Tuesday, November 18, 2014

Royal Beloveds in the Times of Scorpio

Shaking out and re-airing an archived post which still continues to attract a hit or two.

Sun in Scorpio days of mid-November have often had significance for Britain's royals - not always positive significance. The outcome of a fairly recent mid-November date of royal significance seems to have been a happy one: the announcement of the engagement of Prince William and Kate Middleton in 2010. They have since married and produced one son with another child on the way.

On 20 November, in 1947 the then Princess Elizabeth married Lieutenant Philip Mountbatten in Westminster Abbey. They first met when the Princess was just 13, and the story goes that it was "love at first sight". According to news gossip, through following decades, the marriage has not always been trouble-free, but it has lasted - probably more due to royal protocol and the Queen's determination than anything else, or so I'd guess.

On 20 November, in 1992 a fire broke out in Windsor Castle, one of the three principal official residences of the British monarch. The fire badly damaged the castle causing over £50 million worth of damage.

On 22 November, in 1914,
the man who was to become what many people considered to be the love of Princess Margaret's life was born: Group Captain Peter Townsend. (Not to be confused with Pete Townsend of The Who!)

Townsend was equerry (personal attendant) to King George VI, father of Princesses Elizabeth and Margaret.

For astrology buffs there's Australian astrologer Douglas Parker's interpretation of the natal charts of Princess Margaret and Group Captain Townsend, with the charts available at a linked pdf file.

Princess Margaret's love affair with Townsend was superseded by other stories and scandals in later years, so may have been forgotten or perhaps never known by any stray younger readers. Here are the bare bones of it taken from a website HERE
Townsend was a war hero, sixteen years the Princess's senior and married, although he was soon to be divorced. In her grief over her father’s death, Margaret turned more and more to Townsend for consolation. He too had suffered a loss when the King died.

The relationship had apparently started long before the King’s death and would probably have stayed under the radar, if Princess Margaret hadn’t been caught out brushing a piece of fluff off Townsend’s lapel during the coronation.

Princess Margaret desperately wanted to marry Townsend, but there were several obstacles, the most pressing being that he was divorced. Despite the fact that he was the injured part, divorce in aristocratic and royal circles was still a big taboo in the fifties. As the Queen was the Defender of the Faith and the Head of the Church of England, having her sister marry a divorced man was unthinkable.

Margaret was told, erroneously it turns out, that not only would she have to renounce her place in the succession, but that she would be stripped of her royal title, her civil list allowance and forced to live abroad in exile for the rest of her life like her Uncle. In 2004, it was revealed that Margaret and the Queen were deliberately given misinformation by the government. While Margaret would undoubtedly have had to renounce her place in the succession, she could have kept her royal title and the money. The reason for the subterfuge was that even though the abdication was almost twenty years prior, the wounds were still open. As the Queen had just ascended the throne, it wouldn’t do for her younger sister to be seen marrying a divorcé, no matter how well-connected.

After a two year separation, Townsend had been posted abroad to Belgium as an air attaché and only sporadic meetings, Princess Margaret agreed to give up any thought of marrying him. Despite their love for each other, Margaret had no concept of what it would be like to be anything but a member of the Royal family. The idea of living in exile, on his salary, was too much to be borne. Margaret simply wasn’t the type to have to do her own washing up, and cooking. It was one thing to play at it, knowing that you could also call the servants if something went wrong, another to have that be your way of life.

On 6 May 1960 Margaret married photographer Antony Armstrong-Jones, later given the title Lord Snowdon. She reportedly accepted his proposal a day after learning from Peter Townsend that he intended to marry a young Belgian woman, Marie-Luce Jamagne, who was half his age and bore a striking resemblance to Margaret.

Princess Margaret and Lord Snowdon were divorced in 1978. Ironic? Prevented from marrying her first, and possibly best love because of his divorce. I wonder how the Princess's life would have unrolled had she been allowed to marry Group Captain Townsend?

Townsend died in 1995, Princess Margaret in 2002.


Sonny G said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Sonny G said...

Ican only hope for all the future Royals sake that marrying someone because you're "supposed to" has been abolished.
Surely they see now how many lives were lived in abject misery and in today' world can be put asunder with the scrolling of a pen:)
I always thought Prince Charles was pitiful ugly and then he married Camilla and overnight he got much better looking, even though his outward featured had not changed- it was his happy heart shining thru them that caused the change. I mean seriously, he'll never be Clark Gable- but still the difference is nothing short of a miraculous transformation.
Just goes to show what LOVE will do for you. Its totally verifiable by simply looking at his before and after photos.
Charles is a scorpio sun and Camilla a Cancer sun as was Diana, but two totally different women. I'm sure there are major differences in the 2 ladies charts

mike said...

I've viewed a fair number of documentaries about the royal family, their consorts, affairs, misters and mistresses, gay & straight. It's unfortunate that their position requires intellectual, sexual, financial, and romantic considerations of societal acceptance regarding their personal entanglements. They seem like regular folk...LOL.

Princess Margaret was an ego force to be reckoned, from what I've seen and read: jealous of Elizabeth and determined to take center stage...aka "Bitch". It's difficult to know whether she and Townsend had their secret liaisons post separate marriages, as Prince Charles managed with Camilla. Margaret's marriage to Snowden was thought to be a sham:

"The marriage began to collapse very early and publicly. Various causes may have been behind the failure. In 1953 Margaret had been dissuaded from accepting the proposal of Group Captain Peter Townsend. On her side there was a penchant for late-night partying, on Snowdon's, an undisguised sexual promiscuity. ('If it moves, he'll have it', was the summing up of one close friend). To most of the girls who worked in his Pimlico Road studio, there seemed little doubt that Snowdon was gay or bisexual; to which he himself responded, 'I didn't fall in love with boys — but a few men have been in love with me'".

I'm not enamored with the royal family and I can't comprehend why they exist, except to drain the British economy, but I understand the need for the commoners to have ancient, traditional, expensive puppet(s) to both revile and adore.

Twilight said...

Sonny ~ With hindsight it's easy to see that the Charles/Diana combo was a tragedy waiting to happen, one way or another.

Charles, as you say, is no oil painting. Maturity (or Camilla and happiness at last) have softened his look a lot.

I'm not a royals fan at all, but at times, in the UK, it was difficult not to find oneself interested in their goings on...it all seemed something like a living soap opera!

Twilight said...

mike ~ Tradition, tradition, tradition - that's all it is. I'm no royalist myself, but it was difficult, when living in the UK, to ignore it all totally.

Regular folk? In some ways, perhaps, in others - about as "regular" as the Koch Brothers, or Rockerfeller, or the Pope. The royals at least have little, or no, power to screw the people as corporations are doing in the USA - apart from the money they regularly receive, of course.

They ensure tourists will continue to gaze at their "stuff" read about their doings, and visit their castles, so they do have a little value to the nation.

The public knows only a fraction of what actually goes on in Buck. Palace and Windsor Castle. Locals in the environs of Windsor, I understand, have various salty tales to tell.