Diana and James Hewitt


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
And a very wizened and melancholy figure Hewitt presents. Not that I'm particularly sorry for him. Like Burrell his life seems to have stopped in some measure since 1997.
 
Last edited:
James Hewitt and Paul Burrell tried to jump on the Diana bandwagon to take advantage of their relationships with her after her death and their actions backfired on them. Hewitt was especially slimy when he had the nerve to try to sell her private letters to him. That was exceptionally low.
 
Why do people watch these things? I have watched one interview iwht Hewitt, I think that as someone who knew Diana, who was her lover, there was some point ot hearing a bit of what he had to say about their relationship. And I do feel a tiny bit of sympathy for him because I think that he had some feelings for her and she did at times "use him". . but still his behaivour was terrible in outing their affair and in going on talking about it over and again to make money
 
This must be awful for James's elderly mother and his siblings. Heaven knows he has been criticised for his past actions re Diana but a heart attack AND a stroke are massive traumas to undergo. I hope he makes a good recovery. He's not very old.
 
No matter what the personal opinion is of Mr. Hewitt (I actually don't really have one myself), I'm hoping he has a complete recovery. 59 years old is way to young to suffer a heart attack and a stroke at the same time.
 
Sadly not that uncommon. You have a pretty good risk of a stroke within the first month after a heart attack (risk is for up to a year). Something like 15% risk with in three days. If you have pre existing issues, can elevate it. The article says he was dealing with pre existing illness at the time which likely increased that chance, depending on what it was.

Hopefully he makes a full recovery, for his and his family's sake.
 
Not even worthy of comment IMO. MY sympathies to his family
 
Charles knew of Diana’s affair… and didn’t care: The 1987 photograph that showed the Prince joking with James Hewitt - who had been sleeping with his wife for a year


  • James Hewitt was the one man to profit from Diana and the only one to whom she publicly declared her love
  • Richard Kay and Geoffrey Levy say that Charles 'didn't much care' about the affair
  • They add that this was 'because he himself had returned to the bed of Mrs Parker Bowles'
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Of course he knew about her affair with Hewitt...they were both aware, IMO, of whom the other was involved with.


LaRae
 
Of course he knew about her affair with Hewitt...they were both aware, IMO, of whom the other was involved with.


LaRae

I agree. I still believe there was some kind of agreement between them about this "topic" ...
 
I agree. I still believe there was some kind of agreement between them about this "topic" ...

Yes I'm guessing there was. Hardly the first couple to have this type of arrangement.


LaRae
 
Yes I'm guessing there was. Hardly the first couple to have this type of arrangement.


LaRae
Of course not. Charles didn't care about Diana's affair provided she chose a man who "knew how to behave" and was discreet. Alas Hewitt didn't.
 
Anyone care explain?
*did Charles and Diane openly discuss hewitt affair? Something like Charles: "ok bring your lover this weekend. I will not be home"
as I understand they had an "unspoken agreement" but what is it meant? Did Charles talk to Diana about hewitt? did charles say hewitt's name in conversation?
Their unspoken agreement is so bizzare to me.
 
Basically, I think it boils down to what was an unwritten way of being in the aristocracy and that is the concept of an "open marriage". Couples never divorced as the titles and the estates and the prestige were something that both wanted to hold onto in their world and when a marriage wasn't working out, the common practice was for each partner to have their own, separate private lives that was OK as long as it was done discreetly.

Camilla and Andrew Parker-Bowles, I believe had this kind of an understanding. APB was in no way faithful to Camilla during their years of marriage and the "open marriage" avenue worked for the both of them. Its also well known that Charles' Uncle Dickie, Lord Mountbatten and his wife, Edwina had very separate intimate relationships during their marriage.

We will never know what transpired between Charles and Diana about this concept and how they felt about it and what they discussed or didn't discuss but I would think that once they both knew that the marriage was, in all respects, over between the two of them, that Charles would not expect Diana to be faithful if he, himself, wasn't. The big thing that threw everything into chaos was how it all ended up in the press and in the public eye as a free for all battle between the two of them.

This is just my guesstimation of how to answer your question. :D
 
Of course he knew about her affair with Hewitt...they were both aware, IMO, of whom the other was involved with.


LaRae

I agree that they knew, but I don't believe they openly discussed it.

They just more or less went their own ways. Charles didn't care about Hewitt; Diana did care about Camilla, but she soon realized there was no winning that war.
But it was more probably an unspoken agreement about other lovers, rather than an open discussion, imo.
 
Agreed. As the marriage deteriorated, Charles spent his time at Highgrove and Diana lived at KP. They had very little to do with each other and words were probably kept to a very bare, civil minimum for the kids. They were what is called single marrieds each with their own separate lives, personal calendars and very rarely interacted unless they absolutely had to. The time for discussions had long passed.
 
Basically, I think it boils down to what was an unwritten way of being in the aristocracy and that is the concept of an "open marriage". Couples never divorced as the titles and the estates and the prestige were something that both wanted to hold onto in their world and when a marriage wasn't working out, the common practice was for each partner to have their own, separate private lives that was OK as long as it was done discreetly.

Camilla and Andrew Parker-Bowles, I believe had this kind of an understanding. APB was in no way faithful to Camilla during their years of marriage and the "open marriage" avenue worked for the both of them. Its also well known that Charles' Uncle Dickie, Lord Mountbatten and his wife, Edwina had very separate intimate relationships during their marriage.

We will never know what transpired between Charles and Diana about this concept and how they felt about it and what they discussed or didn't discuss but I would think that once they both knew that the marriage was, in all respects, over between the two of them, that Charles would not expect Diana to be faithful if he, himself, wasn't. The big thing that threw everything into chaos was how it all ended up in the press and in the public eye as a free for all battle between the two of them.

This is just my guesstimation of how to answer your question. :D

Thanks. about the marriage being over. Then why did Diana try to reconcile with Charles, "trap" him with a third child, confrontation with the Camilla? what was the meaning of diana's behavior. Without hewitt, there was no one to "entertain" Diana.
after mutual indifference ( she was having a good time with hewitt) she suddenly decided to take Charles back? this talk about "I said to Camilla I loved you darling nothing wrong with that".
 
When did Diana try to trap him with a 3rd child? She said the marriage was over after Harry was born. She had wanted another child but it wasn't possible (with Charles)..it was later she talked about remarrying and possibly having another child ...she was just 36 when she was killed.



LaRae
 
I agree that they knew, but I don't believe they openly discussed it.

They just more or less went their own ways. Charles didn't care about Hewitt; Diana did care about Camilla, but she soon realized there was no winning that war.
But it was more probably an unspoken agreement about other lovers, rather than an open discussion, imo.


I think they discussed it in a round about way. Look it's over you do your thing and I'll do my thing and we will do our duties as required.


LaRae
 
Can you cite your sources about trapping him with a third child? That's something totally new to me and I don't think there's much about Diana that I've not read. I believe that after Harry was born, Diana knew there would never be a third child.

A good source that delves into Diana's behavior is Sally Bedell Smith's book called "Diana in Search of Herself: Portrait of a Troubled Princess". Personally, I think Diana always had it in the back of her mind that she and Charles could reconcile but I don't think its something that she actively sought to make happen.
 
Anyone care explain?
*did Charles and Diane openly discuss hewitt affair? Something like Charles: "ok bring your lover this weekend. I will not be home"
as I understand they had an "unspoken agreement" but what is it meant? Did Charles talk to Diana about hewitt? did charles say hewitt's name in conversation?
Their unspoken agreement is so bizzare to me.

There are about 3 to 4 layers of the Charles and Diana story. :cool:

The first layer is what actually happened in 'real time', which we will never know because the two key players (Charles and Diana) never spoke the 'real time' timeline of events.

However, keep in mind that Charles and Diana lived in the very highest margin of the upper-crust elite, where everyone's business is known in that circle, and discretion is second nature. Discussion would not have been necessary for Charles and Diana to know the business of the other.

In 'The Housekeeper's Diary' the author mentions that leading up to the separation the couple were never at Highgrove on the same weekends, but I would guess the other's doings were known to the other. Again we'll never know at this point unless we get another tell-all from someone willing to really tell it like it was.

Diana 'wrote' the Morton book because her fairly random sexual life was starting to be reported by the press. The Morton book was Diana's 'defense' for her failure to keep her marriage vows (a serious scandal, especially for the wife in those sexist times).

Up until the Morton book, Diana appears in public as a very happy woman. It is Charles who manifests as miserable. Pundits at the time ascribed Charles' open unhappiness to his being jealous of Diana's popularity. I am of the view that it was more complicated, more profound, connected to Diana's behavior in private, and Charles' genuine upset over the failed marriage. Diana only evidenced upset in public with the aftershocks of the Morton book, when she was 'caught' in the untidy mess, and was suffering the consequences of her indiscrete telling.

Timelines are hotly disputed amongst Diana aficionados ;) the most significant being when Charles was engaged in his active amours (Camilla or someone else). I am of the view that Charles was not involved with Camilla early in the marriage, and when the marriage became 'irretrievably broken down' he sought comfort elsewhere (not Camilla necessarily, as Diana claimed).

Diana strove to paint herself in the Morton book as the seriously wronged wife, and that required Charles to be the cad with the wandering eye. This scenario is a seriously accepted rendering of the timeline (even though it has innumerable internal inconsistencies imo). She never mentions that she had a wandering eye as well and was actively ensconced with a lover she was 'mad about'. At some point early in the marriage Charles was to have been aware of Diana's infatuation/flirtation with one of her bodyguards. Did they talk about it? No way for us to know.

By around 1985 (again timelines are always disputed) when Diana got involved with Hewitt, the marriage was pretty much set on it's separate trajectories. Charles was seeing old amours and Diana was with Hewitt. It's at this juncture (somewhere around 1985) that Diana stated at some point that she approached Charles about having a third child. It's curious given that she was settling into a serious years-long affair with Hewitt. Maybe she was contemplating having a child by Hewitt and needed the cover of sex with Charles? Who knows. Maybe the third baby conversation with Charles never happened. You have decide who to believe.

Diana confronting Camilla was just theatre pure and simple imo. Diana liked to control things. Motive is hard to assess. We know what she said her motives were, but she also failed to mention she was also engaged in a long-standing affair (to which she invited her sons to tag along, as it turns out). Her motives in both performing the confrontation and then telling about it had to have been layered. We're not going to get to the bottom of it. Maybe it was the ultimate one-upmanship, a way of letting Camilla know who was 'Queen' and who wasn't, etc.

I would not say Diana was trying to get back together with Charles. Those reported incidents related by Diana were her spin regarding her victimization by Charles, that justified her being an unfaithful wife (in her status as Princess of Wales).

There's no logic to any of it because what really happened, and what Diana claimed happened (with massive stuff on her side conveniently left out of the telling and never owned up to by her) are riddled with inconsistencies. Add to that the 'myth' of the marriage and we are hopelessly bogged down with murk.
 
Last edited:
Can you cite your sources about trapping him with a third child? That's something totally new to me and I don't think there's much about Diana that I've not read. I believe that after Harry was born, Diana knew there would never be a third child.

A good source that delves into Diana's behavior is Sally Bedell Smith's book called "Diana in Search of Herself: Portrait of a Troubled Princess". Personally, I think Diana always had it in the back of her mind that she and Charles could reconcile but I don't think its something that she actively sought to make happen.

There aere soem stories out there, I don't know how accurate that Diana asked him later in the 80s to "try again" and have anoeher baby. I don't know if it is true, and even if it were that is hardly "trapping" him iwht another child. I'm not even sure she really wanted a third child, as she had had difficult pregnancies, and I think she realised that 2 or at most 3 children was enough just from a practical point of view. but if she DID make such a suggestion to Charles it was clearly an attept at making their marriage work again and having another baby. That's not "trapping" him. I agree that I don't think she did take active steps, she HOPEd that maybe something might happen and Charles would trun to her again and they could make it work.. but I don't believe she asked hm. perhaps she felt that if he borke with Camilla for some reason, he would turn to her
 
Can you cite your sources about trapping him with a third child? That's something totally new to me and I don't think there's much about Diana that I've not read. I believe that after Harry was born, Diana knew there would never be a third child.

A good source that delves into Diana's behavior is Sally Bedell Smith's book called "Diana in Search of Herself: Portrait of a Troubled Princess". Personally, I think Diana always had it in the back of her mind that she and Charles could reconcile but I don't think its something that she actively sought to make happen.

quotation from Diana reassessed: Part Three

"The tragedy was that she was still in love with Charles and secretly longed to win him back.
Over long lunches with friends she would plan, half-joking, half-serious, how to get him back into her bed. Ken Wharfe said: "She wanted to have another baby, she was desperate to have another baby, she continued to love him."
 
I would not term it as "trapping" but the book by the Housekeeper also mentions a desire for a third child, hopefully a daughter.

As Lady Nimue states, there were layers, but I respectfully disagree that Diana did not want to get back with Charles. I think at some point Charles was done with Diana and never looked back, but Diana wavered when it came to wanting to have a relationship with Charles. I do think the confrontation with Camilla in 1989 was sincere, at that moment Diana wanted Charles and, because he was firmly ensconced with Camilla, she wanted Camilla to give him up. Of course when Diana tells the story she conveniently leaves out that at that point she had had extra-marital relationships.
 
I would not term it as "trapping" but the book by the Housekeeper also mentions a desire for a third child, hopefully a daughter.

As Lady Nimue states, there were layers, but I respectfully disagree that Diana did not want to get back with Charles. I think at some point Charles was done with Diana and never looked back, but Diana wavered when it came to wanting to have a relationship with Charles. I do think the confrontation with Camilla in 1989 was sincere, at that moment Diana wanted Charles and, because he was firmly ensconced with Camilla, she wanted Camilla to give him up. Of course when Diana tells the story she conveniently leaves out that at that point she had had extra-marital relationships.

I concur. I think ONE of the reasons Diana loved and married Charles was because she totally believed she was going into the one marriage which COULDN'T fail -I mean, it's not as if there are numerous heirs to the throne who get divorced, are there- I think her parents' divorce had had a devastating and lasting effect on her. As for the points she leaves out of her story, we probably all reveal certain facts about our lives in such a way that we don't damage our characters.
 
I would not term it as "trapping" but the book by the Housekeeper also mentions a desire for a third child, hopefully a daughter.

Ashe had had extra-marital relationships.

How can it be "trapping"? if she had asked Charles to give up his relationship with Camilla, and she had given up Hewitt, and had asked him to try again, and produce another child.. - it wuld IMO have been a bad idea, (at least ot try for another baby, and bring a third child into a shaky marriage) but it would not have been TRAPPING.
 
:previous: Which is why I stated that 'I would not term it as "trapping"'. :rolleyes: I am just sharing that I am familiar with the part about the desire for a third child.
 
Back
Top Bottom