The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #1401  
Old 01-19-2018, 07:32 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: new-york, United States
Posts: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
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.
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".
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1402  
Old 01-19-2018, 07:46 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 10,063
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
__________________

Reply With Quote
  #1403  
Old 01-19-2018, 07:47 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 10,063
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel View Post
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
Reply With Quote
  #1404  
Old 01-19-2018, 07:49 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 12,363
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.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #1405  
Old 01-20-2018, 12:50 AM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades CA, United States
Posts: 4,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by aigulminimalist View Post
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.

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.
__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
Reply With Quote
  #1406  
Old 01-20-2018, 04:41 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
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
Reply With Quote
  #1407  
Old 01-20-2018, 08:30 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: new-york, United States
Posts: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
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."
Reply With Quote
  #1408  
Old 01-20-2018, 08:51 AM
Queen Claude's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 890
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.
Reply With Quote
  #1409  
Old 01-20-2018, 10:10 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: colchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Claude View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #1410  
Old 01-20-2018, 11:07 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Claude View Post
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.
Reply With Quote
  #1411  
Old 01-20-2018, 11:36 AM
Queen Claude's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: May 2015
Location: USA, United States
Posts: 890
Which is why I stated that 'I would not term it as "trapping"'. I am just sharing that I am familiar with the part about the desire for a third child.
Reply With Quote
  #1412  
Old 01-20-2018, 02:38 PM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades CA, United States
Posts: 4,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Queen Claude View Post
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.
The story is convenient: it demonstrates (to her public) what she had to go through to try to get her husband back from the 'heartless Camilla'. Poor Diana. It's Diana's spin from later.

By then (later) Camilla was the lover of choice for Charles, Diana knew that, and commenced Camilla's take down. Camilla giving up Charles would not have effected a Charles beating a path back to Diana. Camilla was not 'in charge' of Charles' decision regarding who he was with. This is Diana's reasoning? What is clear is Diana chose a 'public' display with Camilla. That is curious, given she could have 'had it out' with Camilla in any number of ways less obvious. So what was the point of the public theatre?

Recall that when this incident took place is not when Diana spoke about it years later. Recall, too, that she was in her longest relationship with a man that she publicly professed to 'love madly'. (Think of that: longer than even with her husband). She trying to get Charles back? Why? She was 'madly in love' with Hewitt, as were her sons. She had a pretty cozy alternate family grouping going on. What was the point of busting up Charles' nest?

If she was trying to get Charles to give Camilla up it was a strange way to go about it (demean the husband's lover). Why not actually sit down with one's husband and agree to give up Hewitt when one asks him to give up Camilla? That would be a serious attempt at reconciliation. As with all of Diana's public displays one needs to be a little more canny regarding interpretation. Diana was doing something else (imo) with that little bit of theatre with Charles' friends.
__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
Reply With Quote
  #1413  
Old 01-20-2018, 02:54 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 12,363
I can't help but feel that the scenario between Diana and Camilla that was made very, very public was a case of "what is mine, is mine even if I don't really use it or want it that much. If I can't have him, I don't want anyone else having him either" kind of thing. It was a play for power and control and manipulation. It was seeing Camilla as an adversary more than a serious attempt to restore her marriage out of love for Charles.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #1414  
Old 01-20-2018, 03:15 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: colchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 351
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Nimue View Post
The story is convenient: it demonstrates (to her public) what she had to go through to try to get her husband back from the 'heartless Camilla'. Poor Diana. It's Diana's spin from later.

By then (later) Camilla was the lover of choice for Charles, Diana knew that, and commenced Camilla's take down. Camilla giving up Charles would not have effected a Charles beating a path back to Diana. Camilla was not 'in charge' of Charles' decision regarding who he was with. This is Diana's reasoning? What is clear is Diana chose a 'public' display with Camilla. That is curious, given she could have 'had it out' with Camilla in any number of ways less obvious. So what was the point of the public theatre?

Recall that when this incident took place is not when Diana spoke about it years later. Recall, too, that she was in her longest relationship with a man that she publicly professed to 'love madly'. (Think of that: longer than even with her husband). She trying to get Charles back? Why? She was 'madly in love' with Hewitt, as were her sons. She had a pretty cozy alternate family grouping going on. What was the point of busting up Charles' nest?

If she was trying to get Charles to give Camilla up it was a strange way to go about it (demean the husband's lover). Why not actually sit down with one's husband and agree to give up Hewitt when one asks him to give up Camilla? That would be a serious attempt at reconciliation. As with all of Diana's public displays one needs to be a little more canny regarding interpretation. Diana was doing something else (imo) with that little bit of theatre with Charles' friends.
Indeed. Why not, as you suggest, have an adult and entirely reasonable conversation? Trouble is, when one is trying to have a grown up discussion with a man who is very much one's senior, they can hide behind the superiority it affords them. I'm willing to bet that Diana felt a long way from being adult and reasonable, and when emotions kick in, as I'm sure they did, she'd have lost all credence even IF, and I believe it's a big IF, he'd been prepared to discuss it it the first place, other than to say he wasn't prepared to negotiate.
Reply With Quote
  #1415  
Old 01-20-2018, 03:32 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I can't help but feel that the scenario between Diana and Camilla that was made very, very public was a case of "what is mine, is mine even if I don't really use it or want it that much. If I can't have him, I don't want anyone else having him either" kind of thing. It was a play for power and control and manipulation. It was seeing Camilla as an adversary more than a serious attempt to restore her marriage out of love for Charles.
Of course Camilla was her adversary. ANd I think that Diana always had feelings for Charles and wished she could have him back.. it was the fact that she knew after a certain time that she wasn't going to get hm back, that drove her towards trying to get out of the marriage. I can't see how you can say it was a case of "I want to keep him for ME, even if I don't really want him that much." That's not the case at all. Charles had lost interest in her, because the interest was never very deep and Diana's unhappiness, mental problems which made her difficult and a lack of compatibility, killed off his feelings for her within a few years..
Reply With Quote
  #1416  
Old 01-20-2018, 04:24 PM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades CA, United States
Posts: 4,422
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I can't help but feel that the scenario between Diana and Camilla that was made very, very public was a case of "what is mine, is mine even if I don't really use it or want it that much. If I can't have him, I don't want anyone else having him either" kind of thing. It was a play for power and control and manipulation. It was seeing Camilla as an adversary more than a serious attempt to restore her marriage out of love for Charles.
Beautifully summed up, Osipi.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsaritsa View Post
Indeed. Why not, as you suggest, have an adult and entirely reasonable conversation? Trouble is, when one is trying to have a grown up discussion with a man who is very much one's senior, they can hide behind the superiority it affords them. I'm willing to bet that Diana felt a long way from being adult and reasonable, and when emotions kick in, as I'm sure they did, she'd have lost all credence even IF, and I believe it's a big IF, he'd been prepared to discuss it it the first place, other than to say he wasn't prepared to negotiate.
Interesting 'take' on Charles. Your opinion, of course, but I go by the character of the man we know. I've no doubt that Charles may have personal issues (as do we all) but I do see him as a man of integrity and discretion (never once has he spoken ill of Diana). We will never fully know what Charles was dealing with regarding Diana's imbalance (nor she of him and how he triggered her). We have some clue in the 'Portrait of a Troubled Princess' book (a harrowing read which I have never been able to finish).

My 'take' on Diana was she was never intimidated by Charles' 'seniority'. Quite the reverse, she dictated to him from nearly the get-go, and threw substantial fits if he did not abide by her wishes. Not exactly the kind of behavior that would have opened up an already cautious Charles. In most of this we have to accept people's limitations and not judge them for those limitations. JMO.

EDIT: Remember: for the sit-down talk to have sincerity, Diana would have had to have been willing to own up to her own flirtations, and her own long-standing love affair with Hewitt. In that scenario, which among the two might not have wanted to 'negotiate'? I have my answer, what would be yours?
__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
Reply With Quote
  #1417  
Old 01-20-2018, 08:09 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: new-york, United States
Posts: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
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.
we do not know that Diana in fact informed Charles about "dumping" hewitt.
(we do not know if they discussed openly hewitt in contradistinction to camilla) maybe Charles didnt trust diana? he was aware about Diana sleeping with hewitt for years.
Charles could have doubts about the paternity of the future 3 child and true motives of Diana. Look how strange it looks.
Charles and Diana did not sleep togehter in the same bed, behaved with each other as "neighbors" or "roommates" for at least 2 years. And then suddenly Diana comes to Charles and says "let's try again, I want a third baby".
Charles is a proud man. Maybe he didnt want to take Diana back after Manakee, Hewitt. According to rumors Charles was annoyed (I think he was hurt, jealous) with diana barri manakee affair.

IDK. it's just how it seemed to me.
Reply With Quote
  #1418  
Old 01-20-2018, 08:16 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 12,363
What Denville was referring to was the theoretical hypothesis that Charles and Diana *could* have have such a discussion and should they have done, it would have been far from trapping. From my knowledge, there was never such an event that ever happened. Charles and Diana had gotten to the point where they couldn't even stand to be in the same room with each other.

I, for one, do not believe that marital infidelity actually was the main point in the breakdown of the marriage at all. None of that came about until after the marriage was severely damaged beyond repair. These were two people that should never have married in the first place and once the honeymoon was over and they lived with each other and their true natures came out, it was a far cry from the "fairy tale" marriage of a match made in heaven.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
Reply With Quote
  #1419  
Old 01-21-2018, 03:56 AM
Jacknch's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Suffolk, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,793
Posts relating to Charles' and Diana's marriage have been moved to the Charles and Diana thread. THIS thread is for discussing Diana's relationship with James Hewitt. Further, please avoid bringing Camilla into the discussion. Thank you.
__________________
JACK
Reply With Quote
  #1420  
Old 01-24-2018, 05:45 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: new-york, United States
Posts: 32
Quote:
Originally Posted by aigulminimalist View Post
we do not know that Diana in fact informed Charles about "dumping" hewitt.
(We do not know if they discussed openly hewitt in contradistinction to camilla) maybe Charles didnt trust diana? he was aware about Diana sleeping with hewitt for years.
Charles could have doubts about the paternity of the future 3 child and true motives of Diana. Look how strange it looks.
Charles and Diana did not sleep togehter in the same bed, behaved with each other as "neighbors" or "roommates" for at least 2 years. And then suddenly Diana comes to Charles and says "let's try again, I want a third baby".
Charles is a proud man. Maybe he didnt want to take Diana back after Manakee, Hewitt. According to rumors Charles was annoyed (I think he was hurt, jealous) with diana barri manakee affair.

IDK. it's just how it seemed to me.
found the answer.
I read the article about Diana's Secret Tapes March 1997. This quotation
"On another tape she talks of how "I entered into a relationship with James (Hewitt). Charles knew about it and didn't care. He said it gave him the freedom to run his own life"
explains that Charles and Diana openly discussed their affairs. It turns out they had some kind of open marriage.
__________________

Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
diana princess of wales, extramarital affair, james hewitt, paternity, prince charles, prince harry, prince of wales, princess diana


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
James and Julia Ogilvy and Family News 1: December 2003- flirtmooni British Royals 26 11-14-2018 01:54 PM
James Carnegie, 3rd Duke of Fife (1929-2015) and Family betina British Royals 30 07-06-2015 10:12 AM
Why do you like Diana? juliamontague Diana, Princess of Wales (1961-1997) 222 12-21-2011 03:40 AM
Sophie Gives Birth to a Son: James, Viscount Severn - December 17, 2007 BeatrixFan The Earl and Countess of Wessex and Family 237 01-27-2008 06:11 AM
James James Mclean Member Introductions 1 10-30-2007 06:19 PM




Popular Tags
aif australia belgian book bracelets british royal family britishroyals camilla caracciolo clothes corruption crown princess victoria current events daughters denmark documentary duchessofcambridge duchess of sussex dutch royal family family fashion felipe vi forum genetics germany hasnat khan helena iñaki urdangarín juan carlos king felipe and queen letizia current events king philippe letizia lineage meghan markle member monaco porphyria prince charles prince harry prince harry of wales prince laurent princenapoleon prince of belgium princess beatrice princess claire princess diana princess eugenie princess royal queen elizabeth queen mary of teck quizz remarriage royal royal ancestry royal geneology royal ladies royal wedding sarah duchess of york smith spain state visit surname sweden swedish royal family tradition visit from sweden visit to spain wedding windsor castle windsor wedding



Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:12 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018
Jelsoft Enterprises