at Aunt Fergie and Camilla, two women once seen as royal outliers, if not outright exiles. Fergie, after the toe-sucking scandal and various headline-grabbing ventures, was firmly shown the palace gates. Camilla spent decades as the unwelcome “other woman,” vilified by the press and perpetually compared to Diana.
And yet, here we are. Camilla wears the crown with the calm of someone who’s already survived the worst of it. Fergie may not be back on the official royal roster, but she’s got Windsor access, the late Queen’s corgis, and a front-row seat to the family awkwardness. As for Prince Andrew? Well… every royal family needs a redemption arc no one asked for.
Because in Windsor tradition, forgiveness is always possible, provided it's strategic and mutually beneficial.
After centuries of wars, abdication crises, and tragic royal deaths, we may have finally arrived at the moment that brings the British monarchy to its knees.
We knew this day would come.
It wasn’t Wallis Simpson. It wasn’t Diana’s BBC interview. It wasn’t even Prince Andrew’s catastrophic denial over Pizza Express. The monarchy survived Charles’ tampon-gate, Fergie’s toe-sucking scandal, and 1992’s official annus horribilis. But this. This might finally be too much.
A video of Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, twerking to induce labour may be the thing that pushes the institution off the edge for good.
The monarchy has weathered worse, at least on paper. King Henry VIII disposed of inconvenient wives. Charles I was executed. Edward VIII gave up the throne for love and questionable judgment. Even the glossy dramatization of The Crown didn’t kill it off. But apparently, a royal spouse dancing in a hospital delivery room, under fluorescent lights is where the pitchforks come out.
The video, shared to celebrate Princess Lilibet’s fourth birthday, shows Meghan dancing in a hospital room, smiling, swaying, and, by her own account, trying to get labour started. It was personal. It was confident. It was, depending on who you ask, either charming or catastrophic.
For some royal watchers, this was confirmation that the mystique is well and truly gone. The monarchy depends on carefully curated distance, ceremonial grandeur, and the illusion that the Windsors are somehow not quite like the rest of us. Twerking does not support this illusion.
If anything, it yanks the curtain off entirely.
Perhaps it was meant as a playful gesture. A private moment shared publicly to reclaim the narrative. Instead, it triggered renewed scrutiny and shifted the conversation to what truly matters: how many twerks does it take to bring down a thousand-year-old monarchy?
The monarchy has endured civil war, family feuds, wiretaps, leaks, Netflix. Now it must face the most fearsome force of all: viral content.
It survived Cromwell. It may not survive the comment section.
Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.
Royals have been having babies for hundreds of years. At this point, it takes something truly unexpected to earn a footnote in the royal history books. All of the royal firsts appear to be covered. Queen Victoria took chloroform during childbirth. Prince William was the first direct heir to be born in a hospital. We’ve had decades of royal mothers exiting maternity wards in carefully chosen outfits, smiling politely for the press while quietly recovering from what was, let’s be honest, global interest in a deeply personal event.
Just when we thought the tradition had been perfected. Along comes Meghan. Twerking. In hospital. To bring on labour.
The video, shared on social media to mark Princess Lilibet’s fourth birthday, shows a heavily pregnant Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, dancing with enthusiasm in a hospital room, hoping to get things moving. No doubt in 10 years, Lilibet may look back and cringe, wondering why she couldn’t have had a nice, boring royal birth like the rest of her ancestors.
Royal watchers were, predictably, horrified. Shocked. Aghast. Much of the response was openly derisive. But I, for one, think Meghan should be hailed as a trailblazer. A history-making royal birth we’d never have heard about if not for the famously privacy-seeking couple letting a little daylight in on the… ahem… magic.
The result of sharing the video has been, predictably, more speculation. If Meghan was trying to troll her detractors, it worked, though not quite in her favour. Yes, she did it her way, possibly as a not-so-subtle response to years of whispers about her pregnancies. The conspiracy theories, the scrutiny over her belly, the surrogacy accusations. None of it put to rest. If anything, the video just gave people more to pick apart. A hip thrust and a smile can only do so much.
Whether Queen Victoria would have approved is difficult to say. It’s just as likely she wouldn’t have known what twerking was and would have had to be told by a footman.
In any case, Meghan has become the first royal mother to twerk her way into the historical record. Not through tradition or duty, but by dancing to induce labour. It’s not the usual route to royal legacy, but it appears to have worked.
A trailblazer? A cautionary tale? Depends who you ask. But one thing is clear, future royal mothers have a very tough act to follow.
Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.
In the lead-up to King Charles III’s throne speech in Ottawa, the mood was part royal visit, part political litmus test. No one knew exactly what he’d say, only that every word, pause, and brooch would be scrutinized.
With Trump dangling annexation like a minor formality, Canada found itself in a strange moment. Sovereignty suddenly trended, and the throne speech became more than tradition, it became a statement. The question: Would he address the elephant in the room? And how?
Spoiler: he did. Not with a full-bodied rebuke, but with something far more effective, measured, pointed language.
The speech stayed within royal decorum (no mic drops, no off-script flair), yet some lines landed heavy. “Many Canadians are anxious about a drastically changing world,” he said. “Fundamental change is unsettling. Yet this moment is an incredible opportunity. An opportunity for renewal.” Not a battle cry, but far from filler.
This wasn’t the Prince of Wales of spider-letter fame, the passionate commentator on modern architecture and alternative medicine. This was King Charles III, fully aware of the stage, cameras, and geopolitical undercurrents.
Restraint, yes, but no passivity. You could hear it in how deliberately he spoke of Canada’s identity and autonomy. This wasn’t routine throne speech, it was a message built to travel. And travel it did: across news feeds, headlines, and group chats of people who hadn’t cared about the monarchy in years. Trump, in his own way, united Canadians like hockey finals do. Suddenly, those who never cared about sovereignty were sitting up straighter.
Even the line about Canada building a coalition of like-minded countries sharing values, believers in cooperation and open exchange, sounded less like policy and more like a diplomatic side-eye. Subtle, pointed, unmistakable.
Everything from his tone to his tree planting was loaded with meaning. Exhausting? Absolutely. But that’s the role. He played it, then flew home.
If anyone came for royal fireworks, they likely left disappointed. But for those paying attention, this was a quiet yet firm assertion, delivered with unmistakable Canadian clarity. He didn’t write the speech, but he knew exactly how to land it.
Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.
If you haven’t already heard, King Charles III and Queen Camilla are dropping by Canada. For a quick pit stop, just long enough to remind the world we still have sovereignty. Because nothing screams “strong, independent nation” quite like having the King pop in for 48 hours to say, “Yep, we’re still here.”
His visit has been hyped as rich with symbolism. But let’s be honest: what Canadians will really be watching for is the raised elbows. Not the usual royal wave, all delicate wrist flicks and finger flutter, but the full elbows-up move: arms bent sharply, elbows thrust high and proud, forearms jutting out like tiny barricades.
Picture the scene: photojournalists scrambling, cameras firing away. T-shirts, souvenirs, commemorative magazines and coins in production. Breathless commentary as royal watchers obsess over every micro-movement. Historians analyzing what this means for Canada's future. Hockey analysts and body language experts called in to judge: Did Charles nail the elbows-up? Did Prime Minister Carney brief him properly? Should we have sent Mike Myers instead?
Because elbows up is more than just a physical stance. It’s a diplomatic dance move. A way of saying, “We appreciate the gesture, but hands off the maple syrup and the moose.” It’s the polite, Canadian version of a “Back off," delivered with just enough stiff upper lip to confuse the Americans.
The King and Queen will visit the Senate chamber to make a historic throne speech, plant a tree (because what else do you do when you want to say, “We’re here, but we’re leaving soon”), make polite small talk with select individuals and watch a street hockey game. Meanwhile, Canada will do its best to look excited without breaking into a full parade, after all, this is a 48-hour visit, not a hockey final.
Some might wonder why the monarchy still bothers. Isn’t this visit just a fancy postcard from the past? Maybe. But in a world where political chaos is the new normal, the sight of a man and a queen showing up just to say “we’re watching” has its own odd charm.
And when it comes down to it, if elbows up is the way we say “We’re still sovereign, thanks very much,” then Canada might just have found its next great national pastime.
So get ready, Canada. Keep your elbows sharp, your politeness sharper, and maybe practice your own elbows-up move for when the cameras come around. Because this royal visit? It’s less about allegiance to the crown and more about staging just enough pageantry to remind the world Canada is not for sale.
Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.
The funeral of the Queen was bound to be a historic event. But the funeral pales in comparison to the series of last moments leading up to today. Since she died eleven days ago, there have been multiple moments. The ones that finally bring it home to you that she is gone.
Each of these moments has affected people differently. For some it was the moment they saw the coffin. For others, queuing at Westminster Hall. Who could forget the corgis awaiting their mistresses arrival? Or the sight of the Queen's fell pony, Emma, with the Queen's headscarf on the saddle?
Seeing 1926-2022 for the first time. The blankets of flowers, the marmalade sandwiches, the Paddington bears, the thoughtful tributes. The last official portrait. The stoic members of the royal family, sharing their grief with the world. The stoicism slipping in public. Royals being human. Imagine that.
The touching official statements. The King's first speech. The historic vigils of the Queen's children, and grandchildren. The meaningful jewels worn in tribute, the wreath and note on the coffin. The editorial cartoons. The sight of Prince George and Princess Charlotte at the funeral service, starting a lifetime of sharing their grief with the world.
Leaving Balmoral for the last time. Last stay at the Palace of Holyrood House. The last flight. The last stay at Buckingham Palace. The last arrival at Windsor. Hearing her styles and titles read aloud. Watching the Lord Chamberlain break his wand of office and place it on her coffin. The removal of the regalia atop her coffin. Her duty done. The last sight as she descended into the royal vault, finally at peace, away from the public gaze. Reunited with those she loved and who loved her.
I can't pinpoint the exact moment it hit me. Maybe taking these moments together is enough. Watching the funeral, the interminable drive to Windsor. It felt like this moment would go on forever. Watching these moments all week, it was almost too much. Now that it is over, it may never be enough.
What is the moment it finally hit you that she was gone?
Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.
As details emerge regarding Queen Elizabeth II's funeral arrangements, one question on many minds is where she will be buried. While Westminster Abbey, the site of her wedding and coronation, as well as the final resting place for previous monarchs, would seem fitting, St George's Chapel, Windsor, has been the preferred location for royal burials. Sovereigns from several dynasties are buried there. While many historical royals are buried in the vault, it is now used as a temporary location to keep coffins until ready for burial at Royal Burial Ground at Frogmore. Or another location, such as the interment of Prince Philip's mother, Princess Andrew of Greece, who was initially interred in the royal vault in 1969 before being transferred in 1988, to the Mount of Olives convent in Jerusalem. The longest royal to stay in the vault is Prince George, Duke of Kent, who died in 1942. It wasn't until 1968, after his wife's death, that he was removed for joint burial. Some members are sent directly to the private burial ground instead. The Duke of Windsor is the only former monarch to be buried there.
Public domain
In Queen Elizabeth's case, it was very unlikely she would be buried in the private grounds. It is speculated she will be interred in the King George VI Memorial Chapel. This chapel is not specified on the official Royal Family website. As of this writing, the arrangements end with A Committal Service will then take place in St George's Chapel.' But many expect the King George VI Memorial Chapel to be her final resting place. When the Queen's father died in 1952, he was temporarily kept in the King George III vault, until a new chapel was built. The King George VI Memorial Chapel was the first new addition to the St George's Chapel since 1504.
It was designed by George Pace, with stained glass windows by John Piper and Patrick Reyntiens. There were design challenges in applying a 20th century design that worked with the existing architecture. Over 200 drawings were created for the building and furnishing of the chapel. The final design was inspired by the spirit of late-Gothic. Located off the North Quire Aisle, the chapel took nine months to construct and was completed in 1969. It was designed in two parts, the outer Liturgical Chapel and the inner Mortuary Chapel. The chapel is tiny, but it also looks simple. According to the designer, this is not so. The Queen and Queen Mother took a personal interest in the planning and design, which leads me to believe it was planned as a final resting place, not only her father, mother and sister, but also the Queen and Prince Philip in time.
By VCR Giulio19 - Own work, CC BY-SA 4.0, Wikipedia
The stonework of the chapel is Clipsham stone, and a polished Purbeck stone floor. The wrought iron gates are inspired by the ones at Edward IV's tomb. The chapel is entered through an arched opening, down three steps, and the ceiling is painted with a network of gold leaf tracery. A black marble ledger stone, reminiscent of the one for Henry VI, marks the entrance to the vault. The names of George VI and his consort, Elizabeth, are inscribed and bronze medallions of the King and Queen are mounted on the wall. The king's medallion was made by William Reid Dick, and the Queen Mother's by Michael Rizzello. A Caithness stone slab commemorates the interment of Princess Margaret, who had died in February 2002. Her ashes were interred at the same time as her mother's coffin in April of that year.
The chapel is furnished with a small stone altar, on top of the altar stands a modern Celtic cross donated by Princess Margaret. The altar has two silver candlesticks on each side. These were presented to the Queen by the Royal Air Force to mark the fiftieth anniversary of its foundation. As Prince Albert, King George VI was certified as a RAF pilot in 1919.
King George VI was privately transferred to the chapel in March 1969. The chapel was dedicated on Monday, March 31st 1969 with a service attended by the Queen, the Queen Mother and other extended royal family members. You can watch footage on the day of the dedication below.
The message on the gates of the entrance is from the poem, "God Knows', by Minnie Louise Haskins. The King quoted this poem during his 1939 Christmas broadcast.
'I said to the man who stood at the gate of the year;
Give me a light that I may tread safely into the unknown.
And he replied:
Go out into the darkness and put your hand into the hand of GOD,
That shall be you better than a light and safer than a known way.'
Prince Philip, who died in 2021, is likely, currently still in the royal vault, with preparations made to inter him with the Queen. George VI referred to himself, his wife and two daughters as 'The Firm'. If the Queen and Prince Philip are interred in the George VI chapel, they will all be together again.
Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.
The Queen died on Thursday, September 8th. At 96, it wasn't a shock. She had looked frail in photos and public appearances in recent years, no doubt having slowly gone downhill after the death of Prince Philip. Those around at the time of the death of her father in 1952, unlikely to provide perspective in how to grieve someone like her. Someone many of us have never met, but who has been a constant in our lives. The only monarch many of us have ever known. We are in a less deferential time, experiencing the event different from previous generations. What would people in Queen Victoria's day make of hearing the news via social media alert?
On Thursday morning I awoke to the news she was under medical supervision, but thought little more about it. She is frail, but she will rally. This is the person who recovered from Covid. She wasn't going anywhere. A photo of her at Balmoral, meeting her latest Prime Minister had her looking frail, but still with that spark. Truth be told, I thought she would outlive us all. We would celebrate her 100th birthday in due course and with concern, while admiring her all the more for it.
Later that day, when I heard she died, I was surprised. When I heard Prince Charles referred to as The King, I was even more surprised. This was new and would take some getting used to. From this point forward we would have three kings. It is unlikely we will ever say God Save the Queen at any point in our lifetimes. Depending on whether Prince George's first child is a girl, it could be 100 years from now, or more. Who could have known that Wednesday, September 7th would be the last time saying it would apply?
Watching her coffin leave Balmoral for the last time brought it home to me. Watching coverage of her cortege as it made its way to the Palace of Holyroodhouse, the official residence of the British monarch in the Scottish capital. It will remain in Scotland until Tuesday, when it will make the journey back to London by airplane. We will watch again as it disembarks. Another hearse, another journey, lying in State in Westminster Hall, then her State funeral, before she makes her final journey to St. George's Chapel Windsor. A life, and a death under global scrutiny.
I'm not a monarchist by any means. I had a respect for the Queen, but truth be told, I've long thought she should retire. No one could argue she has not carried out her duty. The longest serving monarch in British history, she had earned the right to rest, and enjoy her life. When Prince Philip retired from public life in 2017, I thought he had the right idea. No one thought any less of him for doing so. Nor would anyone have thought any less of her. It was difficult to watch her grow frail before our eyes. No one could avoid the reality. It was only a matter of time before we would face a new one.
On September 19th we will say our final goodbye. Finally, a long earned rest, free from the gaze of the public eye.
Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.
As an avid follower of the British royal family, I have seen more than my fair share of exhibits about Diana, Princess of Wales. I have seen one at Althorp, her ancestral estate, Kensington Palace, Cleveland, Ohio, an elegant exhibit in Hudson’s Bay, Toronto, as well as a truly terrible one at the Design Exchange in Toronto, where I found one of Diana’s famous dresses, (auctioned in 2013 for $80,000 CDN), roped off in the corner of a gift shop.
Almost 25 years after Diana’s death, it is hard to believe that there is sufficient interest to warrant an exhibit. Judging by the gift shop dress, you could say the interest peaked a while ago. This is not the case with Princess Diana: Accredited Access, where it combines two of my interests, photography, and the royal family.
A photography exhibit in as lovely a setting as Casa Loma befits a princess. True, it’s not Buckingham Palace, but it beats a sparse meeting space with video footage on loop. Built in 1914, it is a Gothic Revival mansion and garden in Toronto, which is a popular wedding and film production venue. I highly recommend a visit if you haven’t already done so.
The exhibit features the photos of two generations of royal photographers. While the photography can stand on its own, the audio tour is an absolute must to follow along. Narrated by the photographers, they discuss each photo, the context it was taken, how they took the memorable photos, and the impact. A masterclass if there ever was one.
In her time, Diana was arguably the most photographed woman in the world, she knew how to use the camera to make an impact. One famous photograph of Diana shaking the hands of an AIDs patient, without gloves, did more to dispel myths behind transmission, than any campaign ever could. The imagery is that powerful.
The exhibit was set throughout the historic mansion, winding your way with life sized portraits of Diana, it makes you feel you are in a special place. The life-sized portraits add an impact, bringing you into the scene as no previous exhibit ever has for me. The audio tour wasn’t in chronological order, which makes for a disjoined journey. There is an art installation, inspired by royal millinery, which felt tacked on. Impressive but it felt disjointed without the connection to the previous exhibit. It ends, as all exhibits do, in an exorbitantly expensive gift shop, (sans famous dress). You don’t need to be a fan of Diana to enjoy Princess Diana: Accredited Access, but it helps.
Princess Diana: Accredited Access runs at Casa Loma from April 20, 2022, to June 12, 2022.
Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.
As with anything Harry and Meghan do, when they named their newborn daughter Lilibet Diana as a tribute to the Queen and Harry's mother, Diana, Princess of Wales, it lit up the media and royal twitter with the fury of a thousand suns. The Sussex's are now lawyering up. I've even waded into the controversy by firing up my blog again!
Lilibet is a name from the Queen's childhood, used by parents, late-husband, cousins, and close friends. Stories abound around the origin of the name. Her parents or grandparents gave it to her. Princess Margaret 'bestowed' it on her older sister because she could not pronounce it. In fact the nickname has a simpler origin, the Queen gave it to herself at 2 1/2 years old because she could not pronounce her own name. If she had known the nickname would set off a controversy 95 years later, would she have pronounced something different? Who knows the mind of a 2 1/2 year old.
Choosing the name for a royal baby can be fraught with complexities we mere mortals can only imagine. There's the fury of royal twitter, and potential global disapproval to contend with. In the oft chance the baby becomes monarch, a suitable name is required. No Apple, Dylan, North, Chicago or Dream, please. Instead, we have names imbrued with royal history that sound heavy, stale and old fashioned. The Queen herself was named after her mother. In 1926, her father, the Duke of York (later King George VI), wrote to his own father, King George V, hoping 'there won't be a muddle over two Elizabeths in the family'. Everyone seems to have survived until now.
Because family tree names get recycled, sometimes royals share them. In some cases, whether they like it or not. In Queen Victoria's day, she insisted that her female descendants bear the name Victoria and male line descendants, Albert. Although Albert is still around, the name Victoria is infrequently used. It did not come back into rotation until the 1966 birth of Princess Alexandra's daughter, Marina Victoria Alexandra Ogilvy. The next appearance was in 1990, with the birth of Princess Eugenie Victoria Helena. In its place we have Elizabeth. Apparently you can never have enough Elizabeths in the family!
Lilibet Diana is not the first royal baby to share a name with another family member. And she won't be the last. Here are some examples of royal children, including siblings, who have shared names without causing any controversy or lawsuits whatsoever.
Alexander
Prince George Alexander Louis of Cambridge
Alexander Patrick Gregers Richard, Earl of Ulster
Prince Richard Alexander Walter George, Duke of Gloucester
James Alexander Philip Theo, Viscount Severn
Alexander Charles Ogilvy, son of James Ogilvy
Christian Alexander Mowatt, son of Marina Ogilvy
Edward
Prince Edward Antony Richard Louis, Earl of Wessex
Prince Andrew Albert Christian Edward, Duke of York
Prince Edward George Nicholas Paul Patrick, Duke of Kent
Lord Nicholas Charles Edward Jonathan Windsor
Elizabeth
Princess Anne Elizabeth Alice Louise, Princess Royal
Princess Charlotte Elizabeth Diana of Cambridge
Princess Beatrice Elizabeth Mary of York
Zara Anne Elizabeth Tindall
Lady Louise Alice Elizabeth Mary Mountbatten-Windsor
Lady Sarah Frances Elizabeth Chatto
Lady Davina Elizabeth Alice Benedikte Lewis
Lady Margarita Elizabeth Rose Alleyne Armstrong Jones
Lena Elizabeth Tindall
James James Alexander Philip Theo, Viscount Severn
James Robert Bruce Ogilvy
Nicholas
Prince Edward George Nicholas Paul Patrick, Duke of Kent
Lord Nicholas Charles Edward Jonathan Windsor
George Philip Nicholas, Earl of St Andrews
Charles
Prince Charles Philip Arthur George, Prince of Wales
Prince Henry Charles Albert David, Duke of Sussex
Prince Louis Arthur Charles of Cambridge
David Albert Charles Armstrong-Jones, Earl of Snowdon
Charles Patrick Inigo Armstrong-Jones, Viscount Linley Lord Nicholas Charles Edward Jonathan Windsor
Philip
Prince Charles Philip Arthur George, Prince of Wales
Prince William Arthur Philip Louis, Duke of Cambridge
James Alexander Philip Theo, Viscount Severn
August Philip Hawke Brooksbank
Lucas Philip Tindall
George
Prince George Alexander Louis of Cambridge
Prince Charles Philip Arthur George, Prince of Wales
George Philip Nicholas, Earl of St Andrews
Prince Edward George Nicholas Paul Patrick, Duke of Kent
Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.
This dress was worn for the film premiere of An Accidental Hero in 1993 and official events, such as the state banquet for President Mario Soares of Portugal. One of her first official events after the separation announcement in December 1992.
Lot 17 is described in the Christie's auction catalogue as A Dinner Dress of Eau-De-Nil Green and Cream Silk Crepe by Catherine Walker.
The bodice and long sleeves of this dress are of broad green and cream horizontal stripes. Off-the-sholder, the dress has five jewelled paste buttons placed asymmetrically on the bodice. There are matching buttons on the sleeves. The skirt is slim, with a slit to the knee.
Although she won rave reviews for this dress, there were also some critics who noted, because of her over developed shoulders, she should have covered them up. It is also interesting to note that the earrings she is wearing are made of the same buttons from the gown.
It was sold to Shari Graham for $34,500. She owns this dress as well as my favourite, the cream and salmon one. She has used both her gowns to raise money for charities such as Habitat for Humanity, Meals on Wheels and the American Heart Association.
Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.
The royal family has a long association with the military. Diana herself held several honorary military appointments in Australia, Canada and the United Kingdom, including being Colonel-in-Chief of the 13th/18th Royal Hussars (Queen Mary's Own). She was forced to relinquish these positions upon her divorce. Occasionally she would incorporate military elements into her outfits, with somewhat mixed results. However, that is not the case here.
It is described in the Christie's auction catalogue as A Red and Black Dinner Dress Inspired by the Military by Catherine Walker
The bodice is sleeveless with a high neck in Hussar-style, trimmed with black braid and rouleaux. The long skirt, of pleated scarlet silk crepe, is trimmed with scarlet silk soutache brand and rouleaux where it meets the bodice.
In May 1995 it was worn at the Royal Albert Hall for Red Cross concert to commemorate VE Day. The red and black colours of the British Red Cross, which Diana was Vice-President until she resigned in July 1996. She continued to support the organization, notably during her humanitarian trip to Angola in January 1997.
It was Lot 12 at the Christie's dress auction in 1997, where it sold for $36,800 to the Meijiro Fashion and Art College in Tokyo. They also own the Victor Edelstein Victorian inspired ballgown and Yuki Torimaru dresses. The College displays them on special occasions and, from time to time, lend them to Kensington Palace for fashion exhibits.
Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.
Worn at a ball at Althorp, her family's ancestral estate in 1979, there was little to indicate the global star she would become. At the time of her engagement she had 'one long dress, one skirt and one smart pair of shoes.' When Madame Tussauds requested a dress for her wax figure, Diana gave them this one. You can view the figure here. It was not part of the Christie's auction, but it is still interesting to see how Diana's style evolved from Lady Diana Spencer to the fashion icon who continues to intrigue to this day.
This off the shoulder, 'Deb gown' was designed by the Couture House of Regamus. It has a nylon lace overlay, with velvet ribbon detail and a matching scarf. Diana and her mother found this dress in the 'French Room' at Harrods. Regamus was a popular brand for aristocratic ladies making their start in fashionable society.
In 2005, Madame Tussauds auctioned this dress. A bidding war ensued between Kensington Palace and an American nurse, Wendy Rogers-Morris, who is an avid collector of Diana memorabilia. Surprisingly, Kensington Palace lost out. This dress has been exhibited at the Dresses of Inspiration exhibit and at Kensington Palace.
I cannot locate auction information for Ms. Rogers-Morris to the current owners, Museo de la Moda, in Santiago, Chile. If you visit their Instagram, you can see a short clip of them working on the dress.
Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.
When I look at this dress I can't think of anyone other than Grace Kelly. It is understandable as it was inspired by her look in the Alfred Hitchcock film, To Catch A Thief. So, it is hard to separate it from Grace Kelly and see it as a 'Diana dress'. Like many of her dresses, it was designed by Catherine Walker. It was lot 6 at the Christie's auction and is described in the auction catalogue as: A Classic Evening Dress of Chiffon:
Inspired by the classical simplicity favoured by Grace Kelly, the dress is strapless, of pale blue silk chiffon, intricately draped and tucked with a crossover yoke. There is a matching chiffon stole.
It was worn at the 40th Cannes Film festival in January 1987 and July of the same year to the premiere of Superman IV. She also wore it to the opening of Miss Saigon in 1989 and official portraits by Terence Donovan.
It has a bit of an interesting auction history. In 1997 it was bought by AMC/WE Tv network for $70,700 along with two others. The network wanted to take their dresses on a shopping mall tour titled 'Princess Diana: Dresses to Die For.' Understandably, after Diana's tragic death, they quickly changed the title to 'Legacy of Love.' It has been exhibited in a variety of venues, including Dresses for Inspiration, as well as Kensington Palace.
In 2007, the network tried to sell it on eBay for charity. It went from Christie's Auction House, the premiere auction house dating back to 1766, to EBAY, purveyor of Diana dolls and other royal tchotchkes.
Luckily, it did not sell. With a starting bid of $300,000, either it wasn't the right audience or people just knew something so glorious deserved better. Instead it was sold by Julien's Auction House in Beverley Hills in 2011 for $137,500. The current owners are the Museo de la Moda in Santiago, Chile.
Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.
There is a strong tradition of Royalty in Scottish life. For generations, the royal family has enjoyed time at their estate in Balmoral and the Queen spends much of her summers there. At Balmoral, she finally gets the chance to relax and enjoy time away from the spotlight. During that time, the royals dress in their finery and hold an annual Ghilles Ball. This dress was made in 1990 for Scottish dancing and I can well imagine Diana, in this dress, trying to keep up with the Queen Mother while doing the Eightsome reel. But in February 1991, she also wore it to the Guildhall to support the The Royal Marsden Hospital Cancer Centre.
Lot 33 was designed by Catherine Walker and is described in the auction catalogue as A long dress for Scottish Dancing.
The long-sleeved black velvet bodice is piped in scarlet velvet with a square neckline. The waist and cuffs are cut to a point as is the bust-line. The full skirt is of green black and red silk in a plaid design, worn over a black organza and black tulle petticoat embroidered with tulle flowers.
It was originally purchased at the Christie's auction for $46,000 by Maureen Rorech Dunkle, who bought 14 dresses at the auction. She created a Dresses For Humanity tour to raise funds for charity. In 2011 she declared bankruptcy and the dresses were auctioned at Waddington's Auction House in Toronto. However, only four of the dresses sold. The remaining 10 dresses were auctioned by Kerry Taylor Auction House in 2013.
This dress is not included in the catalogue for the Kerry Taylor auction, which leads me to believe it was one of the dresses sold at Waddingtons. I'm not certain who purchased it in Toronto but I believe the current owner is Museo de la Moda in Santiago, Chile.
Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.
Diana wore some beautiful dresses during her 1992 trip to India, including a magnificent Mughal beaded gown no one got to see! Although not as colourful, this dress is just as stunning. It was worn with the Spencer tiara, to attend a banquet hosted by Vice President Dr. Shanka Dayal Sharma at the Nizam of Hyderbad, India in February 1992. She also wore it again in March 1992 to the premiere of Hear My Song.
It was lot 39 in the Christie's Auction. It is described in the auction catalogue: A Long Evening Dress of Black Silk Crepe and Diamante Paste Embroidery:
In Empire style, the bodice is embroidered in a manner inspired by Mughal embroidery.The black silk crepe skirt is gently gathered at the bodice.
Catherine Walker, the designer of the dress, offers further insight,
This dress was commissioned for an official visit to India. The more research I did for this dress the more I became lost in the rich complex pattern of Indian culture and its hybridization with the British influence of the Raj. I knew the Princess was intending to wear the Spencer tiara, and my daughter Marianne found a beautiful book for me on the decorative art of India, in which I came upon a sandalwood and ivory inlaid casket whose design seemed to compliment the tiara perfectly. The technical design of the embroidery drew upon this traditional pattern of marquetry, and the flatness of the stones is also particular to Indian jewellery.
It was originally bought at the Christie's auction by Kate McEnroe, head of American Movie Classics channel/WE Tv for $42,500. They purchased two other dresses at the sale, and acquired a fourth one privately.
They bought the dresses based on the romance Diana inspired. The network took their dresses on a shopping malls of America tour, with the tagline "Princess Diana's tour of Dresses to Die for". When Diana died, they renamed the tour 'Legacy of Love'. In 2007, the dress was included in an Auctioned Dress Reunion exhibit held at Appleton Museum of Art in Ocala, Florida and later in a Diana, Dresses of Inspiration exhibit.
It was subsequently auctioned in 2011 by Julien's Auctions in Beverly Hills for $144,000. The owners are the Museo De La Moda in Chile. They have a reciprocal relationship with Historic Royal Palaces and have lent this dress, and several others, to Kensington Palace exhibits.
Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.
Diana never failed to impress with the clothes she wore on official visits. She wore two stunning evening gowns during her visit to France in 1988. This is one of them.
Described in the auction catalogue as 'An Evening Coat-Dress by Catherine Walker:
The dress is full-length and double breasted. I tis of white lace, embroidered overall in flowers of blue silk and white sequins. The lace embroidery is mounted on white shantung and the dress is lined with white silk. It has self-covered and sequinned buttons. The cuffs are also trimmed with buttons.
Princess Diana specially commissioned this dress for her trip to France, where she wore it during a dinner hosted by the Minister of Culture, at the Chateau de Chambord. She also wore it to the Royal Opera House in June 1989.
Catherine Walker gives more insight into the design:
I chose white lace for this commission because it was a texture common at the court of Versailles, but I tailored it into a modern shame. Given the Princess's sense of panache I really do not know anyone else who could carry off this long sheath of glittering, icy embroidery in quite the way she did.
During this event she also met HSH Princess Caroline of Monaco (Later HRH Princess Caroline of Hanover). Interestingly enough, Princess Caroline, (daughter of Princess Grace of Monaco) had been a speculated bride for Prince Charles in the late 1970s. In 1983, Diana attended her mother's funeral. It was her first solo trip as a member of the royal family.
Lot 53 at the Christie's auction was purchased by Barbara O'Neill from Georgia for $27,600. In 2011 it was sold by Kerry Taylor auctions to the Museo de la Mode in Chile. The museum boasts the largest private collection of Princess Diana and Marilyn Monroe clothes.
Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.
Sources
Christie's auction catalogue: DRESSES from the Collection of Diana, Princess of Wales
Catherine Walker - An Autobiography by The Private Couturier to Diana, Princess of Wales
Zandra Rhodes designed 10 dresses for Diana, this pretty dress was included in the Christie's dress auction in 1997. Lot 47 is described in the auction catalogue as A Mid-Length Dinner Dress in Pink Silk Chiffon.
The fabric printed in white on pink silk, with a design of pearl necklaces and lace. The gathered neckline has a pointed collar, edged with simulated pearls, glass beads and paste with pink satin cording. The skirt, pleated to below the hip has a pointed hem, echoing the pattern on the collar, edged with pearls and glass beads and trimmed with paste in lozenges and circles.
The Princess wore this dress to a State Banquet in Kyoto during her official visit to Japan in 1986, where she is photographed eating with upside down chopsticks. She wore it about three or four times: July 1985 at a Torvill and Dean party, Charleston Manor, Seaford Britain in aid of the London City Ballet and the Purcell school in July 1987.
At the original Christie's auction, it was sold to Melissa Scripps for $27,600. It was displayed as part of Suzanne King's Pink Ribbons Charity Exhibits, Dresses for a Cause at the Appleton Museum of Art in 2007, and as part of Kensington Palace's exhibit, Diana, Fashions and Style in 2008. The dress apparently passed through a few hands before it was subsequently auctioned in 2011 through Kerry Taylor Auction house for $35,000. The new owners are Historic Royal Palaces where it is now part of their Ceremonial Dress Collection.
Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.
So far, this is possibly the only dress whose colour has been influenced by the World Cup Championship.
Lot 65 in the Christie's auction is described as 'A Long Evening Dress in Ivory Silk Crepe, by Catherine Walker'
The one-sleeved dress is embroidered in pink sequins and woven with gold thread to give the effect of shadowy flowers. The neckline is trimmed with sequins.
It was worn during an official visit to Brazil in April 1991. The colour of the sequins was a safe one. Catherine Walker noted in her autobiography,
The Princess of Wales took great care to honour the traditions and feelings of each country that she visited. Shortly before this visit to Brazil, the national football team had lost to Argentina in the World Cup and...in view of these circumstances we should not design anything in green, yellow and blue, which were the official colours of the team and definitely not in blue and white, which were the colours of the Argentinian football team.
Diana wore it a second time, in August 1991, to the premiere of Stepping Out. She attended the after party where she was photographed laughing and chatting with Liza Minelli.
Maureen Rorech Dunkle paid $35,600 for the dress, and as with all of the dresses she purchased, this was a strategic bid,
"From a geographic standpoint, I wanted most of the continents represented in my collection, and this was the first selection the Princess had worn in South America."
This dress, formed part of her popular Dresses for Humanity tour. In 2010, all of the dresses went up for auction in Toronto. This was a controversial sale and only three of the dresses met their reserve prices. The ten remaining dresses, including this one, were once again auctioned in 2013, this time at Kerry Taylor Auction House. Historic Royal Palaces bought two of dresses, paying £78,000 for this one and a dramatic black velvet Bruce Oldfield dress. Both now form part of the Royal Ceremonial Dress Collection.
Thank you for enjoying this article. If you use the information for research purposes, a link to credit the work I've put into writing it would be appreciated.
