It would also depend if she had remarried. If she had, it's likely she would have lost the title and reverted to Lady Diana if her husband had no title, or take on his title if he did.
- Status
New to Tattle Life? Click "Order Thread by Most Liked Posts" button below to get an idea of what the site is about:
She would still have been Diana, Princess of Wales while Kate would still be HRH The Princess of Wales. Catherine of Aragon after being widowed and before marrying Henry VIII was The Dowager Princess of Wales; George III's mother was also a Dowager, his father dying when Prince of Wales.
The first name, followed by the title usually indicates a divorcee though modern dowagers often prefer it. In the days of frequent divorce, there may be several ladies with the same title and the use of the first name differentiates. For example, Princess Margaret, Countess of Snowdon while her ex-husband's wife was the Countess of Snowdon; she is now the dowager though may prefer the use of her first name while there is currently the divorced Serena, Countess of Snowdon (though I have no knowledge of the current marital status of the two ladies). See also Sarah, Duchess of York as a divorcee as opposed to HRH The Duchess of Edinburgh/Kent/Sussex/Gloucester.
It's almost as if the papers are trying to generate engagement and clicks to sell advertising space or something.
The Sussexes' inability to take a right turn now is a direct result of the Sussexes having taken too many wrong turns, not because the papers are just doing what the papers always do. The papers didn't trap them -- they trapped themselves.
They wouldn't print it if we didn't keep reading it. Drama sells.
Katy Perry, Lionel Richie and Andre Bocelli are headliners? What connection do they have to the British Royal Family and the UK?
Same with Diana Ross. I think it’s headline names tbh.
Lionel Ritchie is definitely something to do with the Prince’s Trust and I think Katie Perry has been an ambassador for something Charles is involved with. Don’t know about Andrea Bocelli but he sang at Eugenie’s wedding so there is something there.
Apparently Katy Perry is an ambassador for the British Asian Trust, so does actually have a connection to Charles.
With that said, I don't think there needs to be a connection for the performers, but the fact that we feel like there should be underlines the lack of clear theme or real point to the concert. Is it to celebrate the coronation? Then I'd expect connection to the event from the performers. Is it to provide a bit of a way to give back to the populace? Then I'd expect them to pay for bigger or more current names. I don't feel like there's a clear reason other than it seemed to go down well for the jubilee.
Ah yes, I remember. Such a random choice for an ambassador.
I think she's KC favourite of all time
I think there need to be a connection, especially as this is a coronation. We are the only country to have one and it should be celebrated as an event for the British and commonwealth people. Not have second rate American acts. It’s like if the headliners for Trump or Biden’s inauguration weren’t American. There would be an uproar.
I doubt most people will get the relevance of KP performing, unless the connection is announced e.g. Katy Perry, ambassador to bla bla
I believe the King Mother was suggested.obviously when William was on the throne.
Which would have been wrong on just about every level.you could think of.
Firstly because the Queen part of Queen Mother comes from the title of the actual mother, who will then also be Queen Dowager (Queen Mary was Queen Mother twice) not the fact it’s a daughter who is Queen. I guess because the longest serving Dowager Queen who was known as Queen Mother did have a daughter as Queen, the meaning became blurred (Also when the Queen came to throne Queen Mary was still alive and Queen Dowager, so calling her mother Queen Mother differentiated between the Old Queen and the potentially 2 Queen Elizabeths. I think you have to go back a long way to find another time when there were 3 overlapping Queens)
So, if Diana was to be known as anything it would be Queen Mother, because King Mother as a designation doesn’t actually exist … which she couldn’t be because she would not actually have been Queen.
She would just have remained Diana, Princess of Wales unless she remarried or unless William reinstated the HRH and/or she was given a title in her own right.
New smile added corrination , it's a bit big but nevermind 
corrinationLovely ... I like it!
That That as usual
I think there was a Princess Mother in the past at some point.
I wonder if Princess Muna of Jordan has any additional title? She's in a similar position as Diana would be as the divorced wife of the previous monarch where there is a Dowager Queen but is the mother of the current monarch. Queen Noor is very obviously absent from the Jordanian court (though the hoohah with her son wouldn't help) but Princess Muna has an honoured place alongside Queen Rania (and the soon to be Crown Princess and future queen Rajwa - royal wedding on 1 June!).
Could she " just" have been styled Princess Diana without any extra title provided she had not remarried?
---
corrination
---
Thank you for this link..I've ordered the mug as a keepsake. May be worth something in a hundred years!
corrination- Status