Charles Spencer accuses monarch of ‘gaslighting’ over Diana’s memory, igniting royal dispute

Earl Charles Spencer, brother of the late Princess Diana, has vehemently challenged Buckingham Palace’s recent statement questioning his memory regarding a private conversation with King Charles III. The Earl asserted he was being “gaslit” by the monarch after the palace implied grief might have clouded his recollection of events following Diana’s tragic passing in 1997. This latest exchange reignites a sensitive historical moment within the British monarchy.

The controversy emerged following the publication of an excerpt from Spencer’s forthcoming memoir, “Swan Song: Diana, My Sister,” which details a heated phone call with King Charles, then Prince Charles, just days after his sister’s death. In the excerpt, Spencer recounts a particularly jarring remark attributed to Charles concerning Diana’s legacy, prompting a rare public response from the royal household and sparking a fresh wave of public discourse.

Memoir details contentious post-Diana conversation

The core of the dispute centers on a phone call Spencer claims he had with Charles six days after Princess Diana died in August 1997. According to Spencer’s memoir excerpt, Charles allegedly uttered a deeply insensitive remark about his ex-wife during their exchange. Spencer described Charles as unleashing a “stream of anger” before pausing and then stating, “Rest assured, we’ll forget her soon enough!” This alleged comment, according to the Earl, solidified his long-held belief in Charles’s “pent-up contempt for Diana.”

Spencer emphasized the profound impact of this conversation, asserting that the outrageous nature of the alleged slur against Diana was so shocking it compelled him to immediately hang up the phone. He further claimed to have relayed the exact words to close friends and family members shortly after the call, underscoring the vividness and permanence of the memory in his mind. The timing of this revelation, decades after the event, adds a layer of complexity to the royal narrative surrounding Princess Diana’s legacy.

Palace’s response and Spencer’s strong rebuttal

Buckingham Palace issued an unusual public statement in response to Spencer’s claims, which was interpreted as a denial of his account. While not directly refuting the words, the statement suggested that “the pain of fraternal grief can cloud reason, affect judgment and color memory in ways others do not recognize, even many years after such a loss.” This subtle dismissal drew a sharp rebuke from Spencer, who saw it as an attempt to undermine his credibility without directly calling him a liar.

During a subsequent interview, Spencer expressed his indignation, stating, “It is not every day you wake up to find you’ve been gaslit by the king.” He found the palace’s response “astonishingly provocative and below the belt,” viewing it as a thinly veiled accusation of dishonesty. Spencer also drew a comparison to the palace’s famous “recollections may vary” statement issued after Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s interview with Oprah Winfrey, suggesting the current response was a less elegant, but equally dismissive, tactic.

Spencer adamantly defended his memory, explaining that he had only ever had two phone conversations with Charles in his entire life, making him “hyper alert” to every word spoken during the post-Diana call. He insisted that the words he recounted were “precisely the words that he said.”

Disagreement over William and Harry’s funeral procession role

Beyond the alleged phone call, Spencer’s memoir also touches upon another point of contention from that somber period: the decision for Princes William and Harry, then aged 15 and 12, to walk behind their mother’s coffin during the funeral procession. This detail is significant as it aligns with accounts from Prince Harry’s own 2023 memoir, “Spare,” where he described “mummy’s brother, Uncle Charles,” as having “raised hell” over the idea, calling it “barbaric.”

The debate surrounding the young princes’ involvement in the procession highlights the intense emotional and familial pressures at play immediately following Diana’s death. Spencer’s consistent opposition to this decision, reiterated over the years, underscores his protective stance towards his nephews during a profoundly difficult time. This shared recollection suggests a broader understanding of the events within the family, even if specific conversations remain disputed.

Implications for royal family dynamics and public perception

The public spat between Earl Spencer and Buckingham Palace carries significant implications for the perception of the royal family and its internal dynamics. It reignites discussions about the handling of Princess Diana’s legacy and the differing perspectives within the family regarding past events. The term “gaslighting” itself, implying psychological manipulation, elevates the nature of the disagreement beyond a simple difference in memory.

The incident also underscores the ongoing challenge for the monarchy in managing public narratives, especially in an era where personal memoirs and media interviews frequently bring private royal matters into the spotlight. Spencer’s insistence on the truthfulness of his account, contrasting directly with the palace’s nuanced denial, forces the public to weigh competing versions of history from figures intimately connected to the royal household.

When questioned about how William and Harry might react to his account, Spencer indicated that his nephews would not be surprised by his version of events. This suggests that his claims are not new to the princes, further complicating the narrative and hinting at pre-existing knowledge or discussions about the alleged phone call within the family. Buckingham Palace has maintained its stance of not offering further comment on the matter.