Lady Anne Glenconner: QEII should have found Prince Charles ‘a suitable wife’

Lady Anne Glenconner was lady-in-waiting to Princess Margaret, and she was close with many of that generation of royals and aristocrats. Lady Anne married Baron Glenconner, who violently abused her throughout their decades-long marriage, then disinherited her in his will. This explains why Lady Anne has fashioned a late-in-life career for herself as a memoirist, novelist and royal commentator – she simply needs the money. A few years ago, she claimed that John Kerry told her that all Americans “feel very sorry for Prince Harry,” a claim which was later disputed by the Biden-era State Department. Well, Lady Anne’s latest book is Manners and Mischief, and she gets into more personal stories which I guess she left out of her bestselling memoir. Stories about… Princess Diana and the Spencer family. And one judgement about the Windsors. As excerpted by the Mail:

QEII should have worked harder to find Charles a bride: I do slightly feel that the late Queen Elizabeth could have worked harder to try to find Prince Charles a suitable wife. The queens of Greece and Spain used to entertain royal princesses from other European countries in order to find a wife for their sons, but I think because the Queen had fallen in love and had such a successful marriage to Prince Philip, she wasn’t really focused on Prince Charles in the same way.

The grandmothers were happy though: The Queen Mother and Lady Fermoy [Diana’s maternal grandmother] were keen that the marriage to Diana should happen. I have a letter the Queen Mother wrote to my mother expressing her delight at the proposed marriage. Prince Philip was also very much in favour of the union, and, of course, Prince Charles needed to marry a virgin which Diana appeared to be.

Diana’s youth & popularity: She was so young when they married and had very little life experience. And I think when she became so incredibly popular with the public, it was very hard for Prince Charles. I had a certain sympathy for him when he was asked if he was in love with Diana during their engagement interview and he said: ‘Whatever in love means’. I think love is complicated.

Nanny troubles: My sister said that Diana had a rather tenuous grasp on the truth, and I wonder whether it was the result of being brought up in such an unhappy household. Years later, when Diana was pregnant with William and looking for a nanny, Princess Margaret suggested she employ our wonderful nanny Barbara Barnes. Barbara went for the interview but didn’t hear anything back. It fell to me to follow up with Diana’s household and when I called, I was told: ‘Oh, yes she’s got the job,’ though no one had bothered to let Barbara know. Eventually, though, Diana became jealous of how fond William and Harry were of Barbara and she got rid of her.

Diana was still gracious to this awful woman: I was extremely touched by the letter Diana wrote to me after my son Henry died [from Aids, aged 29 in 1990]. She had met him while visiting patients at St Mary’s Hospital in Paddington. She wrote that she was very struck by Henry’s inner strength and emphasised how he had given her a greater understanding of how to cope with Aids. At a time when most people couldn’t even talk about Aids, Diana’s directness about the illness and appreciation of Henry was very comforting and meant a great deal to me.

[From The Daily Mail]

It’s true that Diana and Charles’s grandmothers were involved in their courtship, and they believed it was a smart match because of Diana’s youth and inexperience, but also because of Diana’s aristocratic background. I don’t think the grandmothers really understood that Diana was so modern and so different from most aristocrats of the era. As for the idea of QEII doing more to introduce Charles to suitable young women… in some sense, Lady Anne is correct, and QEII should have taken more of an interest considering Charles was the heir and the monarchy’s future hinged on his choice of bride. But I’m sure QEII’s perspective was that Prince Philip, the Queen Mum and Lord Mountbatten had it covered.

What’s also fascinating is that Charles, in turn, took a hands-off approach to his sons and their paths towards finding their brides. Charles didn’t do it consciously, he’s just so negligent and self-absorbed, I’m not sure it would have occurred to him that he should have done more to throw eligible, well-heeled aristocratic women in his sons’ paths. It’s also worth noting that those well-heeled aristo girls wanted absolutely nothing to do with William. Those girls and their parents saw the way that family destroyed Diana. Still, you’d think that Charles would have stepped in when the Middletons were making their moves. Alas, he did not.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

63 Responses to “Lady Anne Glenconner: QEII should have found Prince Charles ‘a suitable wife’”

  1. Cynner says:

    It’s also likely those aristocratic girls saw the real incandescent, incurious, entitled, smug, self absorbed William and thought, “no, I can do better!”

    • BayTampaBay says:

      Though I believe that Chelsey Davy and Cressida Bonas both loved Prince Harry, I also believe that neither girl wanted anything to do with the Mountbatten-Windsor-Glücksburg family and The Daily Fail.

      • Tessa says:

        I think Chelsy loved Harry. Cressida was sort of a rebound. Chelsy was treated badly by the media, almost as badly as Meghan is today. She was called “clingy” when she went to England to study Law. And how she “pursued” Harry. She also was compared to Kate, and put down by Kate fans.

      • Blujfly says:

        They stalked Chelsey around her university in Leeds and put trackers on her cars in England and South Africa. Only William and Kate ever got any relief from the media, including still today.

      • Lawrenceville says:

        All this talk about Cressida Bonas or Chelsey Devy not wanting royal marriages is nonsense given the fact that prince Harry never proposed to any of the 2 ladies in question. So, we will never really know if they did or didn’t want royal life because neither them nor prince Harry was interested in, leave alone discussed, any marriage. So, people need to stop with this speculation about Harry’s ex-girlfriends. Now, William on the other hand did propose to several girls all of whom turned him down so there is clear evidence that these ladies wanted nothing to do with royal life.

      • Nic919 says:

        Cressida in particular was obviously dumped by Harry. He forgot to pick her up at the airport and that was the beginning of the end.

        Chelsy was treated quite poorly by the media whereas Kate was protected far more.

        That said she only received a fraction of the attacks Meghan received and still gets to this day, both by the media and by the family especially Kate.

    • Happy Peregrine says:

      I hadn’t – until this very moment – understood how deeply deeply young Diana was when she married Charles. She was 19. 19! Look at her! The sheer difference in lived experiences is horrifying.

      To overcome the abuse and the gaslighting and the constant undermining at that age and build herself up – dear lord. I love that she found that she had that strength and that steel and that power within herself. I love what she gave to the world.

      But I feel so much sorrow for her that she had to find the strength in her core and to allocate her own value at such a young age. So many women go through it – and yes so many go through abuse like that at that age or much younger. And I feel sorrow for all of us in that regard.

      Diana never had a chance to rest. To find respite and to heal and explore what she had been through. She had to build herself as she was actively being demolished.

      She was something beyond special.

  2. Agree💯 percent!!! They saw what Peg was and said a polite no thank you!!

  3. Thinking says:

    If Charles wasn’t a prince, I don’t think k he would have gotten married. Considering the pressure he was under to “produce” a family who has to adhere to an outdated way of institutional thinking and in combination with his temperament, I don’t think she’s totally wrong in her assessment.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      “If Charles wasn’t a prince, I don’t think k he would have gotten married.”

      Or he would have attempted to marry Camilla. I will believe until my last breath that Camilla never ever wanted to marry Charles at any time (before, during and/or after Andrew Parker Bowles) . Camilla married the man she wanted to marry. Camilla would probably still be married to this man if the adultery with Charles had never seen the light of the UK press & tabloids.

      • Libra says:

        Agree. Camilla was between a rock and a hard spot when Charles publicly outed their affair. She was and probably still is in love with APB, who was left with little choice but to divorce her. It was Camillas father who confronted Charles and demanded he do the responsible thing and propose marriage to Camilla, as he had blown up her marriage .to APB.

      • Thinking says:

        I don’t know — he seemed like he was hedging the first time around when there was a possibility for him to marry Camilla.

        Later on I suppose Charles had to marry Camilla for the relationship to become acceptable in the eyes of the work.

        At his core, I think Charles like his alone time and his marriage to Camilla works because she’s ok with that. And her first husband didn’t want her anymore, so the relationship was allowed to “flourish.” It wasn’t like Charles was her first choice….

      • Tessa says:

        Andrew Parker Bowles and Camilla stayed married although not faithful to each other. Charles blurted out that Camilla was his mistress for all to hear. It forced the PB divorce. It was an “open secret” but Charles naming her was not done. It was not a matter of Parker Bowles not wanting her anymore, It was rather a public slam at him and the marriage, for publicly naming his wife. Charles may like his time alone but it did not give him permission to treat his first wife so badly. Diana would have been OK with if he had he not been seeing his special friend. Charles also put out spin of the Great Love story (even though he was with women besides Camilla like Lady Tryon) and he more or less had to marry Camilla, he named her and actually ended the PB marriage with his indiscretion of telling the world about his relationship with her.

      • Gabby says:

        He was a ditherer even back then

      • Happy Peregrine says:

        I have a private little theory. That Camilla has destroyed Charles’s life and family because he forced her to get divorced from the real love of her life. She’s a villian but she’s also been a pawn.

    • kelleybelle says:

      He never wanted to get married in the first place. He did so because he had to and also for heirs. Who would have been “suitable” for this arrogant, unsightly, spoiled, emotionally immature, incompetent and limited man? He’s hardly even a man.

      • Tessa says:

        He also turned out to be a bad parent and grandparent. The having heirs was merely a “duty” and he just rejects Harry, Meghan and his two grandchildren. He probably rarely sees the Wales children, they spend much time with their maternal grandparents.

  4. Donna Libera says:

    One thing I’m always struck by is how much Diana accomplished, I don’t know how royal work was tallied in her day but the reason we have so many photos of her and her fashion is because she was out in public almost every day doing something. Surely, her numbers rivalled the late queen’s.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      Like QEII and Princess Anne, Diana understood that you had to be seen to be believed.

      Zoom calls and Teams Meetings do NOT count.

    • Nic919 says:

      Diana was doing hundreds of engagements per year. Charles and Anne were around 500 per year but Diana wasn’t far behind.

      Really shows how lazy William and Kate have been.

  5. Blair Warner says:

    She’s implying that Diana was unsuitable as a wife for Charles, and / or unsuitable as a Princess.
    When in fact Charles was completely unsuited to be a husband!
    Also, this line irks me to no end: “of course, Prince Charles needed to marry a virgin which Diana appeared to be.” Why cast doubt?
    Diana was impeccable in her public life and was privately kind to people, like this woman, even when the public wasn’t watching.

    • SussexWatcher says:

      Especially toward a woman (she later writes) who offered kindness and compassion toward her and her dying son. Particularly at a time when there was so much stigma toward people with AIDS!

      What an asshole she is.

      And, naive me, thought she was talking about Camzilla when I read the header for the article.

      • Happy Peregrine says:

        I do wonder about this woman’s own treatment of her son. She said Diana wrote to tell her about her son. As if she wouldn’t know herself because she wasn’t in contact with him. That era is so horrifying.

        AIDS was so stigmatized and everything having to do with having it or possibly catching it made you an immediate threat to everyone around you somehow.

    • Lucy says:

      And saying that not calling the nanny to let her know she’s been hired meant Diana had problems with the truth. She was what, 20? 21? And had a whole staff? Why in earth should the lack of follow up be on her, or mean anything about her morality? So frustrating.

      • Mayp says:

        💯 Jamie Oliver did something similar to Meghan. On some morning show he said that he offered to cater the Sussex wedding reception but never heard back, implying (if not outright stating) it was Meghan’s fault.

      • Tessa says:

        and she leaves out Charles being untruthful about Camilla’s title and also how he said he would not marry again. Also he told Diana, Camilla was just a friend.

    • Mrs.Krabapple says:

      This! The failure is all Charles. The “QEII should have done a better job” should be in reference to Charles.

      This why Kate has an ED and looks nervous around Willam all the time. She knows how they got rid of hugely popular Diana, so there’s nothing to stop William from dumping Kate if he wanted to. She probably knows how William treated his mom and thats why she clings to her children, hoping they won’t turn on her once they understand the power dynamics in that family (it won’t work with George, as the heir he will be as entitled and misanthropic/misogynistic as his father and grandfather).

    • Thinking says:

      Diana had her own faults though. She was a human being with her own flaws. I like her, but some of her traits were not suitable for any relationship just like Charles’s traits weren’t either.

      I think she did the role of glamorous princess really well though, and the world is kind of boring without charismatic oeole like her. It was the world’s and media’s gain when Charles married her.

      • Tessa says:

        Everybody has faults. She was way too good for Charles. Thinking, Before Diana some other women turned him down cold like Anna Wallace and Amanda Knatchbull. It shows Charles was not a paragon. Diana was 19 and thought the man loved her because he proposed. There is nothing wrong with Diana that made her “unsuitable for any relationship.” Diana was gaslit implying she was “damaged” and interestingly these writers were Charles supporters. A real man would have not thought having a special “friend” on the side was OK. He would have been faithful and loving. Charles was not. Diana could have met an aristo who adored her and had a happy life. The writers like Seward who adore Charles blamed Diana for his cheating. Shows the mindset of the critics.

      • Thinking says:

        Sure, fair enough. But her behaviour with other men leads me to believe she may have failed in other relationships, regardless of how bad Charles might be in a relationship. She wasn’t inexperienced when she died.

        Both of them needed therapy for different things. I think Camilla needs therapy too for wanting to keep her hold on Charles (could some biographer find an answer for me? – whyyyy? ), but she’s smart enough to keep her mouth shut so I guess no one probes the question took much.

      • Tessa says:

        Thinking, Diana died at age 36, a divorcee for only a year. She was separated from Charles since late 1992. She would not have found someone else to marry in a year. She did not want to rush into another marriage. So it was not a matter of her not being able to settle down. The failure in relationships is Charles. He married a young woman barely out of her teens to have heirs with. Diana thought he loved her. He was dishonest with her from the start. Charles behavior with other women is nothing to admire–he was involved with other women, some he courted to possibly marry, some he had “flings” with and affairs. He was involved with Dale Tryon, a married woman, and said she was the only woman who understood him. There was also Janet Jenkins who was involved with Charles during the eighties and nineties. And others. He does not know what love means. As early as 1981 when Diana was pregnant with William, Charles joined a hunt club where Camilla was a member and would leave Diana home (she had a difficult pregnancy) Diana only went to other men after Charles ditched her and the marriage was in name only–he got the two heirs he wanted and that was that. At 23, was she expected to become a nun while Charles was with other women? Charles needed therapy badly, before he even thought of putting Diana through his bad behavior. He was also emotionally abusive and as early as 1983 gave a speech (in front of Diana) saying he needed two wives. It does not matter how “experienced” Diana was, She was treated badly.

      • Thinking says:

        I did not say she deserved to be treated badly or cheated on based on experience or inexperience.

      • Blubb says:

        What behaviour with other men?
        She had years longs relationships with Hewitt and Khan.
        You do realize she was in an impossible situation? As a lawyer said to Hewitt when he cooperated in a book about his affair theoretically he could end in the tower for treason.
        Diana was in a very difficult position to find love or lead a normal relationship. With the fear of loosing the children – like her mother – always there.
        But nothing says that with more life experience and the right man she wouldn’t have had a happy life like her sister’s. Only the Scholl of Charles and Camillas defenders of their abuse of Diana make her the problem.

      • Bqm says:

        I think Diana was terribly impacted by her parent’s divorce, her mother being pushed out and her father’s second marriage. If she’d married anyone as a young woman I think she may have had difficulties. Look at her brother’s marriages. They were the two most impacted by the crash and burn of the Spencer split. But if post Charles Diana had lived long enough to remarry (and it wouldn’t have been to a playboy like Dodi) I think she would’ve done well. Part of the tragedy is that she was really coming into her own when she died. She’d found her footing and her voice in a way she hadn’t previously. She and Charles were coparenting amicably.

        Getting divorced was good for both of them as opposed to the 1992-95 “officially separated but still the future king and queen” holding pattern they were in which hit the low point with the Dimbleby and panorama interviews and all the bad press of Squidgey-gate and tampon gate. Once the bandaid was ripped off she was able to start healing. She sadly got too little time to explore that new life. But had she remarried, especially to someone of substance like a Hasnat Khan, I think she would have been quite happy with her partner and a low drama/high personal satisfaction life.

      • monlette says:

        I doubt even a faultless woman would be happy in a marriage with a man who is simping for a married goblin.

      • Thinking says:

        With respect to the question of her behaviour with other men – I would say it was her interactions (I’ll soften the word down from behaviour) with married men that I do not find suitable. In fact, I prefer to forget that stuff happened which is probably why I never stated it directly and danced around the wording. However, being indirect results in misinterpretation. Given the situation they were in, I think the odds were against Charles and Diana to have a successful marriage or for either of them to behave in a psychologically normal way afterwards.

        I’m not inclined to change other people’s perceptions of her. I do think she was a great princess and that’s what I choose to remember about her. That doesn’t mean I have to see her as beyond reproach though. If others do see her as beyond reproach, that’s your right to do so.

      • Tessa says:

        Thinking. Diana was never named co respondent. She was serious about single Dr khan. Charles was with married women. There is a documentary about lady tryon and her relationship with Charles.

      • Blubb says:

        I don’t think Diana is beyond reproach. It’s just that there is so much lies, nastiness and one-side ess against her, since Charles and Camilla started their PR campaign, thinking smearing Diana would make them liked. While charles always had his affairs and more. I do remember Janet Jenkins once implied she had a son with Charles born three month before Harry. It never was just Camilla.

      • Blubb says:

        Thinking: Camilla holding onto Charles? Am I cruel if I say money? Alice Keppel earned with her affair with King George enough money for her family for generations. Now Camilla does for her children and grandchildren. Alone her sister earned millions from the duchy of Cornwall for interior design. I think Andrew and Fergies grifting would look pale if we could see what Camilla got. For example where are the missing jewels for 80 millions the guardian once talked about?

    • Tessa says:

      Charles does not know what Love is. Clearly.

      • L Williams says:

        No matter who Charles married the results would be the same. Camilla had her hooks into him and would have done everything to drag Charles away from any woman that Charles chose. I saw that pictures of her trying to ingratiate herself by going shopping with Diana and trying to copy Diana’s style totally disgusting.

    • StarWonderful says:

      Exactly! Casting doubt on Diana’s virginal status is a low blow, and utterly uncalled for!

    • NoHope says:

      It struck me as disgusting back then that Diana underwent an examination by a gynecologist to confirm her virginity (no doubt a man doing the exam–ugh, it just sickens me).

      This is a family that never learns, but they did this time. The marriage was such a misery that the same kind of requirements for William were out of the question. Plus what woman would have agreed to this? I think there was a hope that with eight years together, which included living together, that W & C would be better off.

      • Tessa says:

        I think Charles saw Diana as a commodity, the aristo young woman that he needed to have his heirs with. Unfortunately Scooter settled for Keen, after all the aristo women he courted rejected him.

  6. Amy Bee says:

    This women is terrible.

  7. Brassy Rebel says:

    By the nineteen eighties, any man “required” to marry a virgin would have to rob the cradle which is what Charles did. It’s interesting that so many were okay with this and never gave it a thought.

    • Tessa says:

      Davina Sheffield one of Charles prospects was and is a lovely woman. She passed the Balmoral Test. An ex came forward and said she had a relationship with him, a serious one. So Charles ditched her. such hypocrisy.

  8. Mrs.Krabapple says:

    They did, even back then. Many aristos also felt Diana was too good for Charles (mostly based on racism, as Diana was a true blue blood and Charles mostly german)

  9. Tessa says:

    The same Diana bashing stories from days of yore. Charles was supposed to be matched with Amanda Knatchbull, Mountbatten’s granddaughter. she turned him down after her grandfather died, soon after that Charles proposed. Diana was too good for Charles. And this leaves out how Charles was turned down by some other women he was courting. Does Lady Anne think Camilla “suitable”? Lady Fermoy turned on her granddaughter later on and sided with Charles.

  10. Betsy says:

    Remind me not to take marital advice from someone who was beaten repeatedly with her husband’s shark bone walking stick and then stuck around. No thanks.

    And no I don’t want to hear it was a different time blah blah. She came from an aristocratic, wealthy family and could have gone home easily.

    • BeanieBean says:

      Yeah, she’s someone who doesn’t really know what love is. ‘It’s complicated’. Huh. I would suggest being beaten by a walking stick is not so complicated–that ain’t love.

      • Bqm says:

        And yet she loved her husband and defended him. I definitely agree with her that love can be complicated but it shouldn’t be *that* complicated.

  11. sammi says:

    This woman has a poor grasp of normal life and people given her very abusive marriage and sycophantic allegiance to the Royals. Graham Norton seems to idolise her and gives her spots on his shows because she is amusing and has good stories to tell. I feel sorry for her but she has little empathy for what other woman have suffered in the Royal hierarchy which is sad given her history.

  12. jferber says:

    One thought: f-ck her.

    • QuiteContrary says:

      I’d prefer she go f*ck herself …

      She’s a nasty old woman, especially given Diana’s kindness about her son.

  13. BeanieBean says:

    ‘Our nanny’. Lady, you were an employee of Margaret’s! Just like the nanny!

  14. Beverley says:

    What a poisonous POS this beeyotch is! Every word is like venom.
    How quaint that a woman who stayed with a violent abuser and got nothing in her divorce has an opinion on Diana as a suitable choice for Charles.
    What a nerve!

    • Unblinkered says:

      Anne Glenconner is a silly old thing and, one imagines, quite lonely to be indulging herself with comments about Diana – that train left long ago.
      In the past she’s been buttered up by the Middletons when the ghastly crew have been on Mustique, look back at some of her groan-worthy comments about KM.
      Her prattle, for that’s what it is, should be ignored.

  15. Smatone99 says:

    It’s also true she’s a racist old hag. I’m happy to promote that story

  16. CM says:

    I think Wills and Kate are perfectly suited in all ways. They match each other’s energy, or lack there of, and looks to me like no matter what Wills does, Kate is going to tolerate it because she wants to be Queen.

  17. Lucia says:

    Wait … Charles was negligent in not putting his adult sons into arranged marriages? Because he took a “hands off” approach to his sons deciding who to marry? I mean … at least in my world, outside of obvious abuse or fraud, parents should take a “hands off” approach to their grown children’s decisions on marriage.

  18. I thought she was talking about Camilla, so they are still bashing Diana. After all these years? Didn’t Diana have staff to call the Nanny. Why would Lady in Waiting whoese expess job was to make calls ans answer letters for the Queen think Diana should do those jobs herself. UK is exhausting

Commenting Guidelines

Read the article before commenting.

We aim to be a friendly, welcoming site where people can discuss entertainment stories and current events in a lighthearted, safe environment without fear of harassment, excessive negativity, or bullying. Different opinions, backgrounds, ages, and nationalities are welcome here - hatred and bigotry are not. If you make racist or bigoted remarks, comment under multiple names, or wish death on anyone you will be banned. There are no second chances if you violate one of these basic rules.

By commenting you agree to our comment policy and our privacy policy

Do not engage with trolls, contrarians or rude people. Comment "troll" and we will see it.

Please e-mail the moderators at cbcomments at gmail.com to delete a comment if it's offensive or spam. If your comment disappears, it may have been eaten by the spam filter. Please email us to get it retrieved.

You can sign up to get an image next to your name at Gravatar.com Thank you!

Leave a comment after you have read the article

Save my name and email in this browser for the next time I comment