Diana Frances Spencer, normal human being born as an English aristocrat, fairy tale princess, former wife of a Prince, mother of kings, heralded as the most famous and most photographed woman in the history of the world, was more than a media icon of global renown. She was a connection, a cosmic connection to the next millennium.
The year Two Thousand (2000) commenced the new millennium. This has colossal, imponderable import for our earth and the people living at this time, for it marks, not just a change of years, or a change of decades, or a change of centuries, but a change of thousand year increments of cosmic earth time and, more importantly, an enormous change in the vibratory veil of planet earth.
One might not think this too extraordinary, but it is. A person could conceivably outlive a century, but no one outlives a millennium. It is an extremely long period of time as far as ordinary, human, day-to-day, living timetables are concerned. What is notably extraordinary, however, is the shift in energy fields in the cosmic realm when millennia change.
Millennia are huge living waves of cosmic energy. They roll onto and over the beach of time with absolutely no regard for personalities, possessions or social conventions. Oblivious to their predecessor, they have their own will and they exercise it mercilessly. They are aloof, indifferent and inconsiderate of what lies in their path. These thousand year periods of impersonal, irrepressible power harbor gargantuan levels of energy far beyond the ability of any human being to control or manipulate. They control us. The sheer weight of their mass and energy compel us to move to their will and in their direction. Indeed, they move us where they choose and when they choose, for we are not strong enough to swim against them any more than we are strong enough to swim against the force of a tidal wave. In effect, they rule and we obey.
Fortunately, millennia and their inbred intrinsic characteristics are calculable, moving to a predetermined rhythm, and by understanding their essence and adjusting to them, we can survive by surfing, by going with their flow. To resist them is impossible. They will simply pick us up, like the towering wave, and slam us down to a more humbling position, perhaps taking our life in the process.
Princess Diana and the Millennia Shift
From a numerological perspective, the last thousand years was marked by the number One (1) which rules male (Yang) energy. This current thousand years is marked by the number Two (2) which governs female (Yin) energy. It was during the transition of these millennia that the destiny of Diana Frances Spencer, Princess of Wales, exerted enormous significance.
From an esoteric point of view, it was Princess Diana’s cosmic purpose – through her extremely public life and death – to assist people in an unconscious way on a global level to adjust to the intrinsic energies and characteristics of the new millennium. Her life was a clear signal that it was out with the old energy of the 1 and in with the new energy of the 2.
This was one of Diana Frances Spencer’s great gifts to the world – she was a bridge between the rigidity and single-mindedness of the 1st Millennium and the yielding and together-mindedness of the 2nd Millennium. Diana recognized there were others in the world and she reached out to them from her royal position, an act which many people not only respected but revered.
Diana felt. She expressed her feelings openly and unashamedly to the people she served and which the monarchy served through her. She touched people, she made them feel they were together in one family. She cared, she was sensitive and receptive to their needs, feelings and desires. She was in touch, not just with them but with the rapidly advancing tidal wave of energy that was the oncoming 2nd Millennium.
How many times during the aftermath of her death was Princess Diana referred to as The People’s Princess and The Queen of Hearts? Truly, she needed no throne, for she sat on the one throne which moves people more than any other – the Throne of Hearts.
In recognition of her personal power, the Union Jack, flag of the British Empire, was lowered to half-mast in respect of Diana after her death. This had never been done in the one thousand year existence of the British Empire. It was a truly remarkable gesture when one considers the rich legacy of English history and an Empire so vast that upon which, at one time, “the sun never set.” When one thinks of the cavalcade of great, auspicious, prodigious and prominent personalities which England has given to the world through the likes of Winston Churchill – possibly the greatest statesman of the Twentieth Century; William Shakespeare – the greatest playwright of recorded history; Isaac Newton – arguably the greatest scientist in history; Dr. Samuel Johnson – first author of the dictionary of the English language; Alexander Pope, Francis Bacon, Percy Shelly, John Keats, Admiral Nelson, William Wordsworth, Lord Byron, Alfred Lord Tennyson, Rudyard Kipling and on and on and on – personalities for whom the flag was never lowered on their behalf – it is remarkable indeed that it was lowered for one Diana Francis Spencer. One has to marvel at the power of a person who, in just sixteen years, could so move the world and her nation’s leadership that she did what no other of her countrymen could do in their entire lifetimes and beyond – honor their passing with the lowering of the Union Jack to half-mast.
This flag gesture is important because it demonstrates what the 2nd Millennium addresses – others, their feelings and emotions. It was the will of the people, people whom Diana touched, that forced that flag to be positioned in such a manner. And why? Because Diana touched them to such a degree and in such a way they felt compelled, through love, compassion and respect, to demand a change in British convention and monarchical disposition regardless of what the last thousand years had postulated or protocol dictated.
There is another important aspect to the Union Jack being lowered to half-mast on Diana’s death and that is in its symbolism. When a flag is not lowered but kept at the apex of its pole, it signifies oneness, and in the case of Great Britain, the unity and solidarity of the nation, which is why it was never lowered for other esteemed English icons. However, when a flag is dropped to half-mast, it virtually cuts the pole (the 1) into two sections signifying ‘others’. The number 2 also indicates relationship, support, togetherness, teamwork, cooperation. In a cosmic way, this is what the Union Jack flying at half-mast in tribute of Diana’s life and death was signifying – the emergence of a new set of principles and standards – ideas based in others, relationship, cooperation, support and all that the yin symbolizes. It is also interesting to note that Diana’s numerology chart was heavily saturated in 2 energy. She was an extremely people-oriented person.
Additionally, in further support of this idea, Queen Elizabeth bowed her head as Diana’s coffin passed en route to her burial. How often has this happened at the death of one of England’s own? And, yes, it was humanistically right and proper for her to do so and would have been humanistically improper if she had not done so. Once we lose our humanity in place of sovereignty, we lose our nobility, respectability, honorability and humanity. We all die, and to dis-acknowledge another in their death is to insure our own dis-acknowledgment at the time of our death. To dis-acknowledge Diana at the time of her passing would be insensitive, cold, heartless and even cruel. Again, this action of the Queen was highly commendable and also commensurate with the energies of the then oncoming millennium. It showed sensitivity, compassion and feeling even if it were encased in the seemingly unfeeling demeanor of a passing age.
One very poignant occurrence during her funeral procession was the five man entourage following her casket. This was composed of her two sons and potential Kings of England – William and Harry, her ex-husband, Prince Charles – a potential King of England, Prince Philip – the Queen’s husband and her brother Charles, Earl Spencer. This may have been perceived simply as a loving gesture, which it most certainly was, but it was also a symbolic ‘ushering in’ of the feminine principle of the oncoming 2nd Millennium. There was no female presence behind that casket, only male. This was certainly an acknowledgment of the passing of the torch from the masculine to the feminine, not necessarily in gender but in principle.
Diana’s power was most visible in the simple dialogue of common people in the wake of her death. As we all saw and heard, it was Diana’s warmth, her love, compassion, kindness, sensitivity to the plight of others, and her genuine feeling for people in general that was the topic of conversation in those heart-rendering days following her tragic accident on 31 August 1997. No one talked about her academic prowess because she had none. In fact, she had failed her ‘O Levels’ twice. She was not an heroic general, an acclaimed scientist, noted author, or celebrated politician. She was English Royalty for a time, but it was not her status that people commented on. In fact, it was her absence of a feeling of status and superiority which endeared her to such a vast array of many different kinds and types of people.
In celebration of Diana, David Miller, Former British Heritage Secretary, said, She had compassion.Diana’s brother, Charles, Earl Spencer stated during her funeral, All over the world she was a symbol of selfless humanity, a standard bearer for the rights of the truly downtrodden. The Very Reverend Dr. Wesley Carr, Dean of Westminster, who presided over Diana’s funeral, commented, In her death, she commands the sympathy of millions, and Andrew Neil, former editor of the “Times of London,” exclaimed, She has set a new standard for a modern monarchy (reference: Blueprint of a Princess: Diana Frances Spencer – Queen of Hearts).
From these quotes it is easy to see that it was Diana’s ability to touch others, to be human, to be feeling, compassionate, concerned and kind which molded her uniqueness, endeared her to millions and generated, through the force of her natural living and being, a legacy which may well regard her as the Mother and Matriarch of Britain’s future.
However, would Diana’s life have continued to have the amazing impact it has had, and most likely will have, if she had died in old age after a rich and full life? We’ll never know. But one can never underestimate the powerful, long-lasting effect of a person’s life and works when that person is taken from among our midst in what appears to be a pre-mature death, especially in a violent and tragic manner.
We all have a sense of loss when a person dies young and violently. But such a loss often generates a memory that is not easily forgotten and, in fact, tends to immortalize such a one when a later, more natural death would not. Think of the deaths of Elvis Presley, Marilyn Monroe, President John Kennedy and Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Too, we tend to remember the person more and the causes for which they worked so selflessly and sincerely when death comes early, unexpectedly and tragically.
To be a millennia bridge it was necessary for Diana to die young and tragically. William Shakespeare’s tragic play, Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, is the most famous and replicated of all his tragedies. Why? Because it, too, like the tragedy of Diana, focused on the theme of youth dying young and tragically. As humans, these stories compel us to remember and not easily forget.
Most importantly, one can be sure that Diana’s offspring, one of whom will no doubt be the King of England, will not forget! Prince William and Prince Harry had their mother seemingly stolen from them at a very impressionable age, an age in which tragic events are not forgotten and which, likewise, create foundations of future expression. Had Diana died in her seventies, for example, it is questionable whether her impression upon her children and the works she left to the world would have had the same intense impact and effect. By dying young, the intensity, sincerity and purity of her message of compassion, kindness, caring, sincerity, honesty and genuine humanity which she conveyed to the British people and the world while alive, will live through her son, the future King of England, and by so doing have a dramatic effect and impact on the future of this proud and stately nation. This is why, among her other titles, she may also be called the Mother or Matriarch of Britain’s future.
England’s people loved Diana. To them she has become the Queen of Hearts, The People’s Princess, the Princess of Love. The importance of her loving ways will, no doubt, be even more dramatic as England’s future unfurls, especially if the royal monarchy remains in tact. Through her son William, England’s future King, her understanding of people, of others and of compassion will, hopefully, live on to lift the British Empire into the embrace of the 2nd Millennium, passionately evoking from her people the exulting cries of “Long live the King” and, never to be forgotten, “Long live the Queen… of Hearts!”
Copyright Richard Andrew King
All Rights Reserved