Sunday, 07 December, 2025
London, UK
Sunday, December 7, 2025 4:59 PM
overcast clouds 14.3°C
Condition: Overcast clouds
Humidity: 88%
Wind Speed: 27.8 km/h

Princess Diana Believed This Unexpected Reason Was Why Her Marriage to Prince Charles Failed

https://www.instyle.com/thmb/PLhz3tPRGM8BzOvD28S_fvCA0ds=/1500x0/filters:no_upscale():max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():focal(873x407:875x409)/CharlesDianaSocial-e01554eb4c69428c8ce354b0e9a6cd27.jpg
  • Prince Charles and Princess Diana married on July 29, 1981, and ultimately separated in 1992 before divorcing in 1996.
  • Throughout their marriage, both Charles and Diana carried out extramarital affairs, perhaps most notably Charles’ long standing affair with the former Camilla Parker Bowles (who is now Queen Camilla).
  • Despite this, there was a different, surprising reason that Diana believed her marriage to the former Prince of Wales failed, according to a royal biographer who also personally knew Diana.

When one thinks of the chief reason behind the demise of Prince Charles and Princess Diana’s marriage, many people’s first inclination would be to blame the former Camilla Parker Bowles—now Queen Camilla—who carried on an extramarital affair with the future king for years.

Sure, that didn’t help—as Diana famously said in her 1995 Panorama interview, “There were three of us in this marriage, so it was a bit crowded”—but royal biographer Ingrid Seward said there was another factor at play. Seward had a close friendship with the late Princess of Wales, spending time with her just weeks before her death on August 31, 1997 at just 36 years old.

“She said to me just before she died, it wasn’t Camilla,” Seward told Hello!’s “A Right Royal Podcast.”

Lady Diana Spencer and Camilla Parker Bowles.
Express Newspapers/Archive Photos
Queen Camilla and Princess Diana.

Photo by Getty Images


Quoting Diana, Seward said, “It wasn’t Camilla that ruined our marriage. It was the people around Charles”—referring to palace staff and courtiers that were always at hand.

“And I could never unpick that comment and quite understand what it meant,” Seward added. “But I also remember Diana’s father saying how tricky the royal household was.”

Of royal staffers, Seward posed the question on the show, “Are they just a load of overinflated egos in the royal household, or are they really trying to help?”

Prince Charles and Princess Diana.

Getty Images


Photographer Denis O’Regan—who has written a book coming out in July about his experiences photographing David Bowie—shared that the palace tried to block a photo of Bowie and Diana to “dampen speculations” on Diana’s love life, according to The Telegraph. O’Regan shot the photograph after Bowie’s concert at Wembley Stadium in June 1987, after which Diana—then 25 years old—had shyly asked O’Regan whether the rock star would want a picture with her.

“I think he would,” the photographer replied, adding that “I thought it was so funny”—seeing that Diana was one of, if not the, most famous women in the world. O’Regan called the Princess of Wales “so sweet,” but added that the day after the concert, Kensington Palace called “saying don’t use the pictures.”

Princess Diana and David Bowie.

Getty


James Hewitt in 2004.

Getty Images


You see, Diana had attended said concert with Army Major James Hewitt, who she began a five-year affair with beginning in 1986. “Word had gone out about James Hewitt,” O’Regan said. “So that’s when it kind of erupted. It was interesting, on a number of levels.”

“They just didn’t want Diana in the press,” the photographer continued, adding, “It was really [that] they didn’t want to fuel the fire.” He added, “So the more pictures that weren’t out there the better, because someone would have said, ‘This is her at the show that she turned up to with James Hewitt,’ even though I didn’t get the multimillion dollar shot of the two of them together, because no one knew who he was.”

LP Staff Writers

Writers at Lord’s Press come from a range of professional backgrounds, including history, diplomacy, heraldry, and public administration. Many publish anonymously or under initials—a practice that reflects the publication’s long-standing emphasis on discretion and editorial objectivity. While they bring expertise in European nobility, protocol, and archival research, their role is not to opine, but to document. Their focus remains on accuracy, historical integrity, and the preservation of events and individuals whose significance might otherwise go unrecorded.

Categories

Follow

    Newsletter

    Subscribe to receive your complimentary login credentials and unlock full access to all features and stories from Lord’s Press.

    As a journal of record, Lord’s Press remains freely accessible—thanks to the enduring support of our distinguished partners and patrons. Subscribing ensures uninterrupted access to our archives, special reports, and exclusive notices.

    LP is free thanks to our Sponsors

    Privacy Overview

    Privacy & Cookie Notice

    This website uses cookies to enhance your browsing experience and to help us understand how our content is accessed and used. Cookies are small text files stored in your browser that allow us to recognise your device upon return, retain your preferences, and gather anonymised usage statistics to improve site performance.

    Under EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR), we process this data based on your consent. You will be prompted to accept or customise your cookie preferences when you first visit our site.

    You may adjust or withdraw your consent at any time via the cookie settings link in the website footer. For more information on how we handle your data, please refer to our full Privacy Policy