Royal historians are still gaslighting Princess Diana in her damn grave

Prince Charles Retro

Vanity Fair’s Katie Nicholl had a lengthy story about the Duchess of Cornwall/Camilla Parker Bowles and The Crown, a story which I’m breaking up into two posts because it’s kind of bonkers and all over the place. At one point, Nicholl’s sources claim that Camilla is a fan of The Crown and that she’ll watch Season 4 out of curiosity. But then the rest of the VF piece is just Clarence House doing damage control about the absolutely correct narratives in this season of the series, namely that Charles and Windsors left Diana out in the cold, that they didn’t look after this young woman, that they are a toxic cesspool of dysfunction. But what of Camilla? What of Camilla’s role in all of this? Well, of course there’s some revisionist history, courtesy of royal historian Sally Bedell Smith, who spoke at length to Katie Nicholl.

According to royal biographer Sally Bedell Smith, who has written biographies of the Queen, Prince Charles and Diana, the portrayal of Charles and Camilla’s relationship is largely fictitious and could be “uncomfortable viewing” for the future king and his wife.

“Because The Crown is such a lavish and expensive production, so beautifully acted and cleverly written, and so much attention has been paid to visual details about historical events, viewers are tricked into believing that what they are seeing actually happened,” Bedell Smith told Vanity Fair. “While the earlier seasons were period pieces, this is recent history, so it seems more cruel in its false depictions.”

While Bedell Smith concedes that Charles really was that hesitant about marrying Diana, she believes from her extensive research that Charles was committed to making the marriage work. “Peter Morgan has created his own personal narrative of Charles and Camilla’s relationship that is largely fictional. If Diana had been grounded and confident and clever, her other good qualities such as her sense of humor and natural warmth could have won Charles over in a heartbeat, and Camilla would have been history. Charles actually appreciated Diana’s quick wit; during the engagement, he wrote to his grandmother about how funny Diana was.”

She continued, “He did not enter into the marriage cynically, thinking he could keep a mistress on the side. He was telling the truth when he said to Jonathan Dimbleby on camera in 1994 that he had remained faithful to his wedding vows until his marriage to Diana became ‘irretrievably broken down’ in 1986, when he resumed his intimate relationship with Camilla. It’s fair to say that between 1981 and 1986, Charles and Camilla were in telephone contact when he was in distress and needed a sympathetic ear, but their physical relationship was in abeyance for five years.”

Given that the fourth season will dredge up much of the misery and animosity of the past, Bedell Smith believes The Crown could “inflict some serious damage” for the monarchy.

“When I watched the relatively sympathetic depiction of Charles and Camilla in season three, I figured season four would lower the boom on both of them,” she said. “Charles and Camilla have come a long way with all their hard work, especially during the coronavirus pandemic. Camilla in particular has transformed herself from a woman scorned to someone widely admired for her charitable work and respected for assuming her royal role with a genuine commitment. People have come to regard her as a good egg, and to accept the idea of her being queen consort. Because viewers believe incorrectly that The Crown is true, this season in particular could undo all the good feelings about Charles and Camilla and resurrect the hostility from two decades ago. It will also reinforce the false mythology that Diana was the sainted victim.”

[From Vanity Fair]

While I agree that Peter Morgan was likely playing fast and loose with Charles and Camilla’s physical relationship in the early years of his marriage to Diana, these people are still gaslighting Diana IN HER GRAVE. Diana was not the most educated or clever woman in the world, but she knew what was going on with Charles and Camilla very early on. Even if you make the argument that Charles and Camilla weren’t having a physical affair for the first few years of his marriage, he was still having an emotional affair with Camilla throughout and Diana KNEW it. Diana knew that Charles’ heart belonged to Camilla. Not to mention that Charles and Camilla were completely wrapped up in each other during his courtship with Diana. Besides, while I believe that Charles “gave his marriage a chance” for a year or two, his physical affair with Camilla restarted a lot faster than he’s ever admitted. And Diana knew that sh-t too.

Also, this is just so nasty: “If Diana had been grounded and confident and clever, her other good qualities such as her sense of humor and natural warmth could have won Charles over in a heartbeat, and Camilla would have been history.” Sure, it’s all Diana’s fault that Charles cheated on her and mistreated her! She was never good enough! Jeez, do these people listen to themselves?

HRH THE PRINCE OF WALESand Mrs CAMILLA PARKER BOWLESAttending a Gala Dinner in honour of the Prince's Foundation at the Foundation's headquarters in Charlotte Street, ShoreditchCOMPULSORY CREDIT: UPPA/Photoshot PhotoUGL 017469/D-24   20.06.2000

20th Anniversary of Princess Diana's Death

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, WENN and Backgrid.

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

83 Responses to “Royal historians are still gaslighting Princess Diana in her damn grave”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Athyrmose says:

    Also, it seems to have gone right over their heads that this season is a reflection of what most of *us* think of *them*.

    They can lament the storytelling all they want, but they’re watching public opinion. 🤷🏽‍♀️

    • 809Matriarch says:

      And what is doubly upsetting to them is they are seeing the public opinion plummet even further because now the millennials, Gen-X, Gen-Z are seeing what the Yuppies and Baby Boomers witnessed. They smell the stench of Chucky, his appalling snobbish and cold family as well! They see how he slyly tried to hook up Diana and Camilla as “friends” so she would be as unproblematic as Andrew Parker Bowles.

      These youngsters join us boomers and yuppies in applauding Diana and might I add Meghan for getting the heck outta there!

    • Thank you Kaiser! 👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼👏🏼 Very well said. I totally agree with you. Having been in a relationship where my partner was having an EMOTIONAL affair, I can tell you it is a hard thing to fight. Much more incidious than a physical affair in many ways. When your partner looks to this other person for all their emotional needs, there is no marriage because you are the one who is not being communicated with or recognized as the other half. You become the outsider, the enemy, even though you are the actual spouse.

  2. Aang says:

    She was a teenager. Same age as my daughter who loves k-pop, makes tik toks, and still has a bed full of Disney plushes. I could not imagine my daughter being a wife to anyone right now, let alone an emotionally stunted, needy man who is at the same time highly educated, worldly, sophisticated, and in love with someone else. What a nightmare for Diana. Her family should have protected her as soon as they saw Charles was interested.

  3. JT says:

    This is what they are spending the Brits taxpayer money on, an expensive campaign to delegitimize The Crown. My God. How pathetic. All of the whining that they are doing is just convincing people that most of it is true. And notice how they can’t outright say that this family wasn’t awful to Diana or Charles wasn’t an a**hole. Instead they are just saying it was all Diana’s fault she wasn’t treated well.

    • Elizabeth Regina says:

      Yup! It’s the familiar version of ‘why wouldn’t stay and let us abuse you’ that they said about M. Princess Margaret was right. History does repeat itself to the detriment of that family.

    • ABritGuest says:

      I’m so bemused all this energy is being expended on a TV SERIES, which deals with matters that have long been reported on, in the middle of a pandemic. Talk about tone deaf. I think it shows how little press scrutiny/ criticism certain royals have faced in the last few years that the Crown would bother so much. The fragility is astounding.

      I also find it interesting how much people care about feelings now like these same commentators haven’t been eating off the gossip about the rift between William& Harry and Meghan & her father

      And did Sally miss Charles bio from his own journals where he claimed he never loved Diana & was forced into a loveless marriage by his parents?

      Going by this revisionism it’s lucky Charles confessed to his affair on camera etc as clearly it would have been denied and Diana made out to be a total villain.

      • JT says:

        Lol at her comment that Diana should have won over Charles. Charles married for f*ck sakes. She already won him over in theory. Do women really have to win over their husbands after the I dos? It just proves that Camilla was, in fact, another person in Diana’s marriage that she had to compete with. How does this makes Charles look better? How do her comments disprove that Diana was treated horribly?

  4. Elizabeth Regina says:

    Prince Charles was always emotionally bound to Camilla. He also had plenty of side pieces. No woman would have ever measured up to her. It didn’t help that they had a friendship which they kept going all through their respective marriages. He even reportedly paid her children’s school fees! She massaged his ego so much it was disgusting. The RF can wheel out all the mouth pieces in the world but Diana’s own words and H and M leaving that cesspool is all the proof we need.

    • 809Matriarch says:

      Lord, I remember him telling Camilla, “your greatest achievement is — to. love. me.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      @Elizabeth Regina – Agree with you 100%. Prince Charles was always emotionally bound to Camilla. Charles had many side pieces (all married women) for his physical needs. Camilla was never as emotionally tied-up with Charles as he was with her. However, I have no doubt she was tied to Charles in other ways.

      One scene I especially liked in the Crown was where Anne tells Charles that the Parker-Bowels marriage is not as shaky and unstable as he believes. Anne would know as she has “carried on and off” with Anne Parker-Bowels since she day she first meet him.

  5. Becks1 says:

    The part about being grounded and clever was SO gross.

    Like you said Kaiser, even if they weren’t sleeping together, there was an emotional affair going on the entire time. You don’t wear cufflinks with C and C if there isn’t an emotional affair. and I do believe they started sleeping together a lot sooner than Charles will admit. I think he picked 1986 because Harry was two by that point, and Charles knows it would be a really bad look to admit to sleeping with Camilla again while Diana was pregnant or the boys were babies.

    But, at least this article makes the point of all this hysteria over the series very clear – “People have come to regard her as a good egg, and to accept the idea of her being queen consort.”

    It’s all about the Queen consort title, and Charles knows this sets that back.

    • Lady2Lazy says:

      @ Becks1, you and Kaiser are absolutely right. In fact Charles saw Camilla just before or the night before the wedding were he gave her a bracelet I believe, and she gave him the cuff links, with their pet names. You can not devote yourself truly to a marriage if you are having an emotional affair. It can’t be done because you are prioritizing your feelings to the mistress and NOT the wife, as in Diana’s case. If he had taken that energy and devotion into his marriage, they could have worked it out, but Charles was never fully committed. The marriage ending was clearly the fault of Charles, given that he was involved with Camilla during the entire marriage.

    • Mika says:

      It’s kind of hilarious that they think people care about whether Camilla is good enough to be “Queen Consort” ? Charles isn’t good enough to be King. William isn’t good enough to be Prince of Wales. Andrew isn’t good enough to be walking free. The whole institution is stupid and that family is garbage – I’d have some perspective if I was the RF.

    • Totally agree Becks1. I think there might have been a small window of time when Charles was faithful, but not the years he wants to have written as historical fact. I remember Diana stating how shocked she was as she and Charles were walking back down the aisle after their marriage, to look up and see Camilla’s face in the church.

  6. Nanea says:

    Right, so the man who took cufflinks custom-made for him by his mistress along on their honeymoon, wasn’t a cynic at all and absolutely and emphatically did not keep a mistress on the side.

    Not mentioning the fact that Camilla was so strategically plced in St. Paul’s that Diana couldn’t help but notice her.

    • Kalana says:

      And in the picture it looked like Camilla wore white to the wedding!

      • Nic919 says:

        I never realized Camilla had worn white to the wedding until I saw the photo a few days ago. It was also obvious that no one else around her was wearing all white to the wedding. Very petty move.

      • L84Tea says:

        I never realized she wore white to the wedding, but i did look up the pictures. YIKES.

  7. Angie says:

    I read this article and I was pissed! People don’t believe this crap, do they?

  8. Kalana says:

    Sally Bedell Smith is a nasty piece of work. She’s gone in on Meghan as well. I think she’s also one of the authors who keeps trying to playing armchair psychiatrist and diagnose Diana to avoid looking at the dysfunction and abuse in Charles’ upbringing and behavior. Diana was too fragile and should have known better just as Harry is too fragile and Meghan should have known better.

    I’ve noticed that in order to defend the BRF all the stans have resorted to rather terrible reactionary behavior. Isn’t it easier and more honest to just admit this family needs to do a lot of work on themselves? What is with this bizarre need to make excuses to the point of going along with painting a woman as a hopeless hysteric just to avoid examining the BRF?

    Also why would Diana *need* to win Charles over? They were married and according to Sally, Charles was totally faithful, right? Why would Charles need to be won over from 1981-1986 if Camilla was already history? And why was Camilla just there waiting for this married man the entire time? Why was Charles getting emotional support from someone who wanted to cheat with him?

    • Tessa says:

      Bedell Smith labeled Diana as having “borderline personality disorder” (she had bulimia nervosa in reality) to try to “excuse” what Charles and Camilla did. Diana married Charles became the WIFE and she should not have tried to “win over” her own husband from his married mistress. Even though in her efforts to praise C and C she did reveal Stuart Higgins reporting that Camilla would call him once a week during the DIana Charles marriage to give “her side.” Then she reported how a pregnant Camilla (pregnant with Laura Parker Bowles) would call up Charles to complain about her marriage, which sounded rather awful to me.

  9. Amy Bee says:

    All this complaining and explaining! They can try to rewrite history as much as they want, it still doesn’t change the fact that Charles mistreated Diana and Camilla was a willing participant.

    • Lady2Lazy says:

      @ Amy Bee, yup!! We all know the truth as Diana told it. Charles was an awful husband and his family is a batch of horrible human beings, as they were and still are!!

  10. SirThang says:

    Did Camilla, Charles & the Queen virtually traffic a young teen, on a national stage? Diana was constantly manipulated & discounted- isolated & suicidal re undue influence. The Royals need to now grapple w this wound – it’s reopened in the #metoo era

  11. minx says:

    The whitewashing of Charles and Camilla is disgusting.

    • Lorelei says:

      Agreed. And I think it’s a reeeeeeal stretch to claim that Camilla is “widely admired and respected.” I would say that for the most part, public opinion is that she’s tolerated at best. It will be interesting to see what title she ends up with, because this is a real setback to all of Charles’s years of diligent PR in order for her to be accepted as Queen Consort.

  12. Eleonor says:

    My mum is a huge Dianalooney and the Charles and Camilla affair was well known.
    Even before the internet, no way people would believe for a second that he has been faithful physically or emotionally even for one day. Diana was a teenager, but that situation would have destroyed anyone confidence.

    • H says:

      I was a big Diana fan and I can’t believe how KP is trying to rewrite history. Diana was 19. My 19 y.o. can’t remember when she has a quiz in school and Diana was supposed to know EVERYTHING about the RF? Please, Charles. Take ALL the seats.

  13. S808 says:

    So it’s DIANA’S fault Charles is POS and a cheater?! Look, I understand he didn’t want to marry her and loved Camilla. I get he was pressured into it, but how he CHOSE to treat Diana and navigate the marriage is on HIM. Not Diana, not camilla (though she is FAR from innocent), HIM. All of this could’ve been avoided if he wasn’t such a goddamn coward or chose not to marry a child.

  14. NotSoSimpleTaylor says:

    The historians can say what they want, no one believes them anyway.

    It seems unfair Camilla gets dragged into all of this except by virtue of being present and the one Charles was in love with. What happened to Diana is on the Queen and Charles. The Queen for forcing that marriage on Charles and Charles for not having the balls to be honest with Diana when they were “dating.”

    All of this could have been avoided with Diana if they had shown some kindness. If she had psychological problems, it was because she was a young girl who was horribly mistreated by her own family and the royal family. Had they been even remotely human towards her, there would have been far less consequences. Instead, Diana was forced to empower herself and take control of her life. That was incredibly brave and admirable of her given the circumstances.

    • minx says:

      Camilla didn’t get dragged anything, she was a full participant.

    • Tessa says:

      Charles was not forced, the Queen did not force him. HE was 32 years old not a baby. Charles made the choice and nobody else did. ANd Camilla aided and abetted Charles’ treatment of Diana–in a letter that came into the public domain Camilla told Charles to ignore that ridiculous creature. In another letter, Camilla showed contempt for Andrew Parker Bowles referring him as “it” to Charles. IF Charles wanted a marriage with Diana he should have dumped Camila. He had no trouble ditching Lady Tryon. HE could have done the same with Camilla.

      • NotSoSimpleTaylor says:

        Not what I meant but yes. Charles should have just stayed a bachelor. He was not forced into marrying Diana and was deceptive and cruel to her. The entire crown was. However Camilla and Diana never met and I think that rather deceptive to say they interacted.

  15. Nic919 says:

    It’s been pretty gross the way the royal “reporters” have been trying to blame Diana for Charles cheating with Camilla (and others). I have seen another excerpt trying to suggest that Diana was the first to physically cheat so it was ok for Charles to do so.

    It’s not going to work for anyone outside of sycophants. And in not surprising news it’s obvious the Kate stans are supporting these attacks on William’s mother.

    • Tessa says:

      Diana did not cheat first. She told Settelen there was no sexual affair with Mannakee. Even Ingrid Seward wrote there was no affair, and she does not like Diana. Some sources say Charles became intimate with Camilla as early as 1983.

      • Lorelei says:

        This is honestly the first time I’ve even heard anyone suggest that Diana was the first to cheat because that is patently untrue and anyone who’s paid the least bit of attention knows it.

        I find it interesting that Cambridge stans are taking Camilla’s side instead of William’s beloved mother…?

  16. Mich says:

    They should just be happy the show isn’t touching ‘tampongate’.

    • lanne says:

      That would be happening in season 5 right?

      • Becks1 says:

        Yup. I think the season ended in 1988, 1989 at the latest. Season 5 will cover all the interviews, tampon-gate, the annus horribilis, etc.

      • Nic919 says:

        Thatcher was pushed out in 1990 so that’s where they ended the season if they are going to be accurate with when that happened.

      • No Tampongate. The actor playing Charles negotiated to not have that scenario as part of his role. Josh just talked about it in ELLE or Harper’s Baazar article. He said in most of his roles there was nudity or his character was a bit of a sleeze. He said he knew his mom would watch him in The Crown and he just couldn’t do ‘Tampongate’ knowing his mother would watch it. Peter Morgan agreed to leave it out.

    • Mindy_Dopple says:

      Ok, I don’t follow royal history and gossip (well until Megan of course) but I need to know what ya’ll are talking about!

      • Becks1 says:

        Oh its gross. Charles’ phone was tapped (I think?) and there were recordings that papers eventually got their hands on. This included a convo where he told Camilla that he wanted to be recreated as her tampon so he could be insider her all the time or something.

        I just googled and it says that Josh O’Connor (who plays Charles) ensured that it wouldn’t be on the Crown, but we aren’t at that point yet anyway.

      • A says:

        Mindy, there was a recording of a phone call between Charles and Camilla in the 90s where he says something like he wants to be in her forever and she replied will you incarnate as my knickers and he laughs “with my bad luck I will probably incarnate as your tampon.” it was a HUGE scandal and often is quoted as him saying he wanted to be her tampon.

      • L84Tea says:

        There was an SNL skit about it back in the day that was HILARIOUS. If I recall, Dana Carvey played Charles and had himself miniaturized and made himself comfortable inside a box of Cam’s tampons. I’m cackling just at the memory of it!

        Found it!

      • Tessa says:

        at the time of the Camillagate tapes, young women were said to go to a Pharmacy and ask for a box of “Charlies.”

      • SomeChick says:

        L84Tea! OMG!!! Hilarious!!! Thanks for finding and posting that. HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! I’m crying laughing.

  17. Christina says:

    Charles and Camilla used Diana. Everybody saw it. Anyone trying to revise to the version they prefer didn’t watch it play out in news cycles daily in the 1990s.

    Camilla and Charles used to joke about how her ancestor was his ancestor’s side piece. The courtiers accepted Camilla as an affair. Diana was a Turnip Toff who cleaned up Charles’s reputation (he had one – he, Edward, and Andrew were my generation’s Harry and William), and the courtiers kept giving interviews about how Diana wasn’t smart enough, and hysterical, etc., because that is how women are publicly shamed if they dare fight back, princess or pauper.

    Poor Camilla. Fun personality, but her man didn’t love her enough to give up the throne, so he had to shoe-horn her into the RF after Diana died, and he did it on the good will Harry and William had as Diana’s sons. She just slipped into the PUBLICLY visible part of the RF, and the public accepted it because “Poor Charles was so unhappy in a forced marriage for propriety’s sake, so he should marry for love”. They checked Diana’s HYMEN to ENSURE that she was a virgin on her wedding night!

    When Harry dares marry for love, and he’s “The Spare”, nobody remembers how Camilla ended up a divorcee married to a future King (if Elizabeth dies in time to give him a year or two of it). Is it that Camilla is an English divorcee instead of an American?

    As Arsenio Hall used it say, “…things that make you go “Hmmmm…’ “

    • lanne says:

      3/4 divorced children for queen, divorced man marries divorced woman: they will be king and queen consort. 6th in line marries divorced BIRACIAL AMERICAN woman? Fetch the smelling salts! It’s the end of the world. They are nothing but a passel of pasty ass miserable racists with sticks up their rectums. This excoriation is karma

  18. Cee says:

    Can someone explain to me why Charles wasn’t allowed to marry Camilla in the first place and why they orchestrated an arranged/forced marriage between Parker Bowles and her by convincing the parents it had to be done?
    Why was Camilla not appropriate?

    • GuestWho says:

      Camilla did not want to marry Charles. Andrew Parker Bowles was the catch of their generation. I don’t think they woud have divorced if Charles hadn’t admitted publicly, on television, that they were involved in an affair. Camilla and APB were perfectly content to go forward with her (“discretely”) being the POW’s mistress. It’s a power thing. But once it was out there, APB wasn’t having it anymore.

      Also, Charles apparently wasn’t ready to settle down at the time they first became involved, so she married the guy she wanted to marry.

      Word at the time of his marriage to Diana was that Camilla wasn’t suitable because she wasn’t a virgin. They did a hyman check on Diana, so that could be true. But what it comes down to is that Camilla married the man she wanted to marry. Being the mistress of the POW is more fun than being his wife. I think her grandmother was also a mistress to a POW. It’s a societal status symbol to be the one banging power. She also wasn’t his only mistress at the time. This “true love denied” narrative is a load of crap.

      • Christina says:

        Ah! Camilla wanted to be free. Thank you, Guestwho. That makes sense. She has always gotten to watch how the sausage was made, so she only went into the family on her own terms. My American bias is showing. Americans haven’t known the Parker Bowels family like people in Great Briton do.

      • Becks1 says:

        Yeah whether or not Charles wanted to marry her initially, Camilla didn’t want to marry him. She wanted to marry APB and she did. The story about how they weren’t permitted to marry and it was this whole thwarted romance so Charles had NO CHOICE but to cheat on Diana is just Windsor spin.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Becks1 – I am so glad someone other than me has stated that Camilla DID NOT want to marry Charles.

        Andrew Parker-Bowles was Camilla’s first choice and I believe if all the “true crap dirtying up the laundry and frightening the horses” had never come out to the light of day for the public to see Camilla would still be married to APB in an open-marriage arrangement and still be a Royal mistress.

        After the Parker-Bowels divorce APB married Rosemary Pittman, his mistress of 10 years.

        @GuessWho – “This “true love denied” narrative is a load of crap.” To be more precise, this “true love denied” is an 18-wheeler semi-tractor-trailer load of crap.

      • Rebecca says:

        Andrew wanted to marry his long time mistress and he married her a year after his divorce from Camilla. She later died from cancer.

        His decision had nothing to do with Charles’ admission of infidelity. His and Camilla’s affairs were public knowledge around their set and the general public by the time of the Parker Bowlea divorce. Their friends actively facilitated the affairs by allowing them to use their homes for meet ups.

        Camilla and Charles weren’t discreet. Neither was Andrew and all his lovers.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Rebecca – I never meant to imply that APB did not want to marry Rosemary Pittman.

      • detritus says:

        They did a hymen check?!?

      • Feeshalori says:

        I remember her uncle stating at the time that she was a virgin. Imagine how that would have felt to have that declared to the world!🙄

      • Lorelei says:

        @Detritus— yes, isn’t that wild?! I don’t know when they changed it, but back in the day, a member of government (I think; I forget exactly who) had to be present at the birth to make sure there was a witness, so many of those poor women before Diana had to have a strange man in the room when they gave birth 😟 Thankfully they stopped requiring that, but I’m not sure how long the hymen checks went on for.

        Also, how and why would Diana’s UNCLE be the one to declare she was a virgin? How would he know…? I love my uncles but they are the dead last people I would be discussing my romantic life with when I was 18 years old.

        They had to have known that Kate wasn’t a virgin at the time of her marriage to William; I guess they just had to give up on that at some point. I’ve always wondered if they insisted upon some sort of fertility testing, since her most important job is providing the heir and the spare.

    • Tessa says:

      The Prince of Wales (1994) was by Jonathan Dimbleby a reporter Charles named as his authorized biographer to commemorate 25 years as the Prince of Wales. He had access to Charles, all his friends, and Charles letters and papers. It was made clear that Charles did not want to get married when he met Camilla and he never gave her any sort of inkling they ha a future together, He never even went to his parents to see if he could marry her. In addition, Dimbleby prepared a documentary about Charles’ work as POW and in that interview Charles twitched and admitted adultery. Soon after APB and Camilla got a divorce. APB was willing to put up with the open marriage as long as it stayed as an “open secret.” When Charles admitted it, it was broadcast to the world. That forced the PB divorce.

  19. GuestWho says:

    Is this not the same man who told his young wife that he woldn’t be the first prince of wales to not have a mistress?

    And what about his other mistress(es) – Kanga, Lady Tryon anyone? The only woman Charles said understood him. Diana actually teamed up with her against the Rotweiller, yes?

    Royal historians need to understand how the internet works.

    • Tessa says:

      Lady Tryon was a more traditional mistress. Camilla actually undermined the wife. He also had an on again off again mistress, a lady friend from Canada, Janet Jenkins.

  20. Joy says:

    Be pretty but not too pretty. Be public but just a certain amount. Get attention but not too much attention. Make the peasants love you but not TOO MUCH. Like, why are they this way? If you do anything other than waity your life away they hate you.

  21. ShazBot says:

    didn’t Charles say to Diana “do you really expect me to be the first Prince of Wales in history without a mistress?” I feel like I read that from an interview.
    I always think of that and how messed up that set is.

  22. DS9 says:

    These people will never admit that the traditional royal marriage cycle was to dally with fun mistresses through your 20s, marry in your 30’s, remain faith long enough to plant an heir and a spare and then take back up with the mistresses.

    That was the game Camilla and Charles expected Diana to play. I think Charles hoped and wanted Camilla to be the wife and/or wanted to delay marriage in general a little longer. But Camilla did not wish to be queen and the rest of the royal family didn’t want her either.

    Had Diana gone along with this separate lives after securing the succession bullshit, we wouldn’t have heard a peep. But it was a long dead expectation which really shows how insulated the Royals have always been that they thought any girl of 18 would know, expect, or abide it.

    Except Kate Middleton… I will always believe that’s why he kept her waiting and why the palace moved forward with her. That waiting period proved she’d endure a traditional wandering royal marriage, complete with the he can cheat but she can’t double standard.

    • Nyro says:

      Kate, at nearly 40, is everything they desperately wanted Diana to be at 19. Even as a shy and sheltered 19 year old, Diana was pushing back in her own way, making noise about her poor treatment. By the time she was an experienced woman in her 30, she was full on waging war the entire institution. Not Kate though. There isn’t a bit of fire in that woman. She has and will forever keep her head down, stay silent, twist herself into a pretzel for the institution, not worry her pretty little head with political opinions or dreams of actually making a difference, etc.

  23. Fleur says:

    Even if he wasn’t physically with Camila for five years , emotional infidelity is as irrevocably damaging as physical infidelity. Diana was a child at the start of their marriage and he was a 30 something prince.

  24. Mel says:

    Diana is gone and unable to speak for herself but her adult children have to live this drama again which is why I will watch the crown s4 as a piece of entertainment but not assume that it is bang on accurate. What is accurate is that C and D were ill suited for many reasons. C made bad choices. So did D (Dodi?). She was too young and he was marrying for the wrong reasons. Both made mistakes. If not for the royal presumed fairy tale everyone would have moved on a million years ago. Instead there are sides taken and blame laid and scars reopened. Imagine how hard this is for H and W to have this playing out. As the line between fact and fiction becomes fuzzier in the Trump era I think it is important to be less inclined to jump to judge and be more discerning about what passes for fact. While compelling entertainment the crown is really a dramatization of other’s experiences – none of whom have endorsed or contributed to the narrative. Truth is generally messier than we would like. It’s time to let Diana Rest In Peace.

    • Tessa says:

      Diana will never be forgotten. I think Charles hoped people will forget but when he is seen with Camilla those who recall it all will think of Diana. Diana was only dating Dodi, she did not marry him. She probably would not have and had she lived would have found someone right for her.

  25. detritus says:

    How exactly is Diana, the teenager marrying into one of the most powerful families of the world, not the victim in this story? Not the sainted victim.. that’s so grossly loaded.

    He had the advantage of age, wealth, hugely prestigious position based on birth right, a jump off in the wings, and a machine to twist the media.

    How exactly is she NOT the victim in this sad story? Because she wasn’t “grounded enough” to win him away from another woman? When she was married to him?

    I don’t get these people

  26. Thirtynine says:

    She says straight out their real concern- that it will undo the years of whitewashing and threaten Camilla’s chances to successfully become Queen Consort.

  27. BC says:

    Makes me so furious all over again. Watching The Crown makes me hate them all again with a passion. The fact that Charles went on to marry that woman and Harry and William had to be around. Charles was in his what, 30s, supposedly an adult and married a child and expected to level up emotionally to him and didnt bother divorcing her when she couldnt. Instead bullied and manipulated and gaslit her to death! Shame on the lot of them! Wheres their comeuppance? Makes me so angry

  28. Blerg says:

    At the time (I was a teenager,) I loved that photo of Charles with his arm on Diana’s shoulder, and all those early photos, but now it is giving me serious Andrew-with-Virginia-Roberts vibes, and all I am feeling is grief for those girls. I also feel sad about how naive I was.

    • Blerg says:

      (I mean, the history of the British monarchy is a series of transactional relationships, and I should have figured out that Charls and Diana weren’t a love match, but I wanted it to be, so that is what I believed.)

  29. Nibbi says:

    “If Diana had been grounded and confident and clever, she would have won him over” …
    woooowwww this makes me see red. Uh, Diana was NINETEEN YEARS OLD when she got sucked into that swamp. She was a kid. No talk of going to university, worked a bit as her sister’s cleaner and a kindergarten assistant. This is to say, she didn’t have loads of life experience and was, uh, kind of chosen for that reason, to be “pure” (ewwwwwwww) and pliable and moldable for what they wanted of her, which was, let’s face it, to bear a couple of children and stay quiet. She quickly understood, despite her youth and naivete, that she wasn’t really loved or valued for who she was. Super awesome foundation for somehow having the “gumption” to “win Charles back” – 33 yr old Charles, who had been in love with Camilla for years. … As if things even work that way to begin with… She couldn’t “make” him love her no matter how wonderful she was. God, those people are gross, the royals and their sycophants alike.

  30. yinyang says:

    Omg she’s so beautiful