Diana threatened on Camilla early years relationship with Prince Charles

[cinrit]

^^ I obviously meant after the wedding, not before.  And as I remember, Diana did agree later that Charles and Camilla began the affair after the wedding in 1986.

Cindy

[sophiechloe]

Well speaking for myself, if my husband was "emotionally attached" to another woman - his feet would not touch the ground - nor hers.  It is called Respect.  Such a shame Charles could not give Diana the same.   

[sara8150]

Diana never said the affair of Charles & Camilla started in 1986, but long-before (only check the Settelen & Morton tapes). And Martin Bashir asked if Diana was aware than was going on between Charles & Camilla, not the timeline.

I believe both of them when they said Diana was unknown for them (know nothing about her) & they (Highgrove Set, include Camilla) were unknown for her (know nothing about them).

If she was always long-term in know why would:
- She want call off the wedding?
- Had breakdown because the gift from Charles to Camilla?
- Be in tears in Polo Match in eve of wedding and because the phone call from Camilla to Charles before his official trip?

And why Dimbleby, Penny Junnor, Ingrid Seward, Caroline Graham & co wouldnt wrote it in their books?

Yes Royals author can write about Royals like HM Queen,Diana,Charles,PW and PH,member of royal families but who work for Royals but who work for Diana dont allowed to write on her because William told press in 2000's about happened on his mom's books i respect that its called "shadows of Princess" i didnt read that book i respect William's decision

[WOW]

Well speaking for myself, if my husband was "emotionally attached" to another woman - his feet would not touch the ground - nor hers.  It is called Respect.  Such a shame Charles could not give Diana the same.   

Well said!

[dianab]

We're all emotionally attached to various people from our pasts.  There's nothing wrong with that as long as everything is kept on a friendly level.  Both Charles and Diana have said that Charles' affair with Camilla began again in 1986.  I believe both of them.

Cindy

Charles and Camila's affair technically began when she was still Camilla Shand, back early in the seventies. Charles also told Dimbleby they rekindled the affair in 1979. It didn't actually begin in 1986 but this was the time he first had the affair with Camilla while married to Diana. They were off and on for years and she was really never out of his life according to various accounts (Charles own words to Dimbleby included).  In this regard, I don't think Camilla and Charles could ever be just friends in every sense of the term.

Diana told Morton that after harry was born Charles "went back to his lady." Later she told bashir that she found out by her "own instincts" and through "well meaning friends"that Charles resumed his affair with Camilla. Dianab is right Diana never really gave a specific date.

Well speaking for myself, if my husband was "emotionally attached" to another woman - his feet would not touch the ground - nor hers.  It is called Respect.  Such a shame Charles could not give Diana the same.   

[Hale]

Diana co-operated with Morton's "Diana: Her True Story"  These are quotes from the book;

During Charles's & Diana's courtship (a whirlwind of approximately between 9-16 days before the engagement announcement - depending whom you read) the press were permanently encamped outside of Diana's flat in Colherne Court.  Diana asked the press office for help at BP and was told she was on her own.  Morton writes:

What made it worse was that PC seemed less concerned about her predicament than that of his friend Camilla Parker-Bowles

Diana began to harbour doubts about her new friend Camilla Parker-Bowles.  She seemed to know everything that Diana and Charles had discussed in their rare moments of privacy.

A couple of days before Charles & Diana were married, Diana discovered that Charles planned to give Camilla a bracelet inscribed with their nicknames "Fred and Gladys".  These nicknames were not names which Charles and Camilla chose for themselves, they were names given to them by Private Eye, which is a weekly satirical new magazine.  It's not all satire, they do actually have good news articles which look behind the scenes of government.  Private Eye gave C&C these names because their relationship was well known, but to blatantly and publicly out it without any proof would have given rise to a libel suit and it was known to Fleet Street at large because they constantly alluded to it.  Why do you think the press were encamped outside Camilla's home as well as Diana's prior to the engagement announcement?

Just before the C&D marriage, Charles was to fly to Australia for a five week visit, before he left Diana was with Charles in his study at BP when the phone rang.  Morton writes: 

It was Camilla.  Diana wondered whether to sit there or leave and let them make their farewells in private.

  If they hadn't been having an affair and if Diana was genuinely innocent of their relationship why would she assume they needed to say their farewells?

This is one of the reasons I find Morton's book contradictory.   On the one hand Diana is trying to project herself as the unsuspecting future wife and yet through Morton her own words are alluding to her knowing about Charles's relationship with Camilla.   Never forget a couple of years beforehand, Anna Wallace who was dating Charles walked out on him in a rage at Lord Vestey's ball because Charles was dancing all night with Camilla.  These sort of things are the gossip of the grand house drawing rooms and shooting parties of England.  Diana socialized in these circles.  Her age wasn't a barrier, she would have heard things.  Not only that, her own father was once employed by the Royal Household, when he inherited the title Earl Spence that doesn't mean he would have severed ALL links with the Royal Household, he would have continued with some of his associations which in turn would have given him an insight to what was happening within the royal circles.  It's also worth remembering why Diana co-operated with Morton in the first place.  Diana wanted a divorce from Charles, but Diana having witnessed how Fergie was treated following her break up with Andrew, Diana was wise and intelligent enough to know she required some ammunition otherwise she would be treated in the same way as Fergie was.

Following the honeymoon they joined the RF at Balmoral.  Morton goes on to write about this: 

At a famous photocall by the Bridge of Dee on the Balmoral estate, Diana told the assembled media that she could 'highly recommend' married life.  However, away from the cameras and microphones, the couple argued continually.  Diana was always on edge, suspecting Camilla's presence in Charles's every action.......As a close friend commented: 'They had shocking rows about her, real stinkers and I don't blame Diana one bit.'

I don't blame Diana one bit either, but I don't buy the story that Diana was a total innocent despite her age.  I NEVER, EVER thought Diana stupid, but I do believe she expected Charles to give up Camilla, unfortunately he didn't.  Nevertheless, once again I do feel that someone should have taken Charles aside and said, "Your getting married now, you have to make a go of this.  It's not like the old days when future Kings can have their cake and eat it.  Times have changed."  Yet no one did broach the subject with Charles.  I can't help wondering if everyone assumed just because Diana arose from aristocratic circles they also assumed she would be quite happy to accept her lot and make the best of it much in the same way as other aristocratic wives and Queens had done.

I agree with those whom say that it is a pity that Charles didn't show Diana any respect, but equally I think it a pity that Diana chose not to respect Charles when she tried to paint him as an uncaring father.  It just goes to show the spite which emanated from both of them during the breakdown of their marriage and afterwards.  Although prior to Diana's death I understand they were becoming friends and I should like to think that had Diana lived she would have found the happiness she deserved and that she and Charles could have co parented their sons in the same way the Yorks did with their daughters, but tragically it was not to be. 

[sandy]

The  odd thing about the Anna Wallace story was that at the time she was painted as a self centered woman who wanted all of Charles attention and she got mad at him because he paid more attention to his grandmother at a party. The part about Camilla only came out much much later as I recall. I think Diana may have heard about Anna Wallace leaving but because Charles who had to attend to his grandmother didn't spen the time she felt he should spend with her. This was in the literature and two films as I recall in the run up to the 1981 wedding.  The truth about Anna W and Camilla was not made apparent back then as I recall. As I recall during the run up to the wedding, Anna and Charles had broken up because she felt he didn't pay enough attention to her. He then dated Diana. There was nothing about Charles having a "love rival" to Anna that caused the breakup. Perhaps Diana only heard the "mainstream" gossip because actually she was not part of Charles' "set" until they started dating.

The press back then was not exactly kind to Anna W. and used her nickname "Whiplash" Wallace a great deal.

Early on in the marriage Diana never put down her husband's parenting skills. They really  had touching interviews both talking about the boys and stories got out about Charles' hands on parenting.  Diana also never said Charles was a bad father--his own actions did him in. He didn't stay at the hospital with William and went to an opera which did indeed make him "fair game" with the press. Charles did really a hurtful thing to Diana by hiring a "mother surrogate" in Tiggy who actually called W and H "her boys" and put down Diana's mothering in public. Charles didn't exactly pull his punches re parenting put downs.

I don't think the two ever would haVe been friends, I think they as the years went on would become more polite and respectful to each other but never buddy buddy. Charles was different than Andrew in that Andrew never had his friends make public put downs of Sarah nor did Andrew ever find his own "Dimbleby" to put down his wife.

Diana was of course wary of Camilla--it is obvious in the Morton book--but at the same time her love for Charles and her belief in him at the time were also apparent. She didn't see Charles as the "bad guy" and trusted him to honor his vows to her and be truly committed to the marriage. She did tell Morton her reaction to seeing Camilla in Church was "well that's over." The problem is that Charles didn't put  his cards on the table about Camilla and tell Diana she was always going to be a part of his life. I think that Charles agreeing to cut Camilla out of the wedding breakfast may also have given Diana a false sense of security re: Camilla,. Camilla also had a husband and young children which also may have given Diana a false sense of security.

[sandy]

Actually I read that Fred and Gladys were the names of two characters in a favorite show of Charles and Camilla "The Goon Show." They were not from what I read given to them by Private Eye. They called each other these names because they liked the "Goon Show."  Some writers also theorized that GF stood for "girl friday". But mostly the reports were Fred and Gladys were nicknames because C and C both liked the Goon Show. Later on Private Eye gave APB a rather crude name which I won't mention here.

References to characters Fred and Gladys on Goon Show:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Goon_Show_cast_members_and_characters

And When Fred Met Gladys

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/foreigners/2005/04/when_fred_met_gladys.html

Diana did spend much time at the PB home and there were rumors that Charles told Diana he was serious about her in the PB garden. The press found out Diana spent time there and therefore were camped out there.

Camilla was vetted by the mainstream press as his "safe married friend" who approved or disapproved of his GFs. This was the way she was presented to Diana who early on was "mentored" by Camilla and there were a few pics of them together during the "menoring stage."

I do think it was very reasonable for Diana to think that once they married he'd give up Camilla. It was shocking on both sides. He thought that Diana should feel happy that he married her and accept everything he wanted. She was shocked that he wasn't giving up Camilla and called her and received presents from her.

[snokitty]

The  odd thing about the Anna Wallace story was that at the time she was painted as a self centered woman who wanted all of Charles attention and she got mad at him because he paid more attention to his grandmother at a party. The part about Camilla only came out much much later as I recall. I think Diana may have heard about Anna Wallace leaving but because Charles who had to attend to his grandmother didn't spen the time she felt he should spend with her. This was in the literature and two films as I recall in the run up to the 1981 wedding.  The truth about Anna W and Camilla was not made apparent back then as I recall. As I recall during the run up to the wedding, Anna and Charles had broken up because she felt he didn't pay enough attention to her. He then dated Diana. There was nothing about Charles having a "love rival" to Anna that caused the breakup. Perhaps Diana only heard the "mainstream" gossip because actually she was not part of Charles' "set" until they started dating.

The press back then was not exactly kind to Anna W. and used her nickname "Whiplash" Wallace a great deal.

Early on in the marriage Diana never put down her husband's parenting skills. They really  had touching interviews both talking about the boys and stories got out about Charles' hands on parenting.  Diana also never said Charles was a bad father--his own actions did him in. He didn't stay at the hospital with William and went to an opera which did indeed make him "fair game" with the press. Charles did really a hurtful thing to Diana by hiring a "mother surrogate" in Tiggy who actually called W and H "her boys" and put down Diana's mothering in public. Charles didn't exactly pull his punches re parenting put downs.

I don't think the two ever would haVe been friends, I think they as the years went on would become more polite and respectful to each other but never buddy buddy. Charles was different than Andrew in that Andrew never had his friends make public put downs of Sarah nor did Andrew ever find his own "Dimbleby" to put down his wife.

Diana was of course wary of Camilla--it is obvious in the Morton book--but at the same time her love for Charles and her belief in him at the time were also apparent. She didn't see Charles as the "bad guy" and trusted him to honor his vows to her and be truly committed to the marriage. She did tell Morton her reaction to seeing Camilla in Church was "well that's over." The problem is that Charles didn't put  his cards on the table about Camilla and tell Diana she was always going to be a part of his life. I think that Charles agreeing to cut Camilla out of the wedding breakfast may also have given Diana a false sense of security re: Camilla,. Camilla also had a husband and young children which also may have given Diana a false sense of security.

Good Post 

[Hale]

Actually I read that Fred and Gladys were the names of two characters in a favorite show of Charles and Camilla "The Goon Show." They were not from what I read given to them by Private Eye. 

Yes Sandy, and that was the name Private Eye also gave them.  I didn't mean Private Eye invented the names and by the way, The Queen was called Brenda and Princess Diana was called Erica.

The  odd thing about the Anna Wallace story was that at the time she was painted as a self centered woman who wanted all of Charles attention and she got mad at him because he paid more attention to his grandmother at a party. The part about Camilla only came out much much later as I recall

Indeed.  Back then Charles was the golden boy.  He could do not wrong OR you could say when he did wrong the press didn't necessarily print it that way. 

Doesn't matter if Diana wasn't part of the Highgrove set.  The Highgrove set were not the only ones present at Lord Vestey's polo ball.  As I said before, the aristos have their own bush wire service.

Diana did spend much time at the PB home and there were rumors that Charles told Diana he was serious about her in the PB garden. The press found out Diana spent time there and therefore were camped out there.

If that was truly the case, why were not the press encamped outside Althorpe?  It was her family home afterall.

Diana was of course wary of Camilla--it is obvious in the Morton book--but at the same time her love for Charles and her belief in him at the time were also apparent.

I think Diana was more than wary of Camilla, so much so that a couple of days before the wedding she was seriously thinking of calling a halt to it.  If only she had family support.

She did tell Morton her reaction to seeing Camilla in Church was "well that's over."

 

I also find this contradictory.  If Diana was supposed to be ignorant of Camilla's relationship with Charles why would she say, "well that's over?"  When she is supposed to have not know anything had started.

I do think it was very reasonable for Diana to think that once they married he'd give up Camilla.

That is what I am saying.  I believe Diana DID know about Camilla before she married Charles, AND that someone SHOULD have taken Charles aside and said end it.  Diana's family should have stepped up to the plate, but no one did.   This is my whole point.  These things should have been talked through before they got married.

[sandy]

I interpreted Diana saying well that's over as just that--Charles swore to forsake all others and she thought well he will. My take on it anyway. I don't see anything contradictory at all.  She made it clear to Morton that she didn't trust Camilla. But she was marrying Charles a man she trusted and loved and thought he married her for love.

Diana did not live at Althorp, she had a flat in London. There was no reason for the press to be camped there as they would be wasting their time. Camilla OTOH was pictured with Lady Diana on various occasions. It was also publicized about how Camilla the safe married friend approved or disapproved of Charles girlfriends and the press found out C and D spent weekends at the Parker Bowles. The press knew Diana spent time at Bolehyde manor why wouldn't they camp there. Plus with Camilla pictured with Diana perhaps they thought they could collar Camilla and ask for "inside information" about Charles and Diana.

In all the books I read Private Eye is not mentioned as the source of the nicknames. Charles and Camilla gave each other the nicknames. Charles and Camilla loved the Goon Show and gave each other pet names. Unless tipped off Private Eye how would they "guess" the nicknames the two actually used for each other.  As I recall Charles was given another name by Private Eye (I'll have to look it up).

I think Diana didn't think Charles would need people to "tell him" to honor his marriage vows. Diana thought Charles would honor them. What bride would think well I'll ask Daddy to tell my husband to be faithful to me.

[Hale]

I think Diana didn't think Charles would need people to "tell him" to honor his marriage vows. Diana thought Charles would honor them. What bride would think well I'll ask Daddy to tell my husband to be faithful to me

Clearly Sandy, you and I have had a moral upbringing, but Royals and Aristos are not like that.  With them it's all about appearance sake.  Consider some of the heir's to the throne before Charles.  They have a different codes compared to you and I.

s I recall Charles was given another name by Private Eye (I'll have to look it up).

Please let it be something other than Wikepedia because they have it wrong and sadly I get the impression that are repeated. 

[sandy]

John Spencer was thinking in terms of the grand dynastic marriage, I doubt he even thought ahead to whether Charles would be faithful or not. His mother in law was also big on the Spencers alliance with the Windsors. If Diana asked him I think she'd get totally rebuffed and even laughed at. He was said to be totally ineffectual when Diana asked him for marital  advice with platitudes like "I'm sure Charles loves you..." Frances Shand Kydd was in major avoidance mode (according to what she told her biographer).

There are royals and aristos who respect their wives and are capable of being faithful. Charles went wrong somewhere along the line. I do think there are royals and aristos that have moral codes. It's no excuse for Charles to say that royals and aristos have different codes. IMO they don't or shouldn't have. There are people from all walks of life who lose their moral compasses but shouldn't be lumped in with the rest of people who do have moral compasses.

If Charles grandfather had lived perhaps Charles attitude would have been different. Axcording to the Shawcross biography of the Queen Mother--George VI before he was Duke of York and still single  had an interlude with a married woman who was estranged from her husband. He had enough moral strength to break off the relationship (for good) and didn't bring the woman into his marriage. He was by all accounts a faithful and loving husband. Perhaps he would have set Charles straight.

[Hale]

Sorry Sandy, our comments crossed, but I made some additions to my previous comment.

As to your last comments I'm not disagreeing with you quite the contrary.  Every woman and man once they are married have the right to fidelity and yes there were some faithful monarchs eg:  George III, George V and George VI, but unfortunately it has to be said that in general the British Royal Family doesn't have a good track record in that department.

As to Diana's family's reaction how tragic.  They all thought more of their own positions and what the marriage would bring to them.  However, I go to my original point and which I felt was implied in the article and that is Diana did know about Camilla beforehand and is not the ignorant she tries to portray herself as through Morton.

[dianab]

Why do you think the press were encamped outside Camilla's home as well as Diana's prior to the engagement announcement?

Because he used take Diana to Parker-Bowles'home. lol The Parker-Bowles used be seen with Charles & Diana.
And Camilla was described for mainstream press as his safe married friend who approved or disapproved of his girlfriends. Diana also described Camilla (in this way to Morton), was who early on "mentored" the girlfriends of Charles.

PS.I think Camilla (safe married friend & mentor of his girlfriends) also was presented in this way to Anna Wallace (was she who made a public scene because he spend the night/party dancing with Camilla?). If she was also in know about something before - on Camilla & Charles affair -, why would she have made the scene?

I'm 100% with Sandy, n-e-v-e-r heard or read the petnames of Charles & Camilla came from Private Eye.
Do you know some bio talks about it? Why Dimbleby dont wrote it in his book?

PS. For what I read in the Morton book, when Charles send flowers to Camilla because she had got sick (during the engagement), sign from Fred, Diana hadnt understood those were their petnames.
 
With due respect Private Eye wasnt & isnt mainstream press (in best of my knowledgment it is for royalists & fans of royals).

Diana dont socialized in Charles' circles. When she was to Balmoral no one (friends of Charles) know her.

Since the 1980s Charles was painted as a uncaring father for press. With due respect I dont the why you insist on it. You seems be very into in the Private Eye, I dont know as dont noted in the articles about Charles as a father in 1980s. Wasnt only with William, but Harry in 1980s was through a operation and Charles choiced to continue his travel in Italy.

Diana was ask advice/talk about her doubts on marry Charles to her father - her cousin Spencer said it -, after the offcial trip of Charles. Carolyn Bartholomew said to James Whitaker that Diana had doubts in marry Charles, was only during the engagement noted certain things were wrong about their courtship. For all what I read I understand Diana only went ahead with this wedding out the huge pressure, because no one supported her. I dont think some of Spencers cared if Charles would be a faithful husband, the spectre of Camilla & if Diana had chances be happy into the Royal Family.
I think Diana sums up the Spencers & friends very well to Peter Settelen:
"It's like being sucked in - just people pushing and then people pulling, all in the same direction,"

[dianab]

Doesn't matter if Diana wasn't part of the Highgrove set.  The Highgrove set were not the only ones present at Lord Vestey's polo ball.  As I said before, the aristos have their own bush wire service.

With due respect, but:
- How you knows, could state such thing about the aristos circles?
- And IF aristos are all into in particular life of each other as seems is what you want meant, why no one else in Charles circle had heard about Diana?
- Why Camilla would select Diana as wife if she was in know about them?
- Why Camilla described Diana as "Mouse"?
- Why when Diana was to Balmoral no one know her?
- What Lord Vestey's polo ball matters in this story?
- Why Dimbleby wouldnt write that Diana was always in know about Charles & Camilla?
PS.You write about the Highgrove Set, as they were/are only some few persons, what isnt true.  They are all persons of generation of Charles, this generation may know about the lovers that Charles had, but I dont see any reason, "proof", that someone else more than 10 years younger would know.

If Diana was always long-term in know why would:
- She want call off the wedding?
- Had breakdown because the gift from Charles to Camilla?
- Be in tears in Polo Match in eve of wedding and because the phone call from Camilla to Charles before his official trip?

S. Barry, former valet of Charles said Diana take names of Kanga & Camilla away of breakfest after the wedding because someone else in CH may have made gossip with her, or heard rumors there.

PS.And Diana was living in London during 1980, even before the courtship. And should be in know she was everyday followed & chased for paparazzi. Why the paprazzi would encamped in a place they know she ont lived?lol
They encamped in where she was living in London, in the places she worked.

[sandy]

Sorry Sandy, our comments crossed, but I made some additions to my previous comment.

As to your last comments I'm not disagreeing with you quite the contrary.  Every woman and man once they are married have the right to fidelity and yes there were some faithful monarchs eg:  George III, George V and George VI, but unfortunately it has to be said that in general the British Royal Family doesn't have a good track record in that department.

As to Diana's family's reaction how tragic.  They all thought more of their own positions and what the marriage would bring to them.  However, I go to my original point and which I felt was implied in the article and that is Diana did know about Camilla beforehand and is not the ignorant she tries to portray herself as through Morton.

Diana did make a fuss over finding the gift from Camilla to Charles. If she was truly "in the know" about it all  before she got married why would she be surprised and upset over this or worry about Camilla at all if she knew? Diana was no masochist and I doubt would have gone into the marriage had she known ahead of time Charles' true expectations for the marriage.

Diana actually did not portray herself to Morton as ignorant about Camilla. I think it fairer to say ignorant about Charles and his true intentions. She at the time of the wedding believed he loved her and would honor his marriage vows. Diana naturally thought that Charles thought she was the One and would be true to her.

It could be said that some people choose to cheat, others don't. Not "everybody" cheats and not every royal cheats.. And even if every single monarch cheated it would still not give Charles his free pass to cheat. I recall during the Monica-Clinton debacle, some commentators were citing Kennedy and  FDR as cheating. But this line of thought to me does not give anybody a free pass.

[cinrit]

That's true, Sandy.  Cheating is cheating, no matter who.  But at some point, forgiveness should come into the equation when the dust settles.

Cindy

[sandy]

There is forgiving vs. forgetting. I don't think some sweep what Camilla and Charles did under the rug and try to put more of the onus on the late Princess of Wales (like saying well she knew what she was getting into so she asked for it--which I totally disagree with, no way would she have known it all)  they may "forgive" but what they did was part of their history.  Clinton is forgiven for what he did perhaps but the Monica episode is not totally forgotten--there are reminders of it in a forthcoming documentary about Clinton. Also in the Clinton saga, Hillary Clinton was not made a scapegoat and blamed for the cheating (like some of Charles' apologists like Seward and Junor do re: Diana).

[cinrit]

^^ I just saw the Clinton documentary on PBS earlier this week.  It was a two-day, four-hour program, and of course Monica was talked about at length, but only because it was made such a big deal of at the time in order to try to catch him on something else.  Paula Jones was also mentioned, but only as a blip on the radar, and Jennifer Flowers wasn't even brought up.  In Charles' (as well as Diana's and Camilla's/Kanga's/anyone else's) biography, the marriage/affair/divorce is worth at least two or three chapters.  In another 75 years or so, it may dwindle down to only one chapter, because in the grand scheme of things, it doesn't define any of them as a whole.  They all made mistakes, they all did things they shouldn't have done.  But to continue to blame only one (or two) of them isn't fair.  They all contributed to the fiasco.

Cindy

[sandy]

It was a landmark in that Charles unlike his Great Uncle got to keep his place in the royal family and marry his former mistress too. Also, the children Charles had were by Diana not by Camilla and thus Diana will not be forgotten--she can't be totally airbrushed out nor the story of the Charles and Diana marriage. I don't think the story will dwindle down to fewer chapters. Look how many times the story of Catherine-Henry VIII-Anne has been rehashed for centuries and will never I believe dwindle down to a footnote or a short chapter.

[cinrit]

Anne Boleyn was beheaded, and she was the impetus for establishment of the Church of England.  Therein lies the difference.  But I didn't say that Diana would be ignored.  I said that the marriage/affair/divorce (together, as one) will probably be reduced to one chapter in 75 years.  I didn't say that they would be ignored.  I didn't say that the children would be ignored.  I didn't say that they won't still write books about Diana.  But I stand by what I said ... in the general scheme of the lives of all three as they are entwined together, it does not define the whole of any of their lives.  The main players are going about their lives now, and even Diana was going about her life at the end, even having fallen in love with someone else.  But since we seem to be veering off-topic, and saying the same things that both of us has said many times before, I'm bowing out.

Cindy

[sandy]

I think it would be more than one chapter--though perhaps a "Palace authorized" book may try to airbrush out Diana if not deriding her and may give her less than one chapter. But I think most of the books will analyze the marriage/estrangement/divorce and even discuss Diana's ancestry in context of how Charles selected her. There are dramas about Anne and Henry that are about their relationship not that she was beheaded--the complexities of the triangle of Catherine-Anne-Henry. There are many takes on it.

[Hale]

She at the time of the wedding believed he loved her and would honor his marriage vows. Diana naturally thought that Charles thought she was the One and would be true to her.
 

This based on 9-16 dates and most of which were conducted with other people present.   

[Trudie]

Well to be fair here Diana was chosen the old fashion way a list of candidates. Charles dated so many aristos from Lady Jane on down to Lady Sarah Spencer however his heart was always with Camilla. Charles himself said thirty was a good age to marry and once he became thirty the pool of eligible women became extremely small due to many were not virgins or sufficiently high as far as aristos go. I believe Diana was chosen due to the fact she was considered shy and as supposedly Camilla said sufficiently moronic enough to be molded as Mountbatten instructed. I am of the opinion that Camilla was never out of Charles life he supposedly called her to inform her that Diana was pregnant with William. I wonder why Camilla couldn't be informed like the rest through the Palace announcement makes me wonder if Kanga was informed it was never mentioned or any other girlfriend. No one can be sure of when they resumed relations but I don't think Diana was the first to cheat and I believe she took on Hewitt to make Charles jealous though that didn't work. Neither one were Saints in the marriage. I will say however if Charles grandfather George VI had lived to see Charles to adulthood Charles would have had his moral compass intact as his grandfather from all accounts was faithful as a husband. The King would have mentored him in all probability not Mountbatten.