Please or to access all these features

The royal family

Royal row between King Charles and Earl Spencer 2

1000 replies

Viviennemary · 18/09/2026 14:17

Buckingham Palace have said they won't be commenting further on the book. But I expect plenty of others will be and it's not even published yet so I started this second thread. I really liked Diana and thought she got treated shabbily by Charles. But really writing a book of gripes 30 years later is not on imho. I noticed on the news Harry declined to comment on it. Sensible decision for once.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
8
foxylady2 · 19/09/2026 07:50

Richard Kay of the Mail, who knows Spencer well, says that he would have been taking notes because he had such a major role in the funeral and would naturally have wanted to make sure he didn't miss anything. More importantly, Kay actually saw him taking notes at the time it was simply what Spencer did, having already been a journalist for ten years. Kay also has little obvious reason to take Spencer's side in this dispute; equally, there is no obvious reason for him to take Charles's side. He is essentially reporting what he observed. So, on the balance of probabilities, unless we are to believe that Spencer is deliberately lying, I think it is reasonable to regard his recollection as a fairly credible account of what actually happened.

CoffeeCantata · 19/09/2026 07:52

bingobangs · 19/09/2026 06:54

@CoffeeCantata did you actually read my post? It was the reaction of everyone else that I found more interesting then KCs actual reaction. Why does that mean I lack compassion?! Some of us aren’t interested in picking sides but you do you.

I’m sorry, bingo - I’m just a bit allergic to that story since it’s trotted out so often on here and treated as if KC sacrifices babies or something!

I don’t know what it says about me - I’ve had a few bosses who behave just like that - but my reaction is more akin to a shrug, rather than outrage. Tense people in formal situations get tetchy over small things - who knew? 😀

Recklessismymiddlename · 19/09/2026 07:53

So Diana went to her family to pull out of the marriage and they all said too late?? And the royals get the blame? Even on my wedding day my dad triple checked I was still happy to go ahead (arranged marriage). Once at home, once in the car and at the church door!

AnnoyedAsAllHeck · 19/09/2026 07:55

foxylady2 · 18/09/2026 19:02

We are in special case uncharted territory here and he loved Diana far more than her royal husband did and he has earned the right to say his piece.

Then why were they estranged for so many years, including at the time of her death?

He seems to have "loved" a lot and often. His ex-wives, his mistresses, his girlfriends, the bottle......

Recklessismymiddlename · 19/09/2026 07:56

I can believe CS was taking notes about funeral arrangements.

MeetMeOnTheCorner · 19/09/2026 07:56

@Recklessismymiddlename Her father would never have let her pull out! He’d already said she was born to
do the role. He didn’t know her and she was 19 when she got engaged. It wax total folly! No wonder William and Kate did a slow burn. Earl Spencer was as unpleasant as his son.

CoffeeCantata · 19/09/2026 07:57

foxylady2 · 19/09/2026 07:50

Richard Kay of the Mail, who knows Spencer well, says that he would have been taking notes because he had such a major role in the funeral and would naturally have wanted to make sure he didn't miss anything. More importantly, Kay actually saw him taking notes at the time it was simply what Spencer did, having already been a journalist for ten years. Kay also has little obvious reason to take Spencer's side in this dispute; equally, there is no obvious reason for him to take Charles's side. He is essentially reporting what he observed. So, on the balance of probabilities, unless we are to believe that Spencer is deliberately lying, I think it is reasonable to regard his recollection as a fairly credible account of what actually happened.

Having read an excerpt, though, I was suspicious of the ascribing of emotions to Charles PoW. I have a relative who does that - tells people what they’re thinking and feeling - and believe me, it’s infuriating because it soon becomes not opinion but established fact in their eyes.

Im thinking of the bit where he says something like “Charles was probably feeling……” and makes up something which may or may not be true.

foxylady2 · 19/09/2026 07:58

AnnoyedAsAllHeck · 19/09/2026 07:55

Then why were they estranged for so many years, including at the time of her death?

He seems to have "loved" a lot and often. His ex-wives, his mistresses, his girlfriends, the bottle......

People can have complicated relationships and imperfect lives while still loving a sibling deeply. For me, the more relevant question is whether what he is saying now is supported by what we know about the events and by the people who were around him at the time and my jury isn’t out on that question.

TheNinkyNonkyIsATardis · 19/09/2026 07:59

foxylady2 · 19/09/2026 07:32

It’s not hard to imagine that, taken as a whole, the substance of what Charles Spencer is asserting is a fairly good approximation of the truth. He’s now doubling down on it in interview after interview, and, unlike the rather shifty Prince Andrew, he doesn’t appear to display that same evasive demeanour. The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree and let’s not forget the Queen’s reported £12 million settlement in an attempt to suppress the truth. It’s all out there now, as opposed to being quietly buried. The Windsors don’t have a monopoly on the truth, and perhaps that’s what makes this whole affair so uncomfortable for them.

Tbh, I'm not even disagreeing with it as the truth, it just gets my back up that people are wilfully layering their own interpretations (and their own fallible memories) over this recollection.

Was Charles a great husband to Diana? Evidently not.
Was Charles S a great brother to Diana? They weren't close at the time of her death (she was closer to her ex)
Were they both experiencing heightened emotions and grief leading to some unfortunate outbursts of sentiment/unusual displays of emotion? I'd be more surprised if they didn't.

Both Charles's seem to be very damaged individuals who've hurt a lot of people. But only one of the Charles's is currently mudslinging about the other and claiming a monopoly on those hurt feelings, especially in a way that will affect his nephews.

I actually feel sorrier for Harry than William, in spite of not being a fan, because his head is clearly not in a good place and this muck raking is hardly going to help.

I don't like my BIL for very valid reasons. But I can't imagine my sister dying and my nephew being grown up and clearly making erratic choices in life and thinking, "you know what, I didn't like the way BIL behaved around the funeral, what everyone needs right now is for this to be incredibly publicly dragged up".

CoffeeCantata · 19/09/2026 07:59

Recklessismymiddlename · 19/09/2026 07:53

So Diana went to her family to pull out of the marriage and they all said too late?? And the royals get the blame? Even on my wedding day my dad triple checked I was still happy to go ahead (arranged marriage). Once at home, once in the car and at the church door!

The Spencers get an easy ride, but they’re a dysfunctional lot and are at least half to blame for the sacrifice if of 19 year old Diana. It’s what aristocratic families have always done - used their daughters as pawns to gain status and influence.

Messedupmyusernameagain · 19/09/2026 08:00

Pipedreams607 · 19/09/2026 06:38

You only have to read the account from the American woman who employed Diana as a nanny, before she became engaged to Prince Charles, to know that is not true.

Also, Patrick Jephson, who worked with her for seven or eight years as her private secretary and travelled with her to five continents, in pretty difficult circumstances, described her as;

“extraordinarily observant, intuitive, organized, and quick-witted, taking her role as a humanitarian and national ambassador very seriously”

https://www.thepworld.com/discover_article/patrick-jephson-on-princess-diana-and-her-enduring-legacy

Diana had mh issues, no one is denying that, but her problems largely arose as a result of her unhappy marriage, her very public betrayal by her husband, and latterly the very isolated situation she found herself in.

Yes funny how the Royals only flaw seems to be their penchant for surrounding themselves with narcissists, the mentally ill, liars, cheats, paedophiles whereas they themselves are never at fault.

foxylady2 · 19/09/2026 08:03

CoffeeCantata · 19/09/2026 07:59

The Spencers get an easy ride, but they’re a dysfunctional lot and are at least half to blame for the sacrifice if of 19 year old Diana. It’s what aristocratic families have always done - used their daughters as pawns to gain status and influence.

Yes very true which I suspect is why aristocrats will no longer date the Royals as it's just more trouble than it;s worth. Maybe Diana is the last toff to marry in - it will be upper middle class "new money" from now on people who buy their own dinner tables rather than inheriting them.

Daygloboo · 19/09/2026 08:06

Pipedreams607 · 19/09/2026 00:45

I certainly agree that King Charles is coming across like a petulant toddler having a temper tantrum every time he doesn't get his own way.

I have heard other commentators say before that he doesn’t ever respond well to the word “no”.

Very different to the image that BP like to portray of a steady, settled, calm philosophical monarch.

But of course by now we know it’s the MIGs who shape and project the characters of the various key members of the RF to make them appear acceptable and popular with the general public, and often the image is very different from the reality.

I think this job is getting harder and harder in the 21st century, and the lack of authenticity is beginning to grate. I also agree that people are sick of the manipulation. Why do we need this secrecy and pseudo knee-bending reverence for our head of state? I would far prefer someone who is serious, ordinary and professional to do the job who doesn’t come with soap opera baggage attached and who doesn’t live behind a wall of men in grey suits. I would like a potential candidate to be genuinely who they say they are, and be transparent and accountable to the citizens of our collective countries.

Also, I’m sorry, but I don’t think placing a person who is already enormously rich and entitled in to a position where everyone bows to their will and speaks to them in hushed tones is very good for anyone’s character. That is exactly what produces spoilt toddler-like men!

Yes. Good points. Didnt someone say you shouldnt ' let sunlight in on magic'. That's the trouble, isnt it. It's the 21st century and ppl are much more aware and educated now and mass communication has become more sophisticated now, so we get a better understanding and insight into the truth behind closed doors. And we're all less willing to accept the unseemly goings on than when we were relatively ignorant subjects. Especially as we are bloody paying for it all. I thought the queen worked hard, but i cant say the next generation has covered itself in glory. William and Kate seem decent enough I suppose.

WhatTheHellsGoingOn · 19/09/2026 08:10

This taken from an article this morning referring to the funeral -

Prince Harry has previously said that walking behind his mother's coffin aged 12 was something no child "should be asked to do".
In 2017, he told the BBC he did not "have an opinion whether that was right or wrong" but. "looking back on it", he was glad to have been part of the day.

It’s interesting he did this 180 preceding the massive wedding he (MeAgain) was determined to have, and which wouldn’t have been a fraction as ostentatious and headline grabbing without royal approval, then when it was over and they’d decided to cut ties and ‘find freedom’ 🤑💸🤑 over in the states he completed the 360 and was saying once again how harmful it was. He seems to have a habit of changing his opinion to suit his personal narrative and which will gain as much public approval as possible, despite saying he hated being in the spotlight.

CoffeeCantata · 19/09/2026 08:10

foxylady2 · 19/09/2026 08:03

Yes very true which I suspect is why aristocrats will no longer date the Royals as it's just more trouble than it;s worth. Maybe Diana is the last toff to marry in - it will be upper middle class "new money" from now on people who buy their own dinner tables rather than inheriting them.

Edited

You may be right! And I’m sure that the experience of being part of a more normal (albeit affluent) middle class family like the Middletons is a revelation to William. I suspect he wants to replicate that for his own children.

For all kinds of reasons aristocratic and royal marriages have not been what we ordinary folk would relate to. I think those archaic attitudes were still there in 1981 and that was a huge factor in the disaster of the royal marriage. But I jut feel sorry for both of them. Lessons have been learned, though.

gishgalloping · 19/09/2026 08:12

foxylady2 · 19/09/2026 07:50

Richard Kay of the Mail, who knows Spencer well, says that he would have been taking notes because he had such a major role in the funeral and would naturally have wanted to make sure he didn't miss anything. More importantly, Kay actually saw him taking notes at the time it was simply what Spencer did, having already been a journalist for ten years. Kay also has little obvious reason to take Spencer's side in this dispute; equally, there is no obvious reason for him to take Charles's side. He is essentially reporting what he observed. So, on the balance of probabilities, unless we are to believe that Spencer is deliberately lying, I think it is reasonable to regard his recollection as a fairly credible account of what actually happened.

Richard Kay knows Charles Spencer because he was very close friends with Diana. They would go to the movies together. He was one of the journalists she regularly leaked stories to during the war of the Wales. He is not at all impartial in this.

notimagain · 19/09/2026 08:12

CoffeeCantata · 19/09/2026 07:44

And that’s bad of him because?

In my book, that’s a positive thing. I hate unpunctuality - it’s disrespectful, so good for KC.

He had a point..

If KCIII had been simply waiting to nip out to the shops or to set out in the school run some posters might have a point about any irritation expressed.

As it was that was a formal state event- those really really are meant to run almost literally like clockwork so the grumbles sound pretty tame and not exactly unwarranted.

CoffeeCantata · 19/09/2026 08:15

notimagain · 19/09/2026 08:12

He had a point..

If KCIII had been simply waiting to nip out to the shops or to set out in the school run some posters might have a point about any irritation expressed.

As it was that was a formal state event- those really really are meant to run almost literally like clockwork so the grumbles sound pretty tame and not exactly unwarranted.

Quite! Apart from other considerations, security works almost to the second. A few minutes’ delay is serious in that context.

That’s why people were irritated at the preacher at H’s wedding who overran by 8 minutes. That’s an age in terms of coordinating security! I just don’t get why he did it - surely he would have been told?

bingobangs · 19/09/2026 08:17

I can’t begrudge KC for getting annoyed about bad timekeeping

Recklessismymiddlename · 19/09/2026 08:18

foxylady2 · 19/09/2026 08:03

Yes very true which I suspect is why aristocrats will no longer date the Royals as it's just more trouble than it;s worth. Maybe Diana is the last toff to marry in - it will be upper middle class "new money" from now on people who buy their own dinner tables rather than inheriting them.

Edited

Most likely right. I suspect that neither Cor D could give each other, what either needed tbh, both damaged by their upbringing imo. Both needy, but only one gets the blame, as was older. I feel sorry for both. Had Charles been allowed to marry Camilla, from the start and Diana had married a wealthy farmer, they would all have been a lot better off. But I think Camilla was in love with APB so who knows?

myrtleWilson · 19/09/2026 08:19

notimagain · 19/09/2026 08:12

He had a point..

If KCIII had been simply waiting to nip out to the shops or to set out in the school run some posters might have a point about any irritation expressed.

As it was that was a formal state event- those really really are meant to run almost literally like clockwork so the grumbles sound pretty tame and not exactly unwarranted.

Charles and Camilla’s carriage was six minutes early in their arrival. The distributed schedule had them arriving at .53 minutes past the hour and the arrived at.47 minutes

TheRoyalInkPot · 19/09/2026 08:22

Out of the two men I think I'd trust Charles S memory more on this rather than Charles W.
Charles W would have been under enourmous pressure in a very fluid on going situation with many different things to consider and do

Where as Charles s had fewer focuses.

foxylady2 · 19/09/2026 08:23

myrtleWilson · 19/09/2026 08:19

Charles and Camilla’s carriage was six minutes early in their arrival. The distributed schedule had them arriving at .53 minutes past the hour and the arrived at.47 minutes

He should have scrolled through his emails like the rest of us - or done selfies with Camilla.

AgathaDanbury · 19/09/2026 08:23

foxylady2 · 19/09/2026 07:50

Richard Kay of the Mail, who knows Spencer well, says that he would have been taking notes because he had such a major role in the funeral and would naturally have wanted to make sure he didn't miss anything. More importantly, Kay actually saw him taking notes at the time it was simply what Spencer did, having already been a journalist for ten years. Kay also has little obvious reason to take Spencer's side in this dispute; equally, there is no obvious reason for him to take Charles's side. He is essentially reporting what he observed. So, on the balance of probabilities, unless we are to believe that Spencer is deliberately lying, I think it is reasonable to regard his recollection as a fairly credible account of what actually happened.

Notes along the lines of 'sounds giddy, as though he has won the lottery. Probably he thinks he will be free to marry Camilla now, even though he is already divorced but it will be another 5 years until the Church of England will allow divorcees to marry in Church and her ex-husband is still alive''?

notimagain · 19/09/2026 08:25

myrtleWilson · 19/09/2026 08:19

Charles and Camilla’s carriage was six minutes early in their arrival. The distributed schedule had them arriving at .53 minutes past the hour and the arrived at.47 minutes

Interesting I suppose the next question would be in the event of an early arrival were they actually meant to be held in the carriage the way they seemed to be?

Please create an account

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

This thread is not accepting new messages.