New details from Charles Spencer shed light on the intensely personal journey of crafting Princess Diana’s unforgettable eulogy, including his struggle to find the right words, his role as a guardian for her sons, and the conscious decision to remove a specific mention of Rupert Murdoch.
In a recent candid discussion on Gyles Brandreth’s Rosebud podcast, Charles Spencer, the 9th Earl Spencer and younger brother to the late Princess Diana, has unveiled new and emotionally resonant details about the creation of the eulogy he delivered at her funeral in September 1997. His revelation that the tribute was “very different” from his initial draft offers a poignant glimpse into his profound grief and dedication to his sister’s legacy.
The Agonizing Journey to Find the Right Words
The sudden and tragic death of Princess Diana in a car crash in Paris in August 1997 left a nation, and her family, in shock. For Charles Spencer, who was living in South Africa at the time, the task of eulogizing his 36-year-old sister was an overwhelming burden. He recounted flying back to the U.K. “in bits,” struggling with the immense grief. A “very sweet stewardess” offered comfort during this trying journey.
Initially, Spencer sought to delegate the monumental task, sifting through a thick address book in hopes of finding someone else to deliver the speech. His search proved fruitless, reaching “Z” without a viable candidate. It was upon landing at Heathrow Airport that his mother, in conjunction with his sisters, conveyed the undeniable truth: he was the one destined to speak for Diana.
The first attempt at drafting the eulogy was, as Spencer described, “very traditional,” recalling childhood anecdotes and achievements. However, this approach quickly struck him as inauthentic. He realized his true role was not merely to speak “about” Diana, but to “speak for” her—to embody her spirit and convey her unspoken wishes.
The Unofficial Guardian: A Deep Sense of Duty
A significant factor shaping Spencer’s perspective was his understanding that Diana had named him as the guardian of her sons, Prince William and Prince Harry. While he acknowledged this held no legal standing given their father, King Charles III (then Prince Charles), was alive, it deeply resonated with him as a profound sense of duty. This personal commitment infused his writing, allowing him to craft the powerful speech in a mere hour and a half.
The eulogy ultimately delivered at Westminster Abbey was a blistering critique of the media’s treatment of Diana and a heartfelt pledge to protect her sons from a similar fate. It vowed to ensure their souls “can sing openly as you planned,” a promise that has resonated with the public and royal observers for decades.
The Omission of Rupert Murdoch and Lingering Tensions
One of the most surprising revelations from Spencer’s podcast appearance was the intentional removal of a specific “name-check” for media magnate Rupert Murdoch from his eulogy. He deemed it “rather unnecessary,” questioning, “why give him the publicity?” This decision highlights a long-standing tension between the Spencer/Windsor family and certain media organizations.
The significance of this cut became even clearer in January 2025, when Murdoch’s News Group Newspaper (NGN) issued a “full and unequivocal apology” to Prince Harry, 41, for the “serious intrusion” into his private life and that of his late mother, Diana. This apology was part of a settlement concluding Harry’s protracted legal battle against The Sun. Charles Spencer publicly lauded his nephew’s victory, writing on Instagram that it takes “an enormous amount of guts to take on major media organizations like this, and incredible tenacity to win against them.” He added that Diana “would be immensely touched by this, I’m sure, and also rightly proud.”
These recent events underscore the enduring impact of tabloid intrusion on the royal family, a theme Spencer directly addressed in his original eulogy, and now, indirectly, through his past editorial decision. His eulogy’s powerful message, particularly its call to protect William and Harry, continues to resonate, as detailed by People. The apology from NGN, as reported by People, provides a tangible link to the “mistreatment” Diana endured and that Spencer vowed to fight against.
Ultimately, Charles Spencer’s account offers a rare and intimate look into one of modern history’s most emotionally charged speeches. It reveals not only the personal struggle behind his words but also the profound, lasting commitment he felt, and continues to feel, to his sister’s memory and her beloved sons. His sustained support for Prince Harry in his legal battles against media organizations is a testament to this unwavering resolve, as highlighted by People.
