The Campbell’s gave protection to my family from the early 1600’s in Argyll, and are held in very high regard by us all to this day. The Duchess is a shining of example of elegance, that is sadly disappearing…..
Incorrect. Her father, George Whigham was a very wealthy gentleman. His family had been wealthy for over 200 years when she met the impoverished, Ian Campbell, H.G. The Duke of Argyll. His only income at the time was alleged to have been derived from sitting in The House of Lords. There may have been a small income from the Argyll duchy but it was in great difficulty when they met and constantly obliged to sell off it’s equities due to the lack of business acumen and irresponsible management of Ian Campbell’s father. The Clan Campbell seat at Inveraray Castle in Argyll was saved from dereliction by Margaret Whigham’s father, George Whigham, who paid for it to be filled with art treasures, saved from having it’s roof removed for taxation reasons and refurbished as only a part of what was a substantial dowry on his daughter’s behalf. On that basis of fact I find your extremely ignorant comment to be little more than thinly-glazed class war spite. There is not a shred of evidence for it whatsoever. On the contrary, Her Grace, Margaret, Duchess of Argyll contributed a very substantial amount of tax to the HM Revenue. She also spent considerably large amounts of her own money on saving a chaotic dog sanctuary and seeing to it that the impoverished woman who ran it and was in very great financial difficulties was rewarded by having her establishment upgraded into a first class animal sanctuary with a proper business infrastructure. She also saved The Argyll and Sutherland Highland Regiment from being dismantled as well as adopting two underprivileged children. I suggest that you get your facts straight before you make completely unfounded trolling comments. @@tashday9662
Fascinating, spirited woman who was born in the wrong century. She was years ahead of her contemporaries - her antics may have shocked back then, but no one would bat an eyelid nowadays.
I rarely focus on gender rights, or what is suitable for women vs. men. However, the duchess seemed to have been a true victim of what men are expected to do, demeanor of a "normal" man. Her demeanor was probably no different than many other women. It just became public. In the "a very British scandal" it frustrates me that she doesn't stand up more for herself. That she doesn't point out that she was the one supporting her husband, only for him to leave her investment in his estate to his son and not being the slightest reimbursed.
It would have been fairly useless exercise to seek reimbursement or compensation as the problem was not recognized by the courts until the Matrimonial Property Adjustment Act of 1970 whereby (roughly speaking) if one of the parties in the divorce has made substantial investment in, or contribution to the property of the other party then they are entitled to an equity share of the value of the said property. Today she would have had the Duke over a barrel !
Agreed, lousy, ill prepared interviewer who asked dumb, disrespectful questions and spectacularly failed to achieve any rapport with this fascinating, intelligent woman.
The Duchess's very prickly reaction to the early questioning, which she could easily have taken in her stride, slightly gives her away. The recent Claire Foy drama's attempt to make her sympathetic was trying to build bricks with straw.
She bristled with indignation at the rather vague question of her age, but purred like a kitten at the suggestion she was a virgin when she was married. However, if you read through her Wiki, it seems there are other opinions about that...
Idk.....I found Clare Foy did an excellent job portraying the prickly side. Could be that it was the polar opposite of her portrayal of the younger version of the beloved late queen, and the protagonist/antagonist that made it seem so. To me, anyhow. She is such an amazing actress, imo, but, I was shocked by her performance......in a good way. Kinda like Dakota Johnson in 50 shades. Lol. All that being said, I do believe that they attempted to portray her in a manner in which we could sympathize with, but it could possibly be more so an attempt to show her in a vulnerable manner, the person nobody really knew.....simply because all anyone ever knew of her was this shallow, vain, and callous exterior, along with the public shaming of her extra marital affairs, while the Duke had his own demons, but was not publicized AS negatively as she. Guess it was the way of the times, when men, especially those of title, were almost expected to behave that way, but a woman should never. Their marriage was doomed with the AAAs...Affairs, Addiction, and Abuse. She was definitely a piece of work, and nothing excuses her behavior.....that being said, this man saw her as a checkbook, consistent vagina, a punching bag, and a doormat. Neither of them had any business being together. She wanted a castle, he wanted $. Sad.
Fascinating! Where did you learn this? Clever woman speaks of her still being a Virgin I assume a bit older than 15. Wasn’t David Niven known to be gay later in life or death, 🤷♀️…. She was a beautiful woman without doubt.
The interviewer used the word 'virginal' (pointedly, I thought), the Duchess did not. The woman interviewing is a cretin who did not even do her research, very poor questions.
Everybody said so, fool - including the misogynist judge at her divorce hearing, who piously branded her "A very promiscuous woman". Had she been a man, her sex life would never have been commented on!
She was an absolute feind for the sausage, loved it in every end of her, which is odd because she comes across as quite frigid, but maybe she hadn't had any that day
The interviewer is a brain-dead nonentity, who couldn't come up with a single intelligent question and hadn't even done her research. No wonder nobody's heard of her!
seems quite spirited to me - staying in the line of fire and not simply fleeing, leaving the rest of the people to get bombed alone (the 'cold as ice' thing to do would of been the opposite) would you of fled the incoming bombs overhead - if you could of easily moved to another country??? answer me that??? under-stated yes but thats just a means of delivery - the British 'stiffness' (as it once was once upon a time)
