Earl Spencer reignites a 30-year royal feud with fresh claims about King Charles

Nearly three decades after Princess Diana’s death, one of the most painful chapters in the British royal family’s history has been reopened.

Charles Spencer, the 9th Earl Spencer, has made a series of deeply personal claims about his former brother-in-law, King Charles III, in his forthcoming memoir Swan Song: Diana, My Sister. Among the most striking is his allegation that, days after Diana’s death, the then Prince Charles told him: “Rest assured, we’ll forget her soon enough.”

Spencer has stood by the account and says he remembers the conversation clearly. Buckingham Palace, however, has issued an unusually direct response, saying that the pain of grief can affect memory and judgment even many years after a loss.

The result is a remarkable return to the bitter emotions surrounding Diana’s death in 1997, with Spencer once again placing his memories of that period at the centre of a very public dispute.

A painful memory brought back into the spotlight

Diana died in a car crash in Paris on August 31, 1997, at the age of 36. Her death prompted an extraordinary public outpouring of grief and transformed the atmosphere around the Royal Family.

Her funeral took place at Westminster Abbey on September 6. Prince William, then 15, and Prince Harry, then 12, walked behind their mother’s coffin alongside their father, then Prince Charles, and Diana’s brother, Earl Spencer.

The procession has remained one of the most enduring images of Diana’s funeral. Spencer has now revisited the circumstances surrounding it in Swan Song, describing a disagreement with Charles over whether William and Harry should take part.

According to Spencer’s account, he objected strongly when he was told the boys would walk behind their mother’s coffin. He says he believed Diana would not have wanted them subjected to such an ordeal.

He then received a phone call from Charles, who insisted that the boys should participate. Spencer says the argument that followed was when Charles allegedly made the remark about Diana being forgotten.

The allegation has not been independently established. Spencer has nevertheless repeatedly defended his recollection, saying in a BBC interview that the words were exactly as he remembers them.

Spencer’s account goes beyond one conversation

The disputed phone call is only part of the story Spencer tells in his memoir.

In another passage, he claims that Charles sounded “giddily elated” when speaking to him after Diana’s death, comparing the tone of his voice to that of someone who had won the lottery. Spencer also makes other claims about Diana’s marriage and the Royal Family’s handling of her funeral.

Those are serious allegations, but they remain Spencer’s recollections and interpretations of events from nearly 30 years ago.

That distinction matters because Buckingham Palace has not accepted his version of events. Its statement did not directly engage with each allegation. Instead, it said:

“The pain of fraternal grief can cloud reason, affect judgment and colour memory.”

The Palace’s decision to respond at all was notable. Traditionally, it has avoided commenting directly on books containing allegations about members of the Royal Family. The statement therefore represented a rare public intervention in a dispute over events surrounding Diana’s death.

The contrast with what happened in the days after Diana died

There is another part of the story that makes the renewed dispute particularly striking.

Spencer was in South Africa when news broke that his sister had died. Contemporary reports recorded him speaking to the press there after the tragedy.

Charles, meanwhile, flew to Paris to accompany Diana’s body back to Britain. He travelled with Diana’s sisters, Lady Sarah McCorquodale and Lady Jane Fellowes, before returning to Britain and rejoining William and Harry.

The historical record therefore contains a more complicated picture than the latest allegations alone might suggest.

Diana’s relationship with Charles had already been deeply troubled by the time of her death. The couple had divorced in 1996, following years of intense public scrutiny and marital difficulties.

Yet, in the immediate aftermath of the crash, Charles was the family member who travelled to Paris to bring Diana’s coffin home. The two young princes were subsequently at the centre of the funeral arrangements, which ultimately saw them walk behind their mother’s coffin.

Spencer’s memoir offers his own perspective on those events, particularly his objections to the boys’ involvement in the procession. Other accounts, including later recollections from members of the Royal Family, have presented the decision differently.

A funeral speech that defined Spencer’s relationship with the Royal Family

Spencer’s public role in Diana’s story was established long before the publication of Swan Song.

At Diana’s funeral in Westminster Abbey, he delivered an emotional and pointed eulogy that became one of the defining moments of the service. His speech praised his sister while also taking clear aim at the pressures surrounding her life as a member of the Royal Family.

Almost 30 years later, that same tension has returned in a different form.

Spencer now says that his memoir is intended to set out his account of Diana’s life and to correct what he believes are misconceptions about her. He has also said that the latest claims are not intended simply as an attack on the King.

At the same time, the book has inevitably placed Charles and the events of 1997 back at the centre of public discussion.

That timing has attracted scrutiny because Swan Song: Diana, My Sister is due to be published on September 22, 2026, meaning the allegations have emerged in the days immediately before its release.

Why the Palace response matters

Buckingham Palace’s response has become almost as significant as Spencer’s allegations.

The Royal Family has previously faced a long series of books, interviews and television appearances dealing with private disputes. In the past, the late Queen Elizabeth II famously responded to claims made by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle by saying that “recollections may vary.”

This time, the Palace chose different wording, specifically referring to the possibility that grief could affect memory, judgment and perception.

Spencer has rejected that suggestion and accused the King of “gaslighting” him. He has said he told friends and family about the alleged conversation at the time because he found it so shocking.

The disagreement therefore comes down, in large part, to competing recollections of a private conversation nearly three decades ago.

There is no recording of the alleged exchange in the public record, and the Palace has not provided an alternative account of the exact conversation. What is established is that Spencer says it happened, that he continues to stand by his version, and that Buckingham Palace has publicly questioned whether grief may have influenced his memory.

Three decades later, Diana remains at the centre of the argument

What makes the dispute so enduring is the fact that Diana’s death has never been an ordinary royal family story.

She was only 36 when she died. Her sons were still children. Her marriage to Charles had ended only a year earlier, and her relationship with the wider Royal Family had been intensely scrutinised by the public and the press.

Her funeral became one of the defining public events of 1997, while Spencer’s speech established him as one of the most outspoken members of Diana’s family.

Now, with Swan Song, he has returned to those events and offered a detailed account of what he says happened behind the scenes.

Spencer has also recently discussed the treatment of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, arguing that their experience with the media echoes aspects of what Diana endured. He has said that lessons should be drawn from his sister’s experience and has expressed concern about the pressure surrounding his nephews.

That broadens the story beyond a single argument between two men. It places Diana’s legacy within a continuing debate over the Royal Family, the press and the way private grief is remembered in public.

For Spencer, these are memories that still deserve to be examined.

For the Palace, they are allegations about events from 1997 that are being revisited through the perspective of a grieving brother nearly three decades later.

The two positions are unlikely to be reconciled simply by another round of headlines. What remains is a deeply personal disagreement over Diana, her final days and the painful aftermath of her death.

And once again, almost 30 years on, her memory is at the heart of a royal family dispute that began long before the present generation inherited it.