Prince William feels betrayed after uncle Charles Spencer’s new book reopens Diana’s 1997 funeral wounds, critics say it harms the crown he will inherit.
Page Six reported that Charles Spencer, the 9th Earl Spencer and Princess Diana’s brother, released “Swan Song: Diana, My Sister” last week and used it to revive one of the rawest fights inside the royal family.
Spencer, 62, wrote that he strongly opposed King Charles III’s wish for William and Prince Harry to walk behind their mother’s casket during the 1997 funeral procession from Kensington Palace to Westminster Abbey. He claimed he fought the then-prince in a “stream of anger,” but lost the argument. The boys still joined their father on that route.
William is 44 now and next in line for the throne. He has spent much of his adult life trying to draw a hard line around his mother’s memory and resist the endless digging into her death. His own uncle just crossed that line in print.
Royal commentator Kinsey Schofield, host of the “Kinsey Schofield Unfiltered” podcast, spoke exclusively to Page Six and described a sharp sense of betrayal inside William’s circle.
Schofield said:
“With Prince William, there is an additional sense of betrayal because this is coming from his own uncle.”
She reminded readers what Spencer did at the funeral itself:
“Charles Spencer stood at Diana’s funeral and publicly promised that her blood family would protect William and Harry.”
Nearly three decades later, that same uncle is back in the Diana business. Schofield put the problem in plain terms:
“Nearly three decades later, William is watching that same uncle reopen some of the most traumatic events of his childhood while making very damaging allegations about his father.”
The damage is not only personal. William will one day wear the crown. Another public round of Charles-versus-Diana warfare hits the institution he is expected to lead.
Schofield said:
“The institution being damaged by another round of Charles and Diana warfare is the institution William will eventually inherit.”
She also voiced the question hanging over the book:
“I think there is a very real question within William’s orbit about how resurrecting disputed private conversations from 1997, attacking the current king, and reopening one of the ugliest periods in the family’s history is supposed to benefit either of Diana’s sons.”
And she asked the obvious follow-up:
“Does anyone really believe that Diana would sacrifice the peace of her adult children to have this one sentence out in the world?”
Schofield said the king’s side sees the book as character assassination built on an alleged private conversation from almost 30 years ago. She reported hearing of “considerable frustration and anger.”
She noted that Charles has lived for decades as the assigned villain in the Diana story:
“But Charles has also spent decades living with being cast as the villain in the Diana story.”
He endured the hostility of the 1990s, the collapse of the marriage, and the brutal public reaction after Diana’s death. Being painted that way again is familiar ground for him, Schofield said.
Page Six reached out to William’s representative for comment. No reply was reported.
The timing lands against another family fracture. Harry and Meghan Markle resigned from royal duties in 2020 and spent six years in Montecito, California. They decided last month to move back to the United Kingdom. William and Harry still have not made amends.
Royal journalist Tom Sykes told Page Six last week that Harry has reason to stay close to Spencer. Rumors of a Diana documentary are circulating, and Sykes argued the Sussexes need the earl on their side.
Sykes said:
“There is no denying [Spencer] is a big name, and he will give the documentary credibility. So [the Sussexes] need to woo him and get him onside.”
He went further:
“What Harry and Meghan are actually doing back in the UK is finally revealed, they are making a Diana film, and Spencer is likely being lined up as its star.”
That claim remains a rumor attributed to Sykes, not a confirmed project from the principals. But it fits a pattern William has spent years trying to stop: relatives and in-laws turning Diana’s death into content.
Schofield tied the pain directly to the broken promise of family protection:
“For that boundary to now be crossed by Diana’s own brother makes this particularly painful for William.”
Family loyalty is supposed to mean something. Publishing old private fights for a book title does not protect Diana’s sons. It sells the wound again. William is left guarding both his mother’s memory and the crown while the people who pledged to shield him keep reopening the file.
