Please or to access all these features

The royal family

Royal row between King Charles and Earl Spencer

1000 replies

Viviennemary · 16/09/2026 23:07

Buckingham Palace said they don't usually comment but they can't stay silent. Apparently Prince Charles said at the time of Diana's death rest assured we'll forget her soon enough. Which is pretty horrendous. Charles has more or less said grief had clouded Earl Spencer's judgement and memory.

I don't know why he has waited nearly 30 years to come out with this.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
Karma2023 · 17/09/2026 10:47

Pipedreams607 · 17/09/2026 10:42

Harry didn’t say it was untrue actually. He said the racism had been unconscious which is a different statement altogether.

That Buckingham Palace statement also said:

"Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much-loved family members."

and that hasn’t exactly turned out to be true has it?

In a spoken interview Harry said the Press had exaggerated the racism claims and it wasn't said. He was trying to distance himself from the claims because he knew them to be untrue.

smilesy · 17/09/2026 10:47

Daygloboo · 17/09/2026 10:30

I believe Charles Spencer. He's a highly educated, intelligent man who has written serious books. I'm sure he's meticulous in what he puts in those books. The other Charles seems like a rather petulant, spoilt individual ( remember the childish ink incident), who I can very well imagine saying something spiteful like this just coz someone had the ' audacity' to stand up to him. That statement is basically telling Charles Spencer that he is not ALLOWED to have any thoughta on the matter. No wonder Diana ended up ill with that kind of vile gaslighting around her. I cant wait for William and Catherine to be monarch. Charles doesnt have the commanding presence of the late Queen imo. William and Kate come across as a lot more in touch.

There is a big difference between getting annoyed because a pen doesn’t work when you are in public, signing a document as a new king just after your mother has died and probably quite tired and irritable, and bad mouthing g the mother of your children who you seemed to be on good terms with before her death.
Charles Spencer has a reputation for treating women badly, is on his fourth marriage and is estranged from some of his children. So not exactly a paragon of stable emotions, regardless of his intelligence and education

Daygloboo · 17/09/2026 10:47

Ladyymuck · 17/09/2026 09:16

As someone said upthread the unquestioning deference towards the royal family and the belief that whatever they say is the truth is shocking. I well believe that KC would have said that. It came across that the RF, in particular KC and Camilla, saw Diana as an annoyance. KC reply to Earl Spencer was awful and patronising to say the least.

Agree.

AprilMizzel · 17/09/2026 10:48

WinterGold · 17/09/2026 10:40

Interesting family, the Spencers.

Diana’s grandmother connived with the old Queen mum to “ arrange” the match and marriage. The same woman (Lady Fermoy) then described her own daughter (Frances Shand Kydd) as a “bolter” when she left Johnnie Spencer, who allegedly was an aggressive bully who drank heavily and pressured her for a male heir, contributing to their deeply unhappy marriage and eventual bitter divorce.

Diana also wasn’t speaking to her own mother at the time of her death because of her criticism of her relationships with certain men.

As someone has commented further up thread, between them and the Windsors, it’s a bit like Eastenders, but with coronets and diamonds.

I saw a documneatary about Frances Shand Kydd - her mother sounded like her worst enermy TBH.

Also said apparently Charles made some comment about being disappointed that Harry was a son not daughter in front of Frances Shand Kydd who told him sharply to be greatful child was healthy - she'd lost her first son still born I think.

Janiie · 17/09/2026 10:49

I really hope in his trashy book he admits that the grabby Spencers were at fault in all of this and Diana should never have been served up to Charles in the first place.
Her older sisters should have stopped the whole thing in its tracks well before the second date.

foxylady2 · 17/09/2026 10:50

TheOvertGardener · 17/09/2026 10:33

Can’t take posts seriously if they contain the phrase “I can imagine”

Yours just did and I didn't imagine that !

nomas · 17/09/2026 10:54

I can believe Charles said, the royal family and the Queen were hated in the days after Diana's death. They would have wanted it all to be over and forgotten.

Diana was a thorn in their side and she was gone.

noonames · 17/09/2026 10:54

Pipedreams607 · 17/09/2026 10:42

Harry didn’t say it was untrue actually. He said the racism had been unconscious which is a different statement altogether.

That Buckingham Palace statement also said:

"Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much-loved family members."

and that hasn’t exactly turned out to be true has it?

He said it wasn’t racism, it was unconscious bias. Unconscious racism is racism, unconscious bias is a different thing.

Themsofcoffee · 17/09/2026 10:55

Don't believe the then Prince Charles said that. Why wait all these years to get that off your chest?

It didn't happen.

Noodledog · 17/09/2026 10:55

noonames · 17/09/2026 10:38

The media had a massive incentive to find someone to blame for Diana’s death and what happened afterwards - the papers were really negative about her at the time and she was being chased by photographers when she died. Not a good look. So whipping up public sentiment and turning on the family quickly moved everyone on and they escaped any real investigation into the morality of their own behaviour.

This is my memory too. The media reporting changed - literally overnight- from "look at Diana cavorting with middle eastern playboys, what a slut!" to "how could the royal family be so cruel to Diana, our queen of hearts?". It was incredibly cynical, and very weird to watch.

The behaviour of some of the public was equally bizarre. Adults leaving teddies and crying inconsolably for a woman they had never met and knew very limited amounts about (no social media at the time). Public pressure on the royal family to act in publicly approved ways. It was like a mass madness.

viques · 17/09/2026 10:56

Has anyone else wondered why Charles Spencer chose that weird photo of Diana for the front cover? It looks as though it has been through photoshop several times and I reckon if people were shown it out of context very few would recognise her.

He is a nasty man, refused his sister help when she needed it, bullied his vulnerable wife and has now decided to cash in on the lucrative Diana / 30 years/ Christmas book market which probably explains why he is buddying up with HAM and the DM to keep the book on the front pages.

stolen book kerching

row with Palace kerching

Palomiino · 17/09/2026 10:56

noonames · 17/09/2026 10:28

It’s interesting that some posters bring up KC3’s failings as a husband and father in their arguments for believing this claim. When Charles Spencer has had four wives, multiple affairs, seven children from three different women, and three of the children no longer speak to him. Yet he is apparently dignified and intelligent compared to KC3 who wrecked his wife’s life and is a selfish, neglectful parent.

Two things can be true. Charles Spencer doesn’t have to be a good man for him to be speaking the truth (and he is not a good man either imo).

Noodledog · 17/09/2026 10:59

twocornichons · 17/09/2026 10:46

He’s not the King of England and supposed role model

Why do people refer to the "King of England"? Have you not heard of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland? Harry did this recently and it was incredibly ignorant, and frankly disrespectful that he seemed to be completely unaware of the countries he apparently wants to represent!

Messedupmyusernameagain · 17/09/2026 11:00

Janiie · 17/09/2026 10:49

I really hope in his trashy book he admits that the grabby Spencers were at fault in all of this and Diana should never have been served up to Charles in the first place.
Her older sisters should have stopped the whole thing in its tracks well before the second date.

Edited

Yep, they are Aristos and behave in exactly the same way as they have always acted. Offering up their daughters to the Monarchy in return for favours and influence. It isn't one family good/ one family bad, they are all under the same system. The British aristocracy and the RF have always had this relationship. One doesn't exist without the other.

readingmakesmehappy · 17/09/2026 11:01

billysboy · 17/09/2026 06:36

What is Earl Spencer’s motivation for writing the book ? Money or settling an old score ?

He said people keep asking him to speak about Diana with the 30th anniversary of her death next year, and he decided to tell the story on his terms.
He published a book last year about his experience of abuse at boarding school, which was well received and I think cathartic for him, and I wonder if he then felt he could confront the trauma of their childhood and then losing his sister. They had a pretty grim time at home with their mother leaving them so young.

Noodledog · 17/09/2026 11:02

nomas · 17/09/2026 10:54

I can believe Charles said, the royal family and the Queen were hated in the days after Diana's death. They would have wanted it all to be over and forgotten.

Diana was a thorn in their side and she was gone.

She was the mother of his two young sons though, and they would have been at the front of his mind at the time, not his previous relationship with Diana.

viques · 17/09/2026 11:02

JustSayyNo · 17/09/2026 10:47

Why did he go collect her body? I have a feeling it was out of care for his sons. She is still the mother of his children, no matter what.

The public wanted a state funeral. It was appropriate that the boys were supported by their father walking behind the coffin, maybe even their grandfather.

Walking behind the coffin is tradition. I've heard the boys wanted to do it but regardless, I'm sure her sons took comfort in their mother being given the full bells and whistles, a good reason to do it. She is also the mother of a future king, another reason to do it.

Oh come on, that funeral was like something produced for a tacky Hollywood sob story, designed to pull at the heartstrings. The little white envelope with “Mummy” written in wobbly letters, Elton John re writing a song, Spencer’s speech, whose bright ideas were those that I wonder.

Ukisgaslit · 17/09/2026 11:02

I think that has changed @Messedupmyusernameagain - mainly since the aristos saw how Diana was treated.

William tried to get a few aristos to marry him and failed . Don’t blame them at all .

GoodGirlFaith · 17/09/2026 11:04

Janiie · 17/09/2026 10:49

I really hope in his trashy book he admits that the grabby Spencers were at fault in all of this and Diana should never have been served up to Charles in the first place.
Her older sisters should have stopped the whole thing in its tracks well before the second date.

Edited

THIS! ^

I can remember watching the wedding with my family (I was 11) and my dad saying 'if that was you, I would have refused you my permission to marry him.'

She was too young, the age gap too big, KC was under pressure to produce heirs, they had been on a handful of dates and he was in love with another woman. Everything was wrong about it but the temptation to go from 'aristocracy' to 'royal' is too good to refuse (on her family's part).

It shouldn't have mattered that Diana's 'face was on tea towels' by then, she should have been listened to and advised to cancel the wedding if she wished not to go ahead with it.

ElsieJay · 17/09/2026 11:04

Ukisgaslit · 17/09/2026 09:28

The walking behind the cofffin was done for one reason only - to protect Charles .
The fear was he’d be heckled by the public - having the children there would stop that .

I’ve certainly read this - and IMHO it is quite plausible - but it was a crazy, crazy time.

There was a general feeling ( stoked by the press ) that her late Majesty and the princes should be in London, and almost be seen to be grieving along with the public.

I think Charles probably was cold and unemotional towards Diana during their marriage - he simply wasn’t in love with her, and her emotional nature and huge worldwide popularity probably grated on him.
Not that Diana was totally blameless either , she could be manipulative and became very adept at using the press to her advantage.

It can’t have been an easy childhood for William or Harry - but I cannot stomach how Harry wallows in his grief and whinges about the unfairness of his life - both then and into the present day .

Messedupmyusernameagain · 17/09/2026 11:04

Ukisgaslit · 17/09/2026 11:02

I think that has changed @Messedupmyusernameagain - mainly since the aristos saw how Diana was treated.

William tried to get a few aristos to marry him and failed . Don’t blame them at all .

That is true. Although you'd have thought they would have learnt their lesson after Henry VIII had 2 of his Howard wives murdered but better late than never!

diddl · 17/09/2026 11:06

BrandiedAromatics · 17/09/2026 10:45

I think that it what the Royals did at funerals - there are photos of some of her sons riding behind Q Victoria's cortege. And, of course, the photo of the teenage Prince Philip walking behind at his sister's funeral - flanked by brothers in law in Nazi uniforms.

Yes, that's what I mean-do you say "oh we'll this bit but have no one walk behind the coffin"

Of course it was something that PP had done albeit not for his mum.

Whether or not that meant it should still be done 60yrs later is another thing.

ANNotherWriter · 17/09/2026 11:06

Charles S seems a very difficult man. His own failed relationships are a train crash in themselves. Is it 3 marriages now? Lost count.

I cannot see why he wants to drag all of this out into the public domain now, and FGS have some kindness towards the King, still battling cancer.

I have no idea what Charles said- none of us do.
I can imagine he might have tried to be sympathetic towards CS and said something like 'Don't worry, this will settle down' - ie the mass grieving, the flowers, the media stuff, that was hard for everyone in the family to cope with.

thepariscrimefiles · 17/09/2026 11:08

bingobangs · 17/09/2026 03:41

I think it’s shocking W&H had to do that walk, who made that decision? Don’t BP normally comment but through “sources” that brief the press?

I believe that it was Charles's idea for his sons to walk behind their mum's coffin. His argument was that he walked behind his great-uncle and mentor Lord Mountbatten's coffin. However, he was 30 when he did that and William and Harry were 15 and 12 and it was their mum.

zanahoria · 17/09/2026 11:08

GoodGirlFaith · 17/09/2026 11:04

THIS! ^

I can remember watching the wedding with my family (I was 11) and my dad saying 'if that was you, I would have refused you my permission to marry him.'

She was too young, the age gap too big, KC was under pressure to produce heirs, they had been on a handful of dates and he was in love with another woman. Everything was wrong about it but the temptation to go from 'aristocracy' to 'royal' is too good to refuse (on her family's part).

It shouldn't have mattered that Diana's 'face was on tea towels' by then, she should have been listened to and advised to cancel the wedding if she wished not to go ahead with it.

I was 14 when they announced the engagement and honestly could not get my head around it with all the talk about fairy tale romance. It seemed obvious even to my young eyes that they hardly knew each other. He looked like a middle aged man and she was not much older than my sister.

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.