FirstNarration
Charles Spencer, brother of the late Princess Diana, has made striking claims about the final years of his sister's life in a newly published memoir. According to Spencer, Queen Elizabeth II offered to restore Diana's HRH title, the royal designation stripped from her following her 1996 divorce from then-Prince Charles. The offer, Spencer writes, came after Diana had been removed from the royal fold, but she declined.
The memoir also contains a more startling assertion: that King Charles sounded unexpectedly elated when he telephoned Spencer in the hours after Diana's death in Paris in August 1997. Spencer describes his former brother-in-law as sounding like someone who had just won the lottery, a characterisation that has reignited scrutiny of the royal family's handling of Diana's death and the years leading up to it.
What Spencer Claims Happened
The core of Spencer's account centres on two separate episodes. The first involves Queen Elizabeth's reported willingness to reverse the decision that removed Diana's Her Royal Highness title. When Diana and Charles divorced, she became Diana, Princess of Wales, but lost the HRH prefix that signified full royal status. Spencer writes that the Queen later offered to restore it, but Diana chose not to accept. The reason for her refusal is not detailed in the available excerpts, nor is the timing of the Queen's offer made entirely clear.
The second claim concerns the immediate aftermath of Diana's death in a car crash in Paris on 31 August 1997. Spencer states that Charles telephoned him and sounded what he describes as giddily elated, a tone Spencer found jarring given the circumstances. He writes that Charles's voice conveyed an emotion closer to excitement than grief, likening it to the reaction of someone receiving extraordinarily good news.
These assertions appear in Spencer's memoir, which has been described as raw and confrontational. The book has already prompted a sharp response from royal circles, though no formal statement has been issued by Buckingham Palace or representatives of King Charles.
The Context Behind the HRH Title
Diana's loss of the HRH title became one of the most publicly debated aspects of her divorce. At the time, the decision was understood to reflect her departure from the working royal family, though it was widely seen as a demotion. Diana herself was reported to have been hurt by the change, which meant she was no longer entitled to the same protocol and deference afforded to senior royals.
The suggestion that Queen Elizabeth later reconsidered this decision adds a new dimension to the story. It implies the Queen may have recognised the harshness of the original terms, or that circumstances had shifted enough to warrant a reversal. However, without confirmation of when the offer was made or what prompted it, the claim remains difficult to verify independently.
Diana's relationship with the royal family remained strained throughout the period between her separation in 1992 and her death five years later. She had given a famous television interview in 1995 in which she discussed her marriage, her struggles with mental health, and her belief that she would never become queen. The interview deepened the rift between her and the institution, making any gesture of reconciliation, such as restoring her title, potentially significant.
King Charles's Reported Reaction
Spencer's description of Charles's demeanour in the hours after Diana's death is the more incendiary of the two claims. Grief manifests differently in different people, and shock can produce unexpected emotional responses. However, Spencer's characterisation suggests something beyond shock. He writes that Charles sounded elated, not subdued or devastated, and that the tone struck him as inappropriate.
At the time of Diana's death, Charles was already in a long-term relationship with Camilla Parker Bowles, whom he would later marry. Public sympathy for Diana remained intense, and Charles faced criticism for how the royal family initially responded to her death. The Queen's delayed return to London and the absence of a public flag at half-mast over Buckingham Palace drew widespread disapproval before the family adjusted its approach.
Spencer's account, if accurate, would add a personal dimension to the institutional missteps of that week. It would also raise questions about how Charles privately processed Diana's death, separate from the public mourning that followed.
Why This Matters Now
These revelations arrive at a moment when the British royal family is still navigating the fallout from other recent controversies, including the ongoing estrangement of Prince Harry and the publication of his own memoir. Spencer's book reopens wounds that many assumed had healed, or at least receded from public view.
The timing also matters because King Charles has been on the throne for less than two years. Public perception of his character and his treatment of Diana remains a factor in how his reign is assessed, particularly among those who remember the 1990s. Spencer's claims, whether fully substantiated or not, will shape that conversation.
For those who followed Diana's story closely, the memoir offers a family member's perspective on events that have been endlessly analysed but rarely illuminated from within her immediate circle. Spencer was protective of his sister during her life and delivered a pointed eulogy at her funeral. His willingness to publish these details now suggests he believes the public record remains incomplete or distorted.
The book has already been described as starting a war of words, though it remains unclear whether the royal family will respond directly or allow the claims to stand without formal rebuttal. Historical practice suggests silence is more likely, but the specificity of Spencer's assertions may make that position harder to maintain.
