May 31, 2011

My first memory of Lady Diana

It was the day of the announcement of the engagement. They both looked so much in love and I truly believe that. She looked so happy and she talked about how they met "in a plowed field". Prince Charles saying he was amazed that she is taking me up on this. I still remember that going she is so kind  I was 9 years old. What is your first memory seeing Diana.

Princess Diana

On July 1, 1961 Diana Francis Spencer was born. This year would have been her 50th Birthday. So for the next month till her birthday we at Tracey's Blog. Will celebrate her life and how she changed the British Royal Family.
Let's celebrate her life and not her way she left the world. God Bless the life of Diana Princess of Wales!

May 27, 2011

Royal Month

After Ireland & Obama: Royal News Roundup

It’s been a very busy and successful two weeks for the Royal Family.  We saw Her Majesty make a historic visit to the Republic of Ireland — the first monarch to do so in 100 years.  This week, the Royal Family hosted a state visit for US President Barack Obama. Coming after Prince William & Catherine’s royal wedding in April 29, it caps a month of glory for the monarchy.  A fine, fine month it was indeed!

Trooping the Colour
  • June 11 (Saturday): Trooping the Colour, celebrating the Queen’s ceremonial birthday. It will be extra special as she turned 85 this year. Many members of the Royal Family expected. Expecting Prince William to be on a horse for the parade, and Princess Catherine to make an appearance with him on the balcony for the fly-past.
  • June 12 (Sunday): The Duke of Edinburgh’s birthday celebration.  Prince Philip turns 90.  A service for the royals at St. George’s Cathedral followed by a reception at Windsor Castle.  That afternoon, Prince William & Prince Harry play polo against each other for the Sentebale Polo Cup.
  • June 13 (Monday): Order of the Garter Ceremony.  Expect the Queen, along with Prince Philip, Prince Charles, Princess Anne & Prince William in full velvet robes and feathered hats.

May 19, 2011

Prince William and Catherine Revive the Cambridge Legacy

by Victoria “Tori” Martínez

Prince William's new title Duke of Cambridge carries 350 years of royal history and all of the hope, heritage, sentiment, misfortune and even scandal that usually comes with such a legacy.

Before the wedding of Prince William to Catherine Middleton, speculation over what royal title the Queen would grant the Prince was rampant. While some put their money on Duke of Cambridge, others thought Duke of Clarence might be the Queen's choice. Personally, when I heard the latter mentioned, it seemed highly unlikely to me that the Queen would give her grandson a title that was last held by the ill-fated Prince Albert Victor, Duke of Clarence and Avondale, who died in 1892.

Prince Eddy, as he was known, was the prematurely-born first child of The Prince and Princess of Wales (later King Edward VII and Queen Alexandra). Despite being second in line to the throne (as Prince William, of course, is now) life did not smile on Prince Eddy. As a young man, he was rumored to have been a patron of a male brothel on Cleveland Street in London. Not long after, a certain Mrs. Haddon accused the Prince of fathering her son whom she had named Clarence. Although neither incident was ever "proven," they certainly did not do much for the Prince's reputation, either during his life or after.

After several failed attempts to find a suitable wife for the Prince, an arrangement was finally made between Prince Eddy and his cousin, Princess May of Teck. Before the union could be made, however, the Prince died. (Princess May, as we well know, went on to marry Eddy's younger brother, Prince George, and they became King George V and Queen Mary.)

After this unhappy history, it's no wonder the Queen chose not to grant her grandson the title Duke of Clarence. That said, the title Duke of Cambridge has also had its bad moments in history, but it also holds a special connection to the Queen's beloved grandmother, Queen Mary, and even to Prince William’s late mother, Diana.

The last holder of the title was Queen Mary's uncle, Prince George, the only son of Prince Adolphus, the 1st Duke of Cambridge (fourth creation), who was himself the seventh son of King George III. Queen Mary's mother, HRH Princess Mary Adelaide of Cambridge, was Adolphus' daughter, which made Princess May a great-granddaughter of King George III. But because Princess Mary Adelaide, affectionately known as "Fat Mary," had married HSH Prince Francis of Teck, Princess May grew up as a mere "Serene Highness." This rankled the young woman, who was very proud of her lineage, but was treated as second-rate by her "Royal Highness" cousins. In the end, Princess May had the last laugh as Her Majesty Queen Mary.

Considering that much of Queen Elizabeth's young life was spent under the careful tutelage of Queen Mary and that she inherited many of her grandmother's greatest jewels, including the beautiful Cambridge emeralds, it's not too difficult to see how it would please her to pass that title to her grandson and, through him, to his new wife.

It would be hoped, however, that the title will grant the new Duke and Duchess of Cambridge better luck than past holders, especially the earliest ones: the Stuarts. The first three, all children of James Stuart, Duke of York (later King James II), died very young. The first use of the title was in 1660, when the first son of the Duke of York was styled Duke of Cambridge, but died as an infant before he was formally created with the title.

In 1664, another son of the Duke of York was officially created Duke of Cambridge in the Peerage of England, but he died as a very young child. The Duke of York's fourth son was created Duke of Cambridge in 1667 and, again, died in infancy. Ten years later, in 1677, the Duke of York tried again with his fifth son, styling him Duke of Cambridge, but with the same result as in 1660: the boy died as an infant without being officially created with the title.

Finally, in 1706, the third creation of the title was granted to an heir-to-the-throne who actually lived and made it to the throne. George Augustus, Electoral Prince of Hanover, and son of George, Elector of Hanover (later King George II and King George I, respectively), was given the title Duke of Cambridge when he became a naturalized British subject. When he became King in 1727, the title merged with the Crown until it was again given to Prince Adolphus in 1801.

This fourth creation died out with Queen Mary's uncle, Prince George, 2nd Duke of Cambridge, in 1904. The end must have been bitter to the Queen (then Princess of Wales) since it was associated with the private and royally unrecognized marriage of her uncle to an actress named Sarah Fairbrother, known as Mrs. FitzGeorge following her marriage, with whom he had five children (two before the marriage).

This was not the only embarrassment to the Cambridge legacy that Queen Mary had to endure. Her brother, Prince Francis, inherited on their mother’s death the rich bounty of the Cambridge emeralds, which had come into the family around 1818 when the wife of Prince Adolphus, 1st Duke of Cambridge, won the 40 or so cabochon emeralds in a charity lottery in Frankfurt.

These beautiful emeralds were ultimately made into several fine pieces of jewelry, including earrings and a necklace that were passed down to Princess Mary Adelaide. After the unmarried Prince Francis inherited them, he gave them to his mistress, Lady Kilmorey, who still had them in her possession when the Prince died unexpectedly in 1910. Deeply aware that these prized family jewels should not be in the hands of a former mistress, Queen Mary sent someone to retrieve them. As if to remove the stain, in 1911, the Queen had the necklace reset as a choker in the Art Deco style, and the jewels were eventually inherited by Queen Elizabeth II.

In 1985, Diana, as Princess of Wales, caused a sensation when she wore the Cambridge emerald choker, which the Queen had given her as a wedding gift, as a bandeau across her forehead because she was sunburned and couldn't wear it around her neck. The pictures of her wearing the Cambridge emeralds in this fashion as she danced with Prince Charles at a charity ball in Australia are singular in that the couple looks quite happy together.

Considering that the Cambridge emeralds are not Crown jewels, but personal property of the Queen and therefore within her gift, it is fun to think that perhaps the Queen will give them to the new Duchess of Cambridge. Like Diana before her, she would no doubt breathe new life into these historic jewels, just as the young royal couple has breathed new life into the centuries-old Cambridge title.


Victoria Martínez is author of “An Unusual Journey Through Royal History,” available on and

May 12, 2011

Horrible Film about the last minutes on Diana's life!

Can't they let Princess Diana rest in peace?

By A.n Wilson

Diana, Princess of Wales pictured a couple of months before she died a Paris car crash which also killed Dodi Fayed, son of Harrods owner Mohamed Al Fayed
Diana, Princess of Wales pictured a couple of months before she died a Paris car crash which also killed Dodi Fayed, son of Harrods owner Mohamed Al Fayed
This week, a sensationalist film with the title Unlawful Killing will be shown at the Cannes Film Festival. It’s directed by Keith Allen, best known as the father of the singer Lily Allen and as the appropriately villainous Sheriff of Nottingham in the recent TV Robin Hood dramas.
One of the selling points of the film is that it is prepared to break every taboo of decency by showing a photo of the Princess as she is dying.
Viewers in Cannes will be able to see her body moments after the Mercedes in which she was travelling with Dodi Fayed crashed in an underpass in Paris and as a doctor desperately tries to administer help.
Of course, a documentary film that said Princess Diana died as a result of a tragic accident is not going to be as exciting as one that repeats the old conspiracy theory that she was murdered as a cover-up by the so-called Establishment. 

The film overlooks the fact that British taxpayers spent £12 million in 2008 because Dodi’s father Mohamed Fayed refused to accept the verdict of two inquests.

After 250 witnesses had been called, not a shred of evidence was presented that made anyone believe the deaths were anything other than an accident.

Exciting as it might have been to suppose — as Mohamed Fayed ludicrously claimed — that the Duke of Edinburgh had somehow ordered a white Fiat to cause the Mercedes to crash, not one bit of evidence was produced to make the theory stand up in that six-month inquest.
The trailer for the film shows the U.S. comedienne Kathleen Madigan saying you have to take notice when a woman predicts she is going to be murdered and her death then happens exactly as she predicted.
When she was at a low ebb of unhappiness, Diana made several suggestions that Prince Charles, the Royal Family or the Establishment would like to kill her or lock her up in a mental hospital.
The most specific of these suggestions — and this is the one, presumably, to which Ms Madigan is alluding in the film — is that Prince Charles was tampering with the brakes of Diana’s car.
The fact is that she did not die in her own car. As three inquests made plain, she died because the driver of that car, supplied not by the Establishment but by the Fayed family who owned the Paris Ritz, was very drunk.
Various inquests found that the reason for Diana's Mercedes crashing was due to her drunk chauffeur
Various inquests found that the reason for Diana's Mercedes crashing was due to her drunk chauffeur
So, in answer to Ms Madigan, Diana’s death did not occur exactly as she had predicted.
In fact, I would question whether Diana predicted her own death at all.
She said these things in the depths of her misery when she felt her husband’s family hated her. And when relations were at an all-time low between her and her husband, she was probably right to say there were many in the Establishment who did wish she would leave the scene.
But that is a very different thing from predicting your own death, as this film claims she did.

It is one thing for her to have said these things when she was alive and feeling wretched; it is quite another for Keith Allen to come along almost 14 years after she died and advance his sensationalist film as a serious ‘documentary’.
He brings forward as witnesses such figures as Noel Botham, who makes his living selling sensational books about the Royal Family, and fanatical republican Stephen Haseler, a professor of government at London Metropolitan University.
In the film, Haseler makes the ridiculous claim that no judge would tell the truth about the death of Diana because judges have all sworn oaths of loyalty to the Queen.
Let me repeat: the French police and a French coroner — who had not sworn oaths of loyalty to the Queen — concluded that the reason for Diana and Dodi Fayed’s deaths was simple: Henri Paul, their chauffeur, was blind drunk.
This verdict was repeated by two British inquests. The cases were heard by coroners and not by judges who had somehow sworn to a royal cover-up.
This latest attempt to make a splash out of this spurious conspiracy theory is both cynical and cruel.
It comes just after the Royal Wedding, at which Prince William and Prince Harry acknowledged that their mother would have loved to have been present.
Diana would be proud of her two boys, Harry and William, who are adored by the British public
Diana would be proud of her two boys, Harry and William, who are adored by the British public
It comes after the passage of the years, which have brought healing, closure and, one would assume, feelings of forgiveness in all those close to the Princess.
When Diana first appeared on the public stage, in common with most people in the world, I was bowled over by her beauty and youth.
But when things came unstuck — in particular, when she appeared on a BBC Panorama programme spilling the beans about her marriage — I felt she was making a terrible mistake.
And, in the crude way of us journalists, I started writing unbelievably rudely about her.
The then Defence Minister Earl Howe said she was a ‘loose cannon’, and he was probably right — though he got a lot of stick for saying it.
Then she came to lunch at the newspaper where I worked and a few of us were lucky enough to spend a couple of hours with her. 
Over the years, I have dished out a lot of insults to public figures in newspaper columns  and the general response to offended dignity has been one of surly pomposity.
Charles and Diana pictured in 1992 - five years before the Princess of Wales' death
Charles and Diana pictured in 1992 - five years before the Princess of Wales' death
There was none of this about Diana. She immediately alluded to my various attacks on her  as if they were no more than jokes, and laughed merrily about them.
Not only was she a woman of melting beauty and overwhelming charm, she had perfect manners.
She won me round in two minutes and from that moment I became her ardent and unwavering champion. And I still am.
Very few people in history have the quality she possessed of being able instantly to communicate with everyone.
She had instantaneous crowd appeal. But everyone she met personally was also knocked for six by her charm. It was  not fake. It is particularly noxious to be resurrecting the nonsense about her being murdered in Paris.
The true legacy of Diana is not to be found in comments she made when she was in the desperate state of misery that marital collapse brings to any of us who have undergone it.
No, her real legacy, as she would have always been the first to say, is ‘her boys’, two delightful young men whom the British public have taken to their heart.
Their humour and lack of self-importance are recognisably Diana-like virtues.
They do not deserve, and nor do we, a film that shows their mother’s dying moments, padded out with a lot of nonsense by people who were not witnesses to the tragedy, who did not know her and who, frankly, have nothing to add to the sum of human knowledge.
When the divorce took place, many felt torn and took sides. Some of Prince Charles’s friends, obviously meaning the best for the man, made some cruelly ill-judged remarks about Diana.
But I suspect none of these remarks would be echoed today by the Establishment.
As the years go by, we can see she brought a tremendous brightness to public life.
The fact Prince William was so clearly at ease with his stepmother at his wedding shows to all of us that he and his brother have found what therapists call closure.
Their mother lives for ever in our hearts. But she deserves to rest in peace, and this hateful film, which is all lies, deserves to be cold-shouldered by every decent person.

May 10, 2011

Respect for the Royals

For the last couple months Prince William and his wife-to be shared their engagement with all of us. All the wonderful moments leading up to that glorious wedding on April 29,2011.  They asked us to give them privacy on their honeymoon. I am so with them on that, they gave us some great memories from their wedding. I will not show any pictures from their honeymoon on this site. Because I believe they are public people to a certain degree but they have private lives also.

New Controversial Diana Documentary Set to Screen at Cannes.

I  utterly find this disgraceful in so many ways. First showing a picture of someone's death is a painful thing for those that loved Princess Diana. Her sons suffered a terrible lost when their mother died on August 31,1997 and had to carry on with such grace and dignity. I hate when people  make money off someone death, I did not know Princess Diana at all but I admired her strength in her life. That is how I and many want to remember her not the last few hours of her life. I will pray for the people that made this film and think how they would feel if this was their mother, ex-wife, sister, and aunt and friend.