King Charles has faced criticism after Buckingham Palace broke its traditional protocol of silence to respond to Earl Spencer's memoir , Swan Song. The palace suggested that grief may have distorted Spencer's memory of conversations following the death of Princess Diana.
The 'giddily elated' phone call and the fight over the coffin
In his memoir Swan Song, Earl Spencer alleges that King Charles sounded "giddily elated," comparing his tone to that of a lottery winner during a phone call after the passing of Princess Diana. According to the report, Spencer also claims the two men clashed over the funeral arrangements,specifically whether Prince William and Prince Harry should walk behind their mother's coffin.
The memoir further alleges that during this dispute, King Charles told Spencer, "Rest assured, we'll forget her soon enough." Spencer has characterized these interactions as a form of gaslighting, framing the King's behavior as callous during a period of intense national and familial mourning.
Why the silence broken for Swan Song differs from the response to Spare
Buckingham Palace has historically maintained a strict policy of not commenting on tell-all books to preserve royal dignity and avoid fueling public controversies. As the source reported, this principle was upheld during the release of Prince Harry's Spare and the 2002 memoir Diana: Closely Guarded Secret by Inspector Ken Wharfe.
The decision to deviate from this tradition for Earl Spencer's book marks a significant shift in strategy. While the palace previously only noted that Princess Diana had not cooperated with Andrew Morton's Diana: Her True Story, the current response is a direct engagement with the claims made by a family member, prompting quetions about why the monarchy felt a response was necessary now.
Sir Clive Alderton's 'non-denial denial' and the cloud of fraternal grief
The palace response, which was reportedly cleared by top aide Sir Clive Alderton, stated that His Majesty is mindful that "the pain of fraternal grief can cloud reason, affect judgment and color memory." This phrasing has been criticized as a "non-denial denial," as it avoids a direct contradiction of the facts while implying that Earl Spencer's recollections are unreliable.
By suggesting that Spencer's memory was clouded by grief, the palace effectively called the author's credibility into question without explicitly calling him a liar. This subtle approach has been viewed by some as a swipe at Spencer, potentially undermining the very dignity the palace usually seeks to protect through its silence.
How the Daily Mail exclusive overshadowed the Dumfries House AI conference
The timing of the controversy created a significant public relations distraction for the monarchy . According to the report, the Daily Mail published the exclusive story on the same day King Charles convened an important AI conference at Dumfries House in Scotland last Thursday .
The resulting headlines regarding the feud between King Charles and Earl Spencer dominated the news cycle, leaving the King's efforts to lead a discussion on artificial intelligence with almost no media attention. This suggests that the palace's decision to engage with the memoir may have inadvertently amplified the drama at the expense of the King's official duties.
The missing evidence behind the 'forget her soon enough' claim
Despite the gravity of the allegations, several key details remain unverified. The source notes that the claim "we'll forget her soon enough" is presented without the full context of the quarrel that preceded it, leaving it unclear exactly how the phrase was spoken or if it was spoken at all.
Furthermore, the reporting primarily reflects Earl Spencer's perspective and the palace's vague rebuttal. There is currently no independent verification or recording of the phone calls in question, leaving the public to decide between Spencer's account of "bitterness" and the palace's suggestion of "clouded memory."
Comments 0