Charles and Diana

[CyrilVladisla]

Charles was born in November 1948.
Diana was born in July 1961.
Charles was more than twelve years older than his wife.
Do you believe this age difference made it difficult for them as a married couple?
​

 

[Osipi]

I think the age difference could have been a minor factor that made the marriage more difficult but not the primary sole reason. I do believe that perhaps Diana had a more "fairy tale" concept on how she viewed being married to Charles would be though. Yes... there were three in that marriage. Charles the man, the Prince of Wales and Diana.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Diana was "old" for his years, and Diana was "young" for hers.

 

[nascarlucy]

Diana said a lot of negative things about Prince Charles, I imagine he could have said a lot of negative things about her, but chose not to do so. I imagine that there are probably things about her that have never been mentioned or brought to light that he could have said about her, but didn't. This I have to admire him for because it would be very difficult not to say anything, especially when you are the one on the receiving line of negative comments.

The age difference between the two was 12 years which isn't a big deal. My grandmother was 20 years old and my grandfather was 32 years old when they got married. They have a happy marriage.

It would be quite a transition for a 19 to 20 year old woman in general to marry someone who was an heir to the throne and have a child with a 12 month period. Not so much having a child but being married to the heir to a throne would be a major transition, even for someone who was royal or had royal blood.

Some 20 year old women would be able to handle this without having difficulties but they probably would have a maturity level of someone who was much older and most likely they would have had more life experiences than Diana had.

 

[COUNTESS]

He used his PR office to say many negative things about her. He didn't have to sully his hands. Their age difference wouldn't have made a difference if they loved one another and worked at it. She was immature, he was old for his years. They came from 2 different generations and had very little in common. And he, truly, loved another woman and still loves her, today. It is too bad he wasn't permitted to marry her then.

 

[4Pam]

Has anyone seen the Diana movie with Naomi Watts? I saw tonight and it was OK... nothing spectacular.

 

[Queen Camilla]

He used his PR office to say many negative things about her. He didn't have to sully his hands. Their age difference wouldn't have made a difference if they loved one another and worked at it. She was immature, he was old for his years. They came from 2 different generations and had very little in common. And he, truly, loved another woman and still loves her, today. It is too bad he wasn't permitted to marry her then.

The marriage was over in 1986. They should have separated and divorce in 1988.

It was the dragging of the marriage and the Morton book that caused the war of Wales.

fyi, Charles was never denied permission to marry Camilla. He was only 23 years old when they dated and not thinking about marriage.
Camilla was 25 years old and ready for marriage. They were two people at different points in their lives.

 

[Skippyboo]

I think it was more a difference in personality than all about the age difference. You have Charles wanting to read Van der Post and listen to opera and then on the other hand Diana listening to pop music wanting to go swimming and play tennis. Charles loves Balmoral. Diana hated it, etc.

You see the opposite thing with William & Kate where they have many of the same shared interests. Taking Will's love for Aston Villa aside.

Camilla married Andrew Parker Bowles while Charles was still in the navy so it didn't get to asking the Queen's permission at that time.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

No matter how many times Diana's supporters post that Charles permitted his PR people to say negative things about Diana, it didn't happen. Even Andrew Morton admits that Charles told his PR people not to criticize Diana. There is even a scene in the 1993 movie based on Diana's book, written by Morton while he was in close contact with Diana, in which Charles is shown as rejecting advice from his PR people to go negative against Diana.

In response to this, at least one Diana fan will point out that one of Charles's friends, Nicholas Soames, did go public. However, Soames repeatedly said that Charles did not ask him to do so. Most royal reporters acknowledge that Charles's friends have told them that Charles asked them not to criticize Diana publicly.

The fact is that Diana's fans cannot justify her decision to publicly attack Charles, so they try and claim that Charles was equally responsible. It makes them feel better but it isn't true.

If you want to criticize Charles for having an affair--fine. But when you have to make up facts in order to criticize him, it just means that he can't have been that bad.

 

[Mirabel]

Has anyone seen the Diana movie with Naomi Watts? I saw tonight and it was OK... nothing spectacular.

I saw it and found it rather silly and boring.
It seemed more like one of those television movies than anything.

I'm just glad I didn't pay money to see that.

 

[Lee-Z]

No matter how many times Diana's supporters post that Charles permitted his PR people to say negative things about Diana, it didn't happen. Even Andrew Morton admits that Charles told his PR people not to criticize Diana...

Unfortunately, even with all the facts that he didn't *go* public, Diana fans will say "there must be a reason why she chose to go public with her attack, she wouldn't have done that, if someone hadn't gave her no other choice" and by that someone, they will always assume it's Charles...
One of the reasons why it's very very very sad that she died when she did, is that she will never have the chance to rise above that divorce and move on; so now her fans will never move on either, because they will probably betray her if they did...

 

[Dman]

Rare Video: NOVEMBER 9, 1985-
Scenes were shown from the royal visit of Prince and Princess Charles to President and Mrs. Reagan at the White House. These scenes include their lunch and dinner arrivals at the White House and toasts from the dinner-
Royal White House Visit | Video | C-SPAN.org

 

[royal rob]

I think if you talk to professional marriage councilors you would find out that a man cheating has nothing to do with the woman he cheats on but everything to do with his values and morals. But I will leave at that


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Cris M]

I think if you talk to professional marriage councilors you would find out that a man cheating has nothing to do with the woman he cheats on but everything to do with his values and morals. But I will leave at that


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

I see you're willingly ignoring the fact that the wife had five lovers and that she started her first affair three years before her husband got a mistress.

So I don't think the wife had a lot of morals and values either.

 

[royal rob]

I see you're willingly ignoring the fact that the wife had five lovers and that she started her first affair three years before her husband got a mistress.



So I don't think the wife had a lot of morals and values either.

I think your ignoring that fact he had a lover before and after his marriage


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Cris M]

I think your ignoring that fact he had a lover before and after his marriage


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

There are many sources that say he had no affair between 1981 and 1986. But what are you trying to say? That the fact his husband had an affair justifies the fact she had five lovers?

Your double standards are lovely.

 

[royal rob]

You believe your sources and I will believe mine ..


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Cris M]

You believe your sources and I will believe mine ..


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

Okay, as you have no arguments, you'll ignore the questions you can't answer.

 

[royal rob]

Not worth replying or continuing


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[Cris M]

Not worth replying or continuing


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

Very predictable.

 

[wyevale]

What is clear, however is that the Princess had multiple affairs,whilst married, but her husband had only one.. To me, that speaks VOLUMES...

 

[Osipi]

What it boils down to is that the marriage was kaput or else neither of them would even think about looking elsewhere for anything. What the affairs were, how long they lasted and when they started is supposition as we have no concrete facts on any of it other than hearsay.

 

[muriel]

I am not sure this is the place to debate either the causes of the breakdown of the Wales' marriage, nor as to who took lovers first, or how many. Perhaps it is best if this conversation focussed on Diana's Royal Orders.

 

[Mermaid1962]

Besides, the whole Charles/Camilla/Diana conversation just goes around and around and around. Positions are entrenched on both sides. Unless new information comes to light--and even then--people have chosen their sides and are sticking to them. I don't get involved with these conversations for that reason.

 

[Dman]

You can't help but laugh at the thought of people comparing how many lovers a couple had than the other. Folks, it doesn't matter, one affair or even the very thought of an affair, is enough to take a marriage and throw it in the garbage. What Charles and Diana did was totally wrong. Forget about hurting the Monarchy. The Monarchy has been through worse things than the 'War of the Waleses'...if you know history. They hurt their own little family. Charles and Diana had a beautiful family at home and their silly actions forever changed what they had.

Marriage is tough for everyone, yes, even for royalty. Charles and Diana had a great deal of pressure on them. They had the stiff and rigid expectations of the "Firm" on their backs, the people of the UK and Commonwealth and the media. When one isn't getting the proper help they needed to save their marriage and family life, it was only going to lead to a disaster one way or the other.

It's over and it's been over for a very long time. Diana is no longer alive and no one can turn back the hands of time. Charles has moved on and is happy once again. Their children, William and Harry, are adults and one has a family of his own. The Charles & Diana saga died long time ago, but I still remember the good times. Everything about this couple wasn't bad. The love Charles & Diana shared helped produce two fine young men and for that I think Charles & Diana was very thankful...and we should be thankful too.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

You can't help but laugh at the thought of people comparing how many lovers a couple had than the other. Folks, it doesn't matter, one affair or even the very thought of an affair, is enough to take a marriage and throw it in the garbage. What Charles and Diana did was totally wrong. Forget about hurting the Monarchy. The Monarchy has been through worse things than the 'War of the Waleses'...if you know history. They hurt their own little family. Charles and Diana had a beautiful family at home and their silly actions forever changed what they had.

Marriage is tough for everyone, yes, even for royalty. Charles and Diana had a great deal of pressure on them. They had the stiff and rigid expectations of the "Firm" on their backs, the people of the UK and Commonwealth and the media. When one isn't getting the proper help they needed to save their marriage and family life, it was only going to lead to a disaster one way or the other.

It's over and it's been over for a very long time. Diana is no longer alive and no one can turn back the hands of time. Charles has moved on and is happy once again. Their children, William and Harry, are adults and one has a family of his own. The Charles & Diana saga died long time ago, but I still remember the good times. Everything about this couple wasn't bad. The love Charles & Diana shared helped produce two fine young men and for that I think Charles & Diana was very thankful...and we should be thankful too.

I have to disagree, Dman. I think it does matter. First of all, many marriages survive affairs. I also think most, if not all, survive the thought of an affair.

Second, the number of her lovers has mattered to you because you have pushed back on reports that she slept with Barry Manakee and Will Carling.

None of us know exactly what happened in the marriage but many people's opinion is based on the fact that Diana got her side of the story out first. She revealed Charles's affair but failed to disclose her own extramarital affairs, including the very real possibility that she was sleeping with more than one man at the same time. You may not be shocked by that but I confess that I was.

At the same time, there are people (including me) who distrust Diana's version of events because she wasn't honest about her own affairs. She only admitted to the affair with James Hewitt after he went public.

 

[Mermaid1962]

I agree with this view. As much as I appreciate Diana's public work and her good qualities, I certainly don't believe everything in her version of things--starting with the Morton book in particular.

She revealed Charles's affair but failed to disclose her own extramarital affairs, including the very real possibility that she was sleeping with more than one man at the same time. You may not be shocked by that but I confess that I was.

At the same time, there are people (including me) who distrust Diana's version of events because she wasn't honest about her own affairs. She only admitted to the affair with James Hewitt after he went public.

 

[Dman]

I have to disagree, Dman. I think it does matter. First of all, many marriages survive affairs. I also think most, if not all, survive the thought of an affair.

Second, the number of her lovers has mattered to you because you have pushed back on reports that she slept with Barry Manakee and Will Carling.

None of us know exactly what happened in the marriage but many people's opinion is based on the fact that Diana got her side of the story out first. She revealed Charles's affair but failed to disclose her own extramarital affairs, including the very real possibility that she was sleeping with more than one man at the same time. You may not be shocked by that but I confess that I was.

At the same time, there are people (including me) who distrust Diana's version of events because she wasn't honest about her own affairs. She only admitted to the affair with James Hewitt after he went public.

Yes, some marriages survive affairs, but not all. There are always two sides to every story and no one has said that Diana's story hold more water than Charles's.

What I'm saying that, the number of lovers really isn't important. Charles & Diana slept with someone other than each other and that did the most damage.

Also, the tabloids came up with all kinds of stories about Charles & Diana's love affairs. Some of the stories are so old and others ran with it, that a lot of it stuck. As royal commentator, Victoria Arbiter once pointed out, there were so many rumors about this couple that's it's nearly impossible to debunk them all.

 

[US Royal Watcher]

Yes, some marriages survive affairs, but not all. There are always two sides to every story and no one has said that Diana's story hold more water than Charles's.

What I'm saying that, the number of lovers really isn't important. Charles & Diana slept with someone other than each other and that did the most damage.

I think the number of affairs does make a difference in the consideration of whether to try and save a marriage. At the same time, I also believe that the fact that Charles loved Camilla more than he loved Diana was also problematic. As was the fact that Diana was 'in love' with James Hewitt at the time she offered to reconcile with Charles and have a third child.

However, I agree that the actual affairs weren't the basis of the problem in the marriage. The real issue is that they were emotionally unsuited for each other. I think Charles loved her, but not as much as he loved Camilla. On the other hand, I think Diana had a crush on the Prince of Wales but was not 'in love' with Charles.

The major other problem was her mental illness. Charles didn't understand it and did not give her the attention and constant validation she craved. Some people think that her constant neediness was her fault, but that is not fair because she was mentally ill and didn't understand her own needs. Eating disorders and personality disorders were not well understood in the early 1980s.

Other people think that Charles's lack of understanding was a failure on his part. My response to that is that few people can give someone who is mentally ill the amount of attention they want. There is a reason that the divorce rate among the mentally ill is so high.

 

[Dman]

No doubt that Charles and Diana had some issues, whether in their marriage and personal, but the thing that really did them in is they didn't get professional help. Their friends and family didn't offer much help either. Their loved ones should have gathered around them and offered their love, attention and support. There was no time to take sides, divide into camps and become 'unnamed' sources for the media and tabloids.

The marriage probably was going to fail no matter what, but at least they could have had the proper help and guidance to resolve their marital issues privately, respectively and with consideration for their children. Archbishop of Canterbury, Robert Runcie, could have offered them marriage counseling. Just my thoughts, BTW.

It's all over now and no one can go back and do things differently, so none of it really matter anyway.