Princess Diana: Princess Margaret Said She Knew the Problem — New Biography Revelations
In excerpts from his upcoming biography of the late Queen, royal author Hugo Vickers relays that Princess Margaret believed she understood the root of the breakdown in Charles and princess diana’s marriage. Margaret, who had experienced her own high-profile split, told Vickers that the central issue was sustained undermining and a lack of support, and she openly questioned Diana’s choice to return to family life at Sandringham after separation.
Princess Diana: Margaret’s assessment and the Sandringham moment
Hugo Vickers records Princess Margaret saying, “The trouble was that he undermined her [Diana] consistently from the start, and gave her no support. ” She added that the situation escalated when Charles “began to get difficult over the children, which was the cause of all the trouble last year. ” Those remarks were made as the family moved through separation: Prince Charles and princess diana had separated in 1992, and Margaret commented on Diana’s presence with the Royal Family at Sandringham for Christmas in 1993 despite that separation.
Margaret drew the parallel between Diana’s marriage and her own, noting, “It was the same with me and Tony [Lord Snowdon]. He undermined me. ” She also confessed a blunt reaction to Diana’s return for the festive season: “I don’t know why she wanted to come back [to Sandringham]. I longed to tell her to go away. ” At the same time, Margaret sought permission to remain on friendly terms after the split, asking her nephew, “Do you mind if I go on being friends with her?” and was told he approved.
Why this matters now
Those recollections matter because they come from within the royal household and from a figure who had endured a similar public separation: Margaret’s own divorce in 1976 after 16 years with Lord Snowdon was cited by her as context for empathy and insight. Hugo Vickers frames these comments in his book as part of a wider portrait of how senior family members viewed the breakdown of the marriage. The remarks illuminate how private family judgments and dynamics intersected with very public lives—informing both internal decisions and public perception at a fraught moment for the monarchy.
Deeper analysis: what lies beneath the headline
The passages Vickers shares suggest multiple intertwined dynamics rather than a single cause. Margaret’s repeated use of the term “undermined” points to perceived patterns of interpersonal behavior: withdrawal of support, contested authority over parenting decisions and a private erosion of trust. Those are the themes she equated between her own marriage and that of her nephew and princess diana, signaling how personal history shaped her reading of events.
Because Margaret voiced both disapproval and an offer of continued friendship, her comments reveal a complex stance inside the family—simultaneously critical of conduct she saw as damaging and protective of personal ties. The decision by Diana to attend Christmas at Sandringham despite separation illustrates the tension between public ritual and private rupture: traditional gatherings can act as pressure points where unresolved conflicts become visible to relatives and, indirectly, to the wider world.
Expert perspectives and direct testimony
Hugo Vickers, described in the book as a royal author and biographer, presents Princess Margaret’s words as first-hand testimony drawn from their conversations late in 1993. Princess Margaret, the late Queen’s sister, provides the blunt assessments quoted above and frames them with reference to her own experience of being undermined in marriage. Those direct statements—about undermining, about children, about Sandringham—constitute the primary evidence that shapes Vickers’ portrait of family sentiment during the separation period.
Taken together, the testimony underscores the role of intimate family judgments in shaping both private choices and public narratives. The royal household’s internal conversations, as recounted here, show how elder family members processed and framed the actions of their kin at a pivotal moment.
What remains to be seen is how readers and historians will weigh Margaret’s recollections alongside other contemporaneous testimony to build a fuller picture of the marriage and its breakdown. Will these candid remarks shift interpretations of responsibility, sympathy and consequence in the years that followed for princess diana and the royal family at large?
