Earlier this year, we discussed the excerpts from a biography of Prince Charles. What I didn’t mention at the time was that it seemed like odd timing for Charles to agree to a semi-authorized book to be released just as everything was ramping up for coverage of the twentieth anniversary of Princess Diana’s death. Now, something even weirder: Camilla got her own semi-authorized biography too. It’s called The Duchess: the Untold Story, by Penny Junor. People Magazine has some excerpts and wow, are they inappropriate this year.
Prince Charles was sad when Camilla decided to marry. Junor details Prince Charles’s sadness when Camilla decided to marry Andrew Parker Bowles in 1973. Although she and Charles had met two years prior and fallen in love, she was not deemed “sufficiently aristocratic” to be the future king’s wife. What’s more, she was not a virgin, which was then considered a prerequisite by Charles’s great uncle and close adviser, Lord Mountbatten.
Camilla dumped Charles by letter. “She wrote to Charles herself to tell him. Her letter broke the prince’s heart. In great distress, he fired off anguished letters of his own to his nearest and dearest. It seemed to him particularly cruel, he wrote in one letter, that after ‘such a blissful, peaceful and mutually happy relationship’, fate had decreed that it should last a mere six months.” Before the July 4 wedding, he made one “last-ditch” attempt to stop her from marrying Parker Bowles by writing her a letter, to no avail.
Charles was attracted to Camilla immediately. The attraction was “immediate . . . He loved the fact that she smiled with her eyes as well as her mouth, and laughed at the same silly things as he did. He also liked that she was so natural and easy and friendly, not in any way overawed by him, not fawning or sycophantic. In short, he was very taken with her, and after that first meeting he began ringing her up.”
Charles ignored Diana on their honeymoon. According to the book, Diana resented Charles for sitting for hours painting watercolors during their honeymoon onboard the HMS Britannia, so one day she destroyed his painting and his equipment.
The photo of Camilla. Junor claims Charles and Diana were consulting their schedules when a photograph of Camilla fell out of Charles’ diary. Later, Diana noticed the prince was wearing a pair of gold cufflinks engraved with interwoven Cs — which she took to mean Charles and Camilla. “It’s hard to believe that anyone as intelligent and well-read as the Prince of Wales could be so stupid — so utterly incapable of imagining what a new wife might conclude if her husband carried a photograph of his old girlfriend in his diary,” Junor says of the cufflink incident, according to the new except.
What an unnamed friend of Charles says about Charles & Diana: “He made a huge mistake. You can sympathize with Diana — oh God, yes. Put that way, he was the architect of the disaster . . . also he wouldn’t have had the sensitivity. He’s very interested in objective things, but not subjective, so he couldn’t have understood the complexities of her feelings.”
Reigniting his affair with Camilla. Camilla and Charles renewed their affair in 1986 after friends urged the prince to reconnect with Camilla after they grew worried about his happiness and possibly heading towards a nervous breakdown. According to friends, Camilla was “the only person who might be able to lift his spirits,” Junor claims. Diana, for her part, had already started her affair with cavalry major James Hewitt, Junor says.
Please don’t let this biography act as revisionist history towards what was a really terrible moment for the late Princess of Wales. Camilla and Charles’ affair cooled down for a few years, in the early years of the Wales’ marriage. But Camilla and Charles started up again way before Diana and James Hewitt began. I also believe it’s revisionist history to treat Camilla and Charles’ love story as some kind of grand “they were pining away for each other for years, they were kept apart by his family” sort of thing. Tina Brown’s The Diana Chronicles made a really good point about this: Camilla is the love of Charles’ life, but Andrew Parker Bowles was the love of Camilla’s life. Camilla didn’t marry Andrew Parker Bowles because Charles’ family didn’t think she was aristocratic enough or whatever – Camilla married Andrew because he was a catch, because he was “dishy” and because she loved him.
Photos courtesy of WENN.
From what I read, it didn’t make it seem like Charles and Camilla started up because Diana was having affairs. It sounded like Charles and Diana were miserable and then he started back up with Camilla (along with Dale Tryon and other women). I don’t see it being “revisionist” at all. I feel like the truth is somewhere in the middle of all these pro-Diana (Morton) and pro-Charles (Juror) stories. He’s self absorbed and spoiled. She was emotionally unbalanced and too young.
If she actually destroyed his painting and equipment on the honeymoon, that sounds like a huge red flag that might have made him feel it was completely a mistake from the beginning. That’s not normal behavior at all and can’t be explained by the age difference. She wasn’t thirteen years old.
Sometimes it does happen that behavior on the honeymoon sours the relationship quickly. People can restrain themselves during courtship but let their true selves out once married and sometimes that true self is too different from what one or both thought they were getting. As royals, they didn’t really have the option of an annulment or a quick divorce after that huge wedding. Plus there was the pressure of getting an heir and a spare. Really sad for both of them. They were stuck with each other.
Dianas version is extremely self effacing. She calls herself a fool often and describes throwing herself down the stairs when he suggested her depression was fake. That version is probably the closest version to truth that we will ever have. This book smacks of a bid to rehabilitate Camilla in time for the Queens death so that she can ascend as Queen instead of whatever they promised.
I havent watched Diana’s version recently but I am vaguely recalling she was angry that he spent no time with her at her own honeymoon. He basically consumated it and went off to read his books. She also said that she had been made aware in the week of the wedding that he and Camilla were on and she even searched for Camilla at the Church as she walked up the aisle. I think you throw that many things at a teenager and they might do what teenagers do and demand some validation. She was nineteen afterall.
I will say one other thing. Diana had the courage to tell her story while all who were involved were still living and able to refute it. This is unbelievable cowardise to write these things about a woman who cannot defend herself. Nauseating.
I think it played a big part that Diana was mentally ill. That puts a strain on even the best relationships. Someone as emotionally uptight as Charles was absolutely unable to deal with that and no one gave Diana the help she needed. That made everything so much worse. They were unsuited for each other. It was ill fated from the beginning.
Anatha this is gaslighting. I can’t even begin to fathom how it must have felt like for Diana to have perfectly human reactions to a terrible situation dismissed as “mental illness”. How awful.
Yes she struggled with depression and bulimia but so have many here. It doesn’t make every response to a bad marriage invalid. In fact, it raises questions about what her “loved ones” were doing to limit triggers.
Furthermore, it looks like Charles to had his own mental and emotional challenges. A middle aged man who weeps the day before his wedding and doesn’t get out has unresolved issues of some sort. In fact the appeal of Camilla appears to be that she puts his psychologal and emotional needs first. Which Diana couldn’t do because she was just a kid and equally expected her emotional needs prioritised.
Anyway, we don’t gaslight Prince Charles for his mental issues. Can we not gaslight her for hers please. Many neurotypicals would have had a rush of temper if they found themselves already dismissed in the first week of a marriage made at 19.
@Nyawira-I’m not going to defend Charles having affairs or being self absorbed. But remember Diana stalking her boyfriends’ wives-that is not simply being depressed or having an eating disorder.
Ramona , Totally with you.
It is bullshit that people label her ‘mental’ to make excuse for Charles and Camillia . She was not before marriage. If I was in her situation, pressure of married the man who considered you as an object and pining for another woman, added his friends abetted and helped with his tryst. I am glad that her sons honour her as their mother and not letting her be forgotten. They are the ones who knew her as a loving mother and the ones who witnessed her suffering.
Honestly, how fragile is the aristocratic psyche?? I feel like Oprah should be here shouting: “Diana had a breakdown, Charles had a breakdown, EVERYONE gets a breakdown!” Sheesh, glad I’m of peasant stock lol. Seriously, though, what a trough of revisionist crap!
I’m sorry that I didn’t express it the way I wanted. I’m not putting the blame on Diana. She said herself that she had bulimia even before her marriage and went through some crisis before the marriage. A teenager can usually expect others to at least try to understand her and try to make the situation better for her. Any human worth being called that would have tried to help her once being aware of it. Charles didn’t. The royal family told her to suck it up, which made it worse.
I have no idea if Charles mental issues were ever named, but I agree that being distant and not being able to see his young wife suffering or even trying to deal with it, is a deciding factor and a mental issue of its own. Doesn’t speak of a mature mind.
How is that being revisionist and saying that what Charles and Camilla did is okay in any way? I didn’t mention Camilla at all, because even though she played a factor in the downfall, I doubt Diana and Charles would have worked out without her.
@Anatha, I wasn’t directing my comment at you…so sorry! I mean the Penny Junior claptrap, trying to paint C & C in a rosy haze to “twue wuv” 🤢 HERS was APB, his is himself, first, and then her (my opinion, of course) 😊
Having had experience with people suffering from the “dramatic” family of personality disorders (my sister, my best friend, Mr. Jaded’s ex-wife), Diana clearly suffered from borderline personality disorder (BPD) and histrionic personality disorder (HPD). Symptoms can include unstable relationships, unclear or unstable self-image, impulsive self-destructive behaviors, self-harm or suicidal thoughts, chronic feelings of emptiness, explosive anger, addictive behaviours, up and down moods often as a reaction to interpersonal stress, intense fear of being alone or abandoned, ongoing feelings of insecurity, stress-related paranoia that comes and goes, negative reaction to delayed gratification and an overwhelming need to be the centre of attention.
Some posters are saying we’re “gaslighting” Diana, that she wasn’t a “mental case” and that she was just a normal 19 year-old in a marriage to someone who didn’t love her. That’s all true but for someone with the existing disorder(s), her relationship with Charles was like putting a torch to a can of gasoline. These disorders are wayyyy more common than most people realize and require intensive psychiatric therapy and sometimes anti-depressants to control. It’s like the sufferer has arrested emotional development.
Their marriage was a perfect storm from the get-go. They were totally mis-matched due to the anachronistic rule of having to marry someone with a title and no sexual history. Silly really and they just ended up having a miserable, soap-opera of a marriage that brought pain and suffering to themselves and their children.
Ramona, I have to applaude your statement. It was a lights on moment: Diana did have the courage to write this while stills alive. These two are trying to re write history and the only person who can refute has been forever silenced. Every time I try to warm up to Camilla, that fact alone makes me stand firm that however wrong all parties were Diana deserved better.
Agree with Jaded’s assessment here.
Jaded
Please don’t diagnose
A if you are not a medical professional
B if you have not spent time with the patient and made an assessment
You speak as though you know Diana as a former patient and are qualified to do so.
It is dangerous and callous to throw really very limited information around in this way
I’m not diagnosing, I’m providing information that I learned about first hand through personal relationships with BPD and HPD sufferers who were my family and friends. I met with my sister’s therapist, I read a TON of information when personality disorders were barely known back in the 80’s, and when my sister died in 1989 as a result of her personality disorders I made it my mission to find out what bedeviled her. I don’t know Diana as a patient but I do know the warning signals of these types of personality disorders. I have way more than limited information and am not throwing limited or dangerous opinions out there. Please give me credit for having personally gone through some tough learning experiences that most of you haven’t gone through.
According to Kelly, Charles was eager to begin a tryst with Camilla because she was one of the few women who hadn’t slept with his father or uncle Louis. If you think the idea of this is ludicrous you don’t know how tawdry and incesuous the aristocracy are lol.
Gasp gasp. @Enough Already please do not laugh at me (non-Brit here) but I had no idea that Charles’ father had been unfaithful to the Queen. Nor have I ever thought that a Queen can be cheated like that. I knew that cheating happens in aristocracy but not when it comes to the Queen. In these modern times.
If Philip was cheating he was discreet enough to keep it decently quiet. I read a book about the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh a few years ago that interviewed several people that were in the inner circle. None of them seemed to know for sure if there was an affair and who it was with.
I’m pretty sure the King of Sweden is a known cheater.
Philip was known to be a big cheater from way back. The Queen just turned a blind eye to it. And she is rumoured to have had affairs of her own. Exhibit A : Prince Andrew is believed to be the “love child” from an affair that the Queen had with a man who was managing her race horses IIRC.
Andrew is rumoured to be the product of an affair with the Earl of Porchester, BUT he has the big Mountbatten teeth that William, and Alexandra Knatchbull nee Mountbatten also have.
LAK
Those are Mountbatten teeth? I’d assumed they were Windsor lol. One thing for certain is the very weak jaw of the Windsors. People slag Bea and Eg but I actually think their Hanoverian eyes are distinctive and beautiful. Sorry for the hijack.
The King of Sweden is a pig, from his love of strip clubs and lap dances, to his treatment of his eldest daughter vs. his slimy son and that son’s questionable wife. A self-made businessman had to wait 9 years to marry Victoria, but a naked model and reality TV participant can marry Precious Son Who Was Robbed of His Birthright (TM) without question.
QEII to her private secretary, as quoted by the secretary. “I am going to have a baby, which I have been trying to do for some time, and that means I won’t be able to go to Ghana as arranged. I want you to go and explain the situation to [President Kwame] Nkrumah and tell him to keep his mouth shut.”
This was when expecting Andrew. Doesn’t strike me as someone trying to cover up a love child, but rather someone who is happy to finally be expecting the reconciliation baby. Andrew arrived 10 years after Anne.
Yes. Phil’s trysts were the unofficial reason Elizabeth had to take away Phil’s yacht. The press were tired of being discreet about what they knew about the real reason Phil enjoyed cruising on it. The press was actually quite fond of Elizabeth and Phil during this period but did not want the queen to end up looking like a fool. She was aware of his indiscretions but thought little of it because they really were a strong couple. There were rough spots but the level of dedication they have to one another earns them a tiny pinch of my respect. Tiny.
Enough Already: Yes. They are Mountbatten teeth. I couldn’t work out where they came from at first. Then i saw pictures of various Mountbattens. Eg http://i.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2016/06/25/15/35A699DD00000578-3659684-image-a-36_1466864237889.jpg
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/51/Aspasia_Manos_2.jpg
Those giant teeth are definitely from Philip’s family.
Yes, very true about Phillip. It’s been known for decades, he had a very long affair with actress Merle Oberon among many others. As a another American, Phillip’s affairs weren’t well known here,
Notasugarhere – I thought Victoria had to wait to marry Daniel because of the aristocratic circles in general not warming to Daniel? Is there an English language biography on that family you recommend?
Oh wow, never knew the teeth were from the Mountbatten’s either!
Yes Phil was a well known slut burger. He is rumoured to have scored princess Alexandra of Kent, the queens first cousin, back in the day. And Mountbattens grand daughter in law. She’s a horsie chick. Was just on the daily mail yesterday as they were all at Patrica Mountbatten’s funeral. She was Louis m’s daughter. Her namr is Knatchbull. Patricia’s son nicholas’s son i think. Prolly 40 years younger than phil. Yes, indeed. The queen sent Phil away for a total of 5 months of continued ‘trips,’ overseas whilst she considered her options. This was when chuckles and Anne were young. She took him back and made him swear to be more discreet.
Yikes…Alexandra? Pretty close to home… Mountbatten’s g-daughter in law Penny Romsey? His carriage driving “partner”? LOL. She is very pretty.
I heard way back when that Lord Mountbatten swung both ways…..true?
Sheesh, can we get some new suits tailored for Charles?
But folks moan when Katie wears a new outfit every day! 🙂
He looks like he slept in that suit.
Why won’t they let this Charles and Diana story fade into history? They had a terrible marriage, were an awful mismatch , and dragged the public into their stupid miserable personal lives for years. The affairs were just the icing on the cake. That said, Diana is dead so lay off won’t you?
Oh, and Penny Junor is a hack. I think she is in love with Charles herself. Read her at your peril. Really terrible taste to release it now, on the anniversary of Diabad death, but the woman should stop writing entirely.
The House of Windsor is off the rails right now. Everyone of them needs to get back to work and shut up about the personal stuff. Or in this case? just place some discreet calls to ypur favorite biographer and tell her to shelve the book until you are dead.
Junor makes her money writing royal fan fiction. This book may be her most creative work yet.
I agree!! I would like to read a bio of Camilla at some point, though. Written by someone a bit more neutral.
Ditto
Maybe we should give it a go, LAK! From Cam to Ma’am!!
If you guys write a book I’m buying! 😁
Amen.
Agree on all counts.
I’ve said before, I think something is up. Whether the Queen is ill or what who knows. This all seems to be laying ground for public to accept King Charles without any hiccups. Maybe they think if they rewrite the truth as fairy tale often enough, eventually people will believe it?
The book has been written because Camilla is about to turn 70. The timing has nothing to do with Diana or the succession.
Suze – ha, I belonged to a royal chat room a few years back, and quite a few thought Penny had a crush on Charles. Wouldn’t surprise me.
I think this is in terrible taste given the 20th anniversary of Diana’s death. There are a number of claims against Diana. The deceased can’t answer, therefore, in that regard, it’s terribly unfair.
There is a new poll published in Canada regarding Charles becoming King and most Canadians are not happy about it.
I will say it’s nice Charles found contentment, however it came at a terrible cost.
I think they are trying to hard now that the Queen is getting so old and Charles will become king in just a few years. Tina Brown definitely has written an excellent and well-balanced biography that doesn’t praise or bring down anyone involved. Camilla married Andrew because she loved him and could care less about Prince Charles, though she was flattered, thank you very much. And no matter how young or temperamental Diana was, every bride deserves at least a nice honeymoon without having to worry about her husband’s ex-girlfriends being on his mind.
I think Tina Brown is well-balanced, but I did come away with the impression she found Camilla to be the most annoying one in the trio.
I’m tired of penny juror making out Camilla to be this fem fatale. Practically drawing in all men with her cooch tractor beam. I just can’t see it myself.
Yes. And it’s really offensive for Junor to write that Charles and Camilla started up again because Diana was “already” having an affair. Talk about trying to shift blame.
Why did Andrew and Camilla get divorced? Bce of Charles?
It was Charles’ interview where he said he’d been unfaithful to Diana and everyone knew who the main mistress was. As long as nothing was ever said publicly I think all parties were content to leave things as they were. But once it went public, I think it forced Parker-Bowles’ hand.
I think. 🙂
Thank you, bluhare! 🙂
Yes-that was my understanding. Apparently Parker-Bowles was constantly unfaithful, all through dating and once they were married. And he knew about Charles and Camilla. But they were “happily married” and would have stayed that way-but once the Charles/Camilla affair broke-he had to divorce her. Then he married his mistress.
Philip was known to be a big cheater from way back. The Queen just turned a blind eye to it. And she is rumoured to have had affairs of her own. Exhibit A : Prince Andrew is believed to be the “love child” from an affair that the Queen had with a man who was managing her race horses IIRC.
Yes, APB certainly knew about Camilla and Charles affair and turned a blind eye to it until, as bluhare says, Charles let everybody know. “Brigadier Parker Bowles had put up with a lot – all the jokes about being willing to lay down his wife for his country – but this was too much, and he initiated divorce proceedings the same year.”
This is a quote from a 2003 biography by Rebecca Tyrrel found in the Telegraph that completely ignores that APB was a notorious philanderer and would have been a hopeless hypocrite not to ignore the Charles and Camilla affair. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/books/3604909/Quite-grand-and-she-doesnt-tip.html
Andrew has the big Mountbatten teeth. Seen on William and Alexandra Knatchbull nee Mountbatten.
That doesn’t prove that HM didn’t canoodle with Porchester, but as far as Andrew being the result, those teeth are a giveaway because they are a Mountbatten family marker. Like the Hanoverian eyes or the Hapsburg chin.
Andrew was the longed-for, much tried-for reconciliation baby. That’s why he’s HM’s favorite, while Edward is Philip’s. HM was wrapped up in Andrew, Philip got to be a relaxed father at 43 to Edward.
Thanks everyone! 🙂
I heard Andrew initiated the divorce yes because he refused to be humiliated by his wife and Charles. It was printed somewhere at the time, seemed well known. It fit at the time but if it’s being rewritten now I have no idea what to believe. All these people seem horrible.
.
Andrew PB was said to be happy with the “honor” of having his wife be the favorite mistress. A point of pride. That’s The Set for you. More recent rumors around Princess Anne and APB.
Andrew parker B wanted a divorce because he wanted to marry his mistress of the time. Ha, his friends wife. He saw his chance. I swear they all act like they are off the council estate.
I just googled Andrew Parker Bowles and I am very disappointed. I expected he’d be a hunk of burning love but no…..OMG. Saw photos of him at his and Camila’s wedding. Ick….premature balding on one hand and just totally not handsome or attractive on the other. I don’t get the attraction.
No sympathy for Charles. YOU DO NOT CHEAT ON YOUR WIFE – especially when she was a teenager when you married her AND you have small children together. You end the relationship and THEN move on.
Not that this is an excuse, but in the case of the Prince of Wales, constitutional role and all that, divorce wasn’t an option like it is for regular folk. Anne and Margaret divorced without any problems except from pearl clutchers that a princess could divorce and being a female, but for the POW, that avenue was closed. That’s one of the reasons Diana said she married a man who wasn’t going to divorce her. Most people interpreted that in the romantic sense, but it was legally true.
Apart from Henry 8 who simply chopped off their heads, every Monarch and or POW who tried to divorce their spouse could not.
George 1 managed it, but that was before he was installed as King of UK. George 4 tried it several times and parliament turned down his request every single time.
When Charles and Diana were finally allowed to separate, the prime minister of the day emphasised that there would be no divorce.
The war of the Wales forced the issue, but constitutional experts had to be drafted in to make it happen, on top of the divorce lawyers.
I speculate that the reason they waged the war of the wales with such bitterness and rancour was because they were stuck with each other. No divorce option. They had to force it because it was bringing down the monarchy and as we all know the Queen only acts to save the monarchy rather than to manage problems before the monarchy is threatened.
“I spevulate that the reason they waged the war of the wales and treated each other so appallingly was because they were stuck with each other. No divorce option.”
This speculations makes a lot of sense. Had they been regular people, they probably would have behaved less drastically. I don’t think either was really truly a bad person, but the weird circumstances of their situation brought out their worst traits to an extreme level. In any other situation, I’d probably think these two were nice enough people.
“I speculate that the reason they waged the war of the wales with such bitterness and rancour was because they were stuck with each other. No divorce option. They had to force it because it was bringing down the monarchy and as we all know the Queen only acts to save the monarchy rather than to manage problems before the monarchy is threatened.”
I also agree. And I think it was all unavoidable once Diana had gone public with the affair – everyone else in that set was quite happy with de facto swinging, whether they were royal or not.
“That’s one of the reasons Diana said she married a man who wasn’t going to divorce her. Most people interpreted that in the romantic sense, but it was legally true.”
Even in her later years, Diana led with her heart not her head so I really doubt your unkind interpretation. She genuinely did expect a fairy tale. And given her childhood complete with an evil step mother, its no surprise that she literally chose a Cinderella dress for her wedding. I doubt that child even knew to find out what the law was. Besides, if she was ever thinking about the potential end of their marriage, the fact that they would just disappear her must have crossed her mind. That was the history afterall and in the 70s, the Government was still known to send in mercenaries to start coups and dispatch the incorperative dictator. This was the height of Bond mania. If her mind was thinking forcing permanence with a Prince then she would also have considered assassination and having no filter would have mentioned that thought to someone.
Why is it unkind to state that Diana was stating factual information? She wasn’t raised in a vacuum that had no idea about basic facts about the royals. This is a known fact about them. No special knowledge required.
And for someone of her family background, I’d wager she had more information about the royals’ rules than you or i because she grew up with the royal family on Sandrigham. Her father was equerry to The King AND to The Queen. Her brother-in- law (Fellowes) was already on track to being the Queen’s equerry by the time Diana married Charles. Her sister Sarah dated Charles and openly (to the media) discussed engagement options. Her Grandmother was Lady-in-Waiting to the Queen Mother.
This was a girl who had the presence of mind to let an employer know her pedigree after said employer voiced a thought that downgraded her social class and wealth.
She also knew to play the Balmoral game long enough to convince the other royals that she was perfect for Charles, complete with pretend love for the countryside.
She might have been naive about marriage itself and all that went with it, but she was very well versed in all things royal.
Finally, her knowing that POW can’t divorce her doesn’t negate the betrayal of her marriage. If you want to look at it romantically, being traumatised from her parents’ bad marriage and marrying a man who wasn’t allowed to divorce her was actually a good thing for her sense of security.
In the end, it turned out to be a terrible thing because the marriage turned out to be a disaster and she was stuck with him.
I think Diana led, always, with her own self-interest. Not her head, not her heart. Not good or bad, but it certainly doesn’t add up to sainthood.
I’m with LAK. It completely beggars belief that Diana wasn’t entirely aware that her marriage was unlikely to be faithful. As LAK says, that doesn’t mean she wasn’t treated badly or she didn’t hope for a better marriage than the one she ended up with. But there is no way in creation she wasn’t fully aware that fidelity wasn’t going to be a part of it.
Lucy those rules are for the great unwashed masses…..not aristocrats. Diana had to be well aware of the cheating that went on his royal/aristo circles as her immediate family were well entrenched in that circle. Not that it was right but if she thought Charles would be faithful then she well and truly had her head in the ground
Not trying to bash Diana here. But people on this site routinely complain about William and more recently even Harry. It’s worth remembering that their mom was apparently very hands-on and very close to her children so she had the major influence on their upbringing. Her premature death didn’t change the basic foundation she gave them. So if William was known as “the Basher” as a child and did all the stuff people here were recently saying about him as a child – I have to wonder how much of that was due to his mother and the way she was raising him. She had a lot of problems that likely interfered with her parenting as well as other things. But maybe William is the way he is especially because of that. It can be hard to tell because some things are congenital and there are other influences, but being raised by an unstable mother can have profound effects on children regardless of how much they love each other. Love isn’t always enough.
Charles had his own set of difficulties (many traceable to his own upbringing), but he may well have been completely baffled by Diana’s instability (which predated their marriage although he might not have seen it). Calling her just “temperamental” is a euphemism. She was still able to accomplish many good things, but her underlying problems must have have had a profound effect on relationships even if Charles had been an ideal devoted husband.
You trust everything people comment here? Do you trust BIs too? Seriously though, if a child has a difficulty the blame lies with both parents. If one of them is so unavailable as to have no input on child rearing, thats his fault. Especially when the family court judges operate under his own mothers name.
I agree with this.
William and Harry are exactly the end result of Diana’s type of parenting along with an absent and/or emotionally withdrawn father in Charles. It’s odd that few mention this when complaining about William or Harry. They are very much like their mother AND their father at times.
This is the thing about dysfunction at a severe level such as they all lived – this is what it does to people. Whole thing is sad.
To think all of this happened because of archaic rules of royal lineage. It’s been so tragic for everyone involved, it’s stunning. Would make a good psych case study in medicine.
The only information here that sounds new is the part where Diana destroyed his painting and equipment. Granted, she was only 19, but I can see any guy going “uh-oh, what have I done?” That’s like something you might see a lady do on a soap opera. Nonetheless, I did find the anecdote believable after I saw the tapes where she admitted she pushed her stepmother down the stairs. Yikes.
Ugh, I just googled it, Diana said:
“My stepmother and I ended up having this row. And I pushed her down the stairs. Which gave me enormous satisfaction. ”
Apparently, the woman was 60 and had problems walking after that.
Diana was seriously mentally unstable, not only did she hurt her stepmom, she bragged about it!
Dont lie. She didnt brag about it. She discussed it as part of her evolving relationship with her family. It was at her brothers wedding and the step mother had been trying to exclude her mother from events. Her mother had left their dad and the father had won custody when they were very young. In her adult years she was trying to rebuild that relationship. Anyway, she and the step mum got into a row and she shoved her. She later apologised to her and her dad and she and her step mum became friends for the first time since she had married into the family. It was not told to brag, it was told as a warts and all. As someone points out above, this actually makes Diana the most credible narrator of the whole story. She didnt hide her worst moments. If a story cant be substantiated through her account, its probably fiction invented by the Prince and his PR team.
Dani: the episode at the wedding was at a different time. That was a row that was in adulthood.
@Aren is quoting Diana’s own words taken from the taped transcripts that she gave Andrew Morton. She bragged about pushing her stepmother down the stairs of Althorp house.
The tapes were the basis for the Andrew Morton book in 1992. The tapes were initially released in 1997.
I also think there was a bit of bragging going on because she seemed to laugh while saying it. The whole thing sounded weird to me. Anyway, she was a complicated woman just as Charles was a complicated man.
If someone had iterated the anecdote, I wouldn’t have believed it. But since it came from her own mouth, I had to accept that Diana really did push her 60 year old stepmother down the stairs.
I read the daily mail description of their honeymoon. Chuck basically regarded it as a glorified holiday for himself. Defo not a honeymoon.
I want to digress, remember after their wedding a story came out about how a woman dressed in black bordered the royal train chuckles stayed on the night before the wedding? Everybody wondered who she was, was it Diana? As if. She was on a short leash at Clarence house with the gin soaked queen mum. No it was CAMILLA. Yuck, a pre wedding last horrah. Gross. Notice penny juror didn’t mention this.
Aurelia, I remember that. Yeah I think it was an embarrassment to Diana and when truth came out later I felt bad for Diana.
Everyone assumes it was Camilla because of the blonde hair, but it could just as easily have been Kanga who was also a blonde, and who carried on with Charles right through the early years of the marriage even if Camilla was benched for a few years.
By concentrating her ire on Camilla, Diana let off all the other women and Kanga and allowed this crafting of the Charles – Camilla true love story that is complete fiction.
I find it quite disgusting that they won’t let diana lie in peace. No one will ever view Camilla and Charles as some fairy tale romance. Let it go Camilla.
It doesn’t appear to be a fairy tale romance at all. She was in love with Andrew Parker-Bowles and married him, despite knowing he was chronically unfaithful. Charles had various affairs-she was not the only one. They love each other but spend a lot of time apart. She goes to her own home to spend time with her kids and grandkids.
It would be amazing if we could both let all the Charles and Camilla stuff go – who cares anymore – as well as the Dear Sweet Sainted Diana Who Art in Heaven stuff. C’mon, half the things Kate gets s*** on for are virtually identical to things we know about Diana. She wasn’t perfect, she ended up in some bad situations, she crested some bad situations, she died and it was sad. Can we just leave it at that.
Plus the Charles and Camilla stuff is BORING. It takes the trope of rich people having affairs – which can be scandalous fun – and sucks the life right out of it.
Errr. We are only discussing this because they have a semi authorised book out to validate their sordid nonsense. They brought it up.
I haven’t read the book and don’t intend to, but reading excerpts it seems that Kanga again has totally been airbrushed from the Charles-Diana-Camilla saga.
There is only one line about Kanga, inserted in a throwaway comment about Charles having other girlfriends in 1979.
The fact that Charles proposed to 2 other women, one of them twice, also goes unmentioned.
This book has completely whitewashed Charles to the nth degree.
In a strange way, he has Diana to thank for that because by focusing her rancour on Camilla so publicly, all the other mistresses and girlfriends were more easily removed from the story.
Anna Wallace was one he proposed to I think? Who was the other LAK? Dang my memory….
Anna Wallace twice, and Amanda Knatchbull.
I wish everybody would let this old story go. Nobody, apart from those, who were involved, will know how it all was. It is very unfair on Harry and his brother, to dig this all up again. Let it rest. It’s over.
This is the royal family. Films are still being made about the romantic entanglements of various members stretching back to ye old times. This story is another chapter in the history book about British monarchy.
It’s funny to think that in 100yrs, it might even be a question on a history exam just like all the other juicy episodes from ye old times.
I’ve been reading the excerpts in the Daily Mail and won’t buy any of it because I’m old enough to know better. If you were not around to see it, you might fall for it. I especially love the story of Diana hitting Charles on the head while he was kneeling down saying his nightly prayers. Sounds too incredible to be true – but if it is, I applaud her!!!
I don’t see how people can read any accounts of them and think either one of them come off well.
There’s always a semi-authorized biography released in the years of royals big birthdays and Camilla’s 70 this year. Just unfortunate that it coincides with the 20th anniversary of Di’s death.
I know Diana had her issues, but what woman, on her honeymoon wouldn’t react when photos of her husband’s ex fall out of his diary? Doesn’t matter if she was 20 o 30. It set the tone for the downfall of their marriage. I would have been suspicious, and yes, a bit paranoid from the start.
And how do we know that Charles was faithful to Diana until 1986? Everyone takes his word for it, just because he told Dimbleby. I believe even if their was no sex, there was intimacy on another level, and that Camilla hovered over their marriage. And no woman, balanced or not would like that.
By concentrating on Camilla, Diana set the stage for everyone to look only at his relationship with Camilla, including Dimbleby. The other ladies, including mistress no 2 who was present throughout, have been expunged.
LAK, was Kanga already in the picture in 1980? I thought she came later.
He took up with Kanga in 1971/72. A few months after he met Camilla.
The Kanga/Camilla/Charles love triangle ran from 1971/72 through to mid- 1980s. He was rarely without one or the other throughout this period except when they were off having babies.
Everything that has been thrown at Camilla as far as approving a naive bride, never quite letting Charles go etc is just as true of Kanga.
She was at the wedding too.
He went as far as saying publicly that Kanga was the only woman who understood him, yet here is PJ whitewashing history and saying only Camilla understood him.
Adding in that Diana befriended Kanga, even wore her clothing to help her promote her fashion line.
The point is Charles’s stupidity in thinking he could do whatever he liked. And Diana couldn’t accept that. Who can blame her? Certainly Anna Wallace didn’t accept that, when he ignored her she just walked out. By having mistresses who were already married, they couldn’t quite be so intolerant.
Having said that, I am glad Charles is happier, and Camilla does her job well. I will never be her no. 1 fan, but I wish them well.
The PJ biography doesn’t mention Anna Wallace or the fact that Charles proposed twice to her and she gave him the push when she pegged onto Camilla and Kanga.
He also proposed to Amanda Knatchbull at the instigation of Uncle Dicke. Amanda had the good sense to turn him down.
In her own words from the tape transcripts that were made into Andrew Morton’s book, Diana claims to have known about Camilla long before the engagement.
….but she also says she often tried it on with her sisters’ ex-boyfriends and she was determined to get Charles and went as far as discussing strategies with her flatmates.
Perhaps she thought marriage would change things which is understandable because we all think or hope marriage will change things.
The way she describes her family’s ambition, it’s surprising how much she never blamed them for overlooking nee dismissing every single one of her fears which she voiced repeatedly.
We talk about the Middletons’ ambition for the ring and ignore the similar Spencer ambition.
Tasteless and classless timing from a classless woman.
Penny Junor? I agree, she has no class. In it for herself and her dream of one-day landing Charles for herself.
She is a real Diana-basher that one.
I really think they should stop with airing their dirty laundry. Theyre human beings just like the rest of us. Flawed!
I was underwhelmed by Diana from the time Charles began his courtship until she died.
I adored her. I was an impressionable teen who thought she was beautiful and fascinating, and as a married, newly pregnant woman I cried and cried the night she died. From the perspective of an older adult I see that she was emotionally unstable, in a bizarre situation that the most well adjusted person would have found unbearably difficult.
Let me say, Diana was magic in public. I was a huge fan of hers and I still am. I think she was amazing, and was ahead of her time in a lot of ways. She did her best, and her best was incredible. But she did make mistakes, and she seemed needy and unstable. She had more than one man at once. Two of them were married and one divorced as a result, and she was the subject to a police inquiry in the other. She manipulated the media against Charles. She was not perfect. But she was absolutely amazing in public.
I never saw her in person, but I was right there as a big fan in the early years. All the magazines, all the books. To younger me there were only two princesses in the world – Grace and Diana.
Diana did as good as she could both as Princess as well as wife and mother.
Problem was that she was so young and unexperienced and that she got exploited by Charles and the Rottweiler. Diana did a lot of the things she did because she as a needy person was stuck between a rock and a hard place and there was no way out. I don’t saint her but I also refuse to blame her for things.
Where did I blame her?
Me too. I thought she was lovely and a breath of fresh air for that badly inbred family. I was two years older than her and felt a bit “protective” of her even. I remember watching that embarrassment of an engagement interview and thinking she should cut and run right then and there. When asked if they were in love, Charles made some stupid comment “Whatever love is” and Diana immediately said: “Of course”. I saw right then and there that they were doomed as she was way more invested than him. As I was so close in age to Diana I just felt if someone said that after becoming engaged to me-I would be so hurt I would’ve flung the ring in his face. But she didn’t….:(
Tragic for everyone concerned, Diana was loopy because she never ever had stability in life and love, Charles was desperate for unconditional love and Camilla just plain mean, she should have done the right thing and walked away from Diana’s marriage. Awful that Diana’s children are being exposed to all the sordid details of their parents’ lives yet again and so close to the 20th anniversary of their mother’s death.
This!
W&K’s relationship started through cheating. He dumped or cheated on her for a decade before finally caving and marrying her. They live in the house where Charles and Camilla had their relationship.
It doesn’t appear to me that William has a problem with infidelity, or even with whatever his parents were doing with anyone. What he has a problem with is how it impacted him – but it hasn’t made him alter his own behavior.
One thing is this glosses over Charles rumored relationship with Michael Fawcett. That was and is huge. Supposedly Diana spoke with someone who saw them spooning in bed. He was given a large loan to purchase a home in London. Wish someone would write about this again.
Penny Junor has always been a Prince Charles apologist. I’ve read the extracts online and Junor says that her father “loved” Diana and I wonder if that irked Junor enough to start a constant campaign of making Charles seem like a saint. There are lots of contradictions in the book. Diana’s temper tantrums are seen as pointing to a personality disorder but Charles’ temper is just a personality trait. Likewise, Diana’s manipulation of the media is seen as spiteful but Charles having his staff plant stories and pictures positive of him and Camilla are understandable. In the Daily Mail online piece, there is a picture of Charles and Camilla at their blessing, Harry can clearly be seen looking over at them kneeling in St. George’s Chapel and the look on his face is heartbreaking. He is red is the face and looks miserable.
He was definitaly not happy. Diana certainly had her problems but this sycophantic nonsense is awful and I think that as an attempt to portray Camilla and Charles in a more positive light it has failed miserably.
Well said!
Love your comments.
Prince Charles really has his staff working overtime on the rehabilitation long game – make all of the nasty go away. I am surprised in some way that the smell of bleach doesn’t overwhelm them all.
There are always 2 sides to every difficult marriage. Charles and Diana were a totally mismatched couple from the beginning. Charles did not behave well towards Diana but she was not the saint, her fans like to believe she is. She was the stereotype fairytale princess and she used that image to manipulate the public. Charles could never compete with her PR strategy.
This disastrous marriage continues to haunt the royal family years after it finished.
I don’t know about Andrew being the love of Camilla’s life. Reportedly they seemed to have a kind of “open marriage” in that he openly bragged about Cam’s affair with the future King