Diana's Secret Tapes Recorded in March 1997

[Mermaid1962]

I know what you mean. When I go there, I do a search string that specifies " -death -accident -conspiracy -icke " Otherwise, there are videos about Diana's death and accident (sad) and conspiracy theories (weird) that show up.

[Katrianna]

Oh yes, the Globe. Just a few weeks ago it's headline was, "Camilla Secretly Poisoning The Queen So She Can Take The Throne". Absolutely not a credible news source at all. I could see Diana writing in a journal or diary rather than taping her thoughts. We, as a public will never probably know and I agree with Denville, if any such writings or tapes actually existed, I hope we never find out and hopefully were destroyed. It wouldn't do Diana, her sons or the Royal Family any good. It would be too many years and the past needs to be buried. I agree also if there was anything such as tapes or diaries/journals, Paul Burrell would have blabbed about way before now.

[Iluvbertie]

As an historian I must disagree. To have her real thoughts etc would be a boon to future historians who would be able to refer to them - imagine if Princess Beatrice, instead of just editing Queen Victoria's diaries had destroyed them instead - how much poorer would be our understanding of QV?

If she did write a diary then it should in the royal archives and be made available to historians about 100 years after her death but certainly it shouldn't be destroyed.

[Mermaid1962]

My wish is that Diana's diaries are kept safe in the archives as well. I remember that it was discussed at the time of the 1981 wedding that one of her duties was keeping a diary. Historians need that information.

[Curryong]

It depends what sort of a diary is kept, of course. Some royals, like Queen Victoria, poured their heart and soul into the pages of their journal. Others keep it strictly as a schedule of what they are doing/have done on any particular day, and therefore will not be particularly informative for future historians.

Actually, I don't know whether I would want to read in her diary about Diana's growing misery and despair during her life as Princess of Wales. I think we've all read enough of that, though little anecdotes about her children and Royal life would be interesting.

[Katrianna]

If a Diana diary/journal was to contain information and thoughts of historical significance then they, of course, would be of great interest. I agree with Curryong if a Diana diary contained entry upon entry of her sadness and misery at her marriage and being Princess of Wales, then there's nothing new to be gained or learned about, we do already know more than is enough. I agree also if she had insightful Royal life anecdotes that would be interesting.

[Denville]

Did she actually kepe a diary?I don't think i'd want to see these tapes (not that they exist) but if they did I fear that they would be from a time that Diana was very unhappy and a bit paranoid and she would not come across well in them

[Mermaid1962]

I believe that she had to keep an official diary for the Windsor archives, such as the type that are reviewed in official biographies. We certainly won't live to see what's in it.

[Iluvbertie]

I doubt that there is any rule that they have to keep an 'official' diary. It that was the case then Vicotria's wouldn't have been able to be edited and Edward VII's destroyed (he put that in his will and that was carried out - so we don't have his at all even though he kept a diary from the age of 7).

More modern royals probably don't keep diaries based on the fact that they communicate via social media way more and so probably don't record anything in that way - typical of their generation.

[Lady Nimue]

Originally Posted by Katrianna

If a Diana diary/journal was to contain information and thoughts of historical significance then they, of course, would be of great interest.I agree with Curryong if a Diana diary contained entry upon entry of her sadness and misery at her marriage and being Princess of Wales, then there's nothing new to be gained or learned about, we do already know more than is enough. I agree also if she had insightful Royal life anecdotes that would be interesting.

In terms of social history, we can assume we'd have an accurate timeline for all the shenanigans going on behind-the-scenes, and not the 'spin' that took place later. That alone being the case, I doubt such a document would ever be allowed to see the light of day (if it exists) except a couple of hundred years down the line.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Mermaid1962

I believe that she had to keep an official diary for the Windsor archives, such as the type that are reviewed in official biographies. We certainly won't live to see what's in it.

I don't think so. I think she would have had to have a diary in the sense of her engagemetns ad so on, but there's no obligation to have a "personal" diary. I think they would NOT want that relly, as it might get into the wrong hands. BUt I think that Di wrote memoes to herself, about her problems..and I'm suere the Royals/palace officials would want to keep those secret...

[Osipi]

An interesting thought that may be a possibility (and notice I said *may be*).

We know that during troubled times, Diana often turned to the spiritual and psychic looking for some answers and guidance. It wouldn't be surprising to me if one of them suggested that Diana keep a dream journal. A lot of our subconscious issues come out to us within dreams and many people keep a dream journal by the bedside as its the best way to remember dreams by writing them down upon awakening before the memory of them is lost.

I would think that any really personal writings such as dreams, emotional recordings and such would be respected and not be put into the public domain. A recounting of her thoughts and feelings, for example, from her trip to the Taj Mahal (we all remember the lonely photo there) would add to the historical significance of that tour.

I would hope that people would be discriminating as to what is of historical value and what should remain being Diana's personal thoughts. Perhaps this is what Diana's sisters felt as, if I remember right, they did destroy a lot of papers not long after Diana died.

[Denville]

well IIRC her family said that they destroyed just routine stuff like invitation letters and so on. But then they're not exactly brainy, the mother or sisters. I would like to think that if Diana had written personal stuff, or stuf about her marriage in private letters, it could be kept safely for a long time and then released when it could not hurt people. that would IMO be the ideal thing to do. But who knows what the Spencers got rid of? However I doubt if Diana kept a diary, Q Vic and older royals did, but that was a long time ago and she wasn't IMO of the generation that might keep one.

[Denville]

I know Diana liked to write, but some how I can't see her writing a whole voluminous personal diary like Q Vic. I think she liked writing letters, and I'd say tat that is why the Spencers got nervous about her letters and did a lot of destroying because she might have been engaged in indiscreet correspondence with friends. there were her love letters to Hewitt. and I'd imagine that in letters to friends she might have complained about Charles or talked about her love affairs. But I don't quite see her writing a diary. I think she might have jotted down "memoes to herself" mulling over things.. and they might also have been "dangerous" or indiscreet.
But thinking it over I'm not sure if she was likely ot have made tapes, I'd say pen and ink was more her medium

[royal_sophietje]

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie

I doubt that there is any rule that they have to keep an 'official' diary. It that was the case then Vicotria's wouldn't have been able to be edited and Edward VII's destroyed (he put that in his will and that was carried out - so we don't have his at all even though he kept a diary from the age of 7).

More modern royals probably don't keep diaries based on the fact that they communicate via social media way more and so probably don't record anything in that way - typical of their generation.

Agreed, I doubt she kept a diary. If she did we would have known by now. Ken Wharfe, Patrick Jephson or Paul Burrell never mentioned that she kept a diary, I believe.

[anbrida]

Simone Simmons mentioned in her book "Diana: the last words" that Diana had kept a personal diary. Most probably it was in Lady Sarah's hand right now, since she was the one in charge of sorting Diana's possession after her death.

[Denville]

Oh well if it is only Simone Simmons I' wouldn't trust her word too far.

[anbrida]

Originally Posted by Denville

Oh well if it is only Simone Simmons I' wouldn't trust her word too far.

I wonder why you wouldn't trust her? Had she ever been caught telling false information, or you think she was not close to Diana to know this. Diana would spent 9 hours on phone with her one time. She was definitely a reliable source about Diana than most people.

[anbrida]

About Simone Simmon's credibility. Here are some background information. Simone Simmons was asked to testify in both the Paul Burrel's case and the inquiry to the death of Diana and Dodi. She must be considered to be close to Diana enough to be asked by the juries, right?

About Simone Simmon loyalty to Diana. Yes she wrote two books about her. But according to herself, she was asked to do that in Feb, 1997 by Diana herself. But no evidence to suggest she was telling lie here. However, I happened to come across the following comments Simone Simmons left under the page of Sally Smith's 1999 book "Diana: in search of herslef" on Amazon. In that book, Sally Smith shed a very negative light on Diana, claiming that Diana was seriously mentally unstable. From the content, one can see Simone Simmon's genuine care for her late friend.

BySimone Simmonson January 12, 2000
Format: Hardcover
Sally Bedell Smith purports to have written about Diana, a book supposedly based on interviews with friends and relatives of the late Princess. I, for one, was mentioned and was faintly amused that this woman whom I have never spoken to or corresponded with in any way should claim to have interviewed everyone (including myself) for this book. I do see however, that she has taken some choice paragraphs out of my own book, re-worded them herself and has taken them completely out of context. Other contacts of Diana don't seem to have been interviewed by the author either. Maybe she can explain herself at a later date! This is not a book which portrays the Diana I knew, who had the same range of emotion as every other woman, but who enjoyed having fun, being "normal" when in disguise and had a propensity for practical jokes. She was a warm, spiritual person who cared about people, the environment and wanted to rid the world of horrors. She was emotional about disasters in her love life as are millions of other women on this planet. She certainly was not unstable as this book suggests and therefore, in my opinion, the material for this book is questionable.

At least Simone Simmons would be bothered to write a comment on an Amazon's page to defend her friend, this is an action I didn't see too much from Diana's other friends or even close relatives. Isn't it a manifestation of loyalty?

[Denville]

she wrote not one but 2 books on Diana, she sold stories to the papers, she and Di had a row and Diana cut her off. I wouldn't clal her a friend