“WE’LL FORGET DIANA?” — King Charles Finally Responds to Charles Spencer’s Bombshell Book Claim

BREAKING: A Buckingham Palace spokesman has hit out at Earl Charles Spencer's new book about Princess Diana, in which he claimed King Charles said "we'll forget Diana soon enough" just days after

For nearly three decades, one of the most painful chapters in the royal family’s history has remained buried in the past.

Now, Charles Spencer has brought it back into the spotlight — with a claim so explosive that Buckingham Palace has broken with its usual silence.

In his forthcoming memoir, Swan Song: Diana, My Sister, Spencer alleges that then-Prince Charles told him, shortly after Princess Diana’s death in 1997, that “we’ll forget her soon enough.”

The allegation has immediately reopened questions about what really happened behind closed doors in the chaotic days following Diana’s death.

And this time, the Palace has responded.

The Remark That Changed Everything

According to an excerpt from Spencer’s memoir, the confrontation happened while the family was discussing Diana’s funeral and, specifically, whether her sons, Prince William and Prince Harry, should walk behind their mother’s coffin.

William was 15. Harry was just 12.

Spencer has previously made clear that he objected to the boys taking part in the procession, believing the experience would be too painful and that Diana would not have wanted them subjected to it.

In his memoir, Spencer describes an increasingly heated exchange with the then-Prince Charles.

Then came the sentence that has now become the center of the controversy.

Spencer claims Charles told him:

“Rest assured, we’ll forget her soon enough!”

For Spencer, the words apparently carried a much deeper meaning.

He interpreted the alleged remark as evidence of what he described as Charles’s pent-up contempt toward Diana and discomfort with the extraordinary public reaction to her death.

But nearly 29 years later, there is another side to the story.

And Buckingham Palace has now put it on the record.

Buckingham Palace Breaks Its Silence

The Palace normally avoids commenting on books about the royal family.

This time, however, a spokesperson issued an unusually direct response.

According to reports, the Palace said King Charles is mindful that the pain of grief can affect reason, judgment and memory — even many years after a traumatic loss.

That response is significant because it does not simply ignore Spencer’s account.

Instead, it raises a completely different question:

Could two people remember the same devastating period in radically different ways?

Spencer remembers a conversation that left a lasting impression on him.

The Palace is effectively pointing to the possibility that grief may have influenced how that conversation was remembered decades later.

Neither version can simply be treated as an independently established fact.

But the disagreement itself has become part of the story.

Why Charles Spencer’s Book Is Causing Such a Shock

Swan Song: Diana, My Sister is not being presented as another conventional royal biography.

Spencer, Diana’s younger brother, is telling the story from the perspective of someone who grew up alongside her and remained deeply connected to her memory.

The book is scheduled for publication on September 22, 2026, and was written as the 30th anniversary of Diana’s death approaches. Spencer has said he wanted to put down his own memories rather than continue seeing what he considers inaccurate versions of his sister’s story repeated publicly.

That makes the timing especially powerful.

Diana died on August 31, 1997.

Almost three decades later, her brother is reopening the most emotionally charged week of her life — and putting his own recollection of the royal family at the center of it.

King Charles News: Earl Spencer Claims Diana Would Be 'Forgotten Soon Enough' In Bombshell New Book

The Funeral Decision Behind the Alleged Comment

The controversy is also tied to one of the most haunting images in modern royal history.

William and Harry walking behind their mother's coffin.

At the time, the decision generated intense debate over whether two young boys should have been expected to participate in such a public and emotionally overwhelming procession.

Spencer has said he opposed the idea.

But William and Harry later described the decision differently.

In the 2017 BBC documentary Diana, 7 Days, William described the decision as a collective family decision.

Harry later wrote in his memoir Spare that several adults had objected to the boys walking behind the coffin, with Spencer among those who strongly opposed it.

So even before Spencer’s latest claim, there were already competing memories of how that decision was reached.

The new memoir adds another layer:

What exactly was said between Spencer and Charles when they argued about it?

And how much of that conversation can still be independently verified nearly three decades later?

“We’ll Forget Her” — Or a Memory Shaped by Grief?

This is where the Palace response becomes particularly important.

Spencer is recounting a private conversation from one of the most traumatic periods imaginable.

Charles was grieving the mother of his children.

Spencer was grieving his sister.

The entire country was grieving a woman whose death had triggered an unprecedented public outpouring of emotion.

That does not automatically prove either person's recollection right or wrong.

But it explains why a conversation remembered differently by two grieving men could remain emotionally explosive decades later.

The Palace's response appears carefully worded.

It does not attempt to rewrite Diana's legacy.

It does not launch a lengthy attack on Spencer.

Instead, it points toward the uncertainty surrounding memories formed during intense grief.

That may be precisely why the controversy is unlikely to disappear quickly.

Diana Was Never “Forgotten”

There is another uncomfortable reality buried inside the alleged remark.

Whatever Charles may or may not have meant in that private conversation, history clearly did not unfold as though Diana were forgotten.

She remained one of the most recognizable figures in the world.

Her sons continued speaking about her.

William and Harry have repeatedly referenced their mother throughout their adult lives.

Her charitable legacy continues to be discussed.

And even now, almost 30 years after her death, a single alleged sentence from a private conversation can dominate international headlines.

In that sense, the historical record has produced an almost dramatic contradiction to the alleged prediction.

Diana was not forgotten.

If anything, her memory became one of the most enduring parts of the modern British royal story.

Why Harry and William Matter So Much to This Story

The funeral controversy also puts Diana's two sons back at the heart of the narrative.

At the time, they were grieving children being placed at the center of a global spectacle.

Today, they are two adult princes whose relationship remains deeply strained.

That makes Spencer's account particularly sensitive.

The original argument was about whether William and Harry should walk behind their mother.

Nearly three decades later, the story is being revisited at a time when the brothers themselves remain divided.

It creates an extraordinary historical echo:

Diana's sons were once at the center of a family argument over how they should publicly mourn her. Today, their own relationship is one of the most closely watched fractures inside the royal family.

Charles Spencer Has Now Put His Memory on the Record

Spencer has made clear that his intention is not simply to attack the monarchy.

He has described Swan Song as his own attempt to tell the truth about Diana from her brother's perspective and to preserve his memories of the woman he knew personally.

But the book's revelations are inevitably going to be interpreted through the complicated history between Diana and Charles.

And the Palace's response ensures that this is no longer simply a story about a memoir.

It has become a dispute over memory.

One man says he remembers a devastating remark.

The institution representing the King has responded by highlighting the possibility that grief can affect memory and judgment.

Neither side has produced a recording of the conversation.

And that leaves the public with an uncomfortable question.

What Really Happened in That Phone Call?

Was the alleged remark exactly as Spencer remembers it?

Was it said in anger, in grief, or in a context that has been lost after nearly three decades?

Did Charles truly believe Diana would eventually fade from public memory?

Or did Spencer, devastated by the loss of his sister, hear and remember the exchange through the overwhelming emotions of that moment?

Those questions may never receive a definitive answer.

But one thing is already clear.

Charles Spencer has reopened one of the royal family's oldest wounds — and this time, King Charles has chosen not to let the allegation pass completely unanswered.