John Major found unexpected ally for Diana during marriage crisis, book says

British Prime Minister John Major quietly acted as a mediator between Prince Charles and Princess Diana during the couple’s public marital crisis, according to Valentine Low’s new book Power and the Palace. The royal author portrays Major as more than a statesman in that moment, describing him as a sympathetic listener who sought to ease the strain of the Waleses’ marriage while ensuring Diana could find a meaningful role in the royal sphere even as separation loomed.

Low’s account, drawn from interviews and archival materials, portrays Major as a steady, discreet presence who spoke with both Charles and Diana individually and as a pair. Alex Allan, Major’s private secretary at the time, said the prime minister held multiple sessions with each spouse. When a meeting was held with one of them, the other would often request time with Major shortly afterward. Allan emphasized that Major did not intend to force a reunion, but he did aim to prevent the crisis from erupting into unnecessary drama and to help Diana navigate the period with as much dignity as possible. Lord Butler, then cabinet secretary, is described by Low as noting that Major offered Diana “a shoulder to cry on.”

In the new book, Major’s private approach is contrasted with the public turmoil that defined the era for the royal couple. Diana’s private circle has long been discussed by biographers and commentators, but Low adds a portrait of Major as a practical broker who recognized the constitutional and ceremonial pressures on the monarchy while also listening to Diana’s sense of loneliness. A longtime royal watcher, Richard Fitzwilliams, tells Fox News Digital that Major’s empathetic, soft-spoken demeanor helped him win trust on both sides of the dispute, a feat in itself given the intensity of Charles and Diana’s public breakup.

The narrative also offers a window into Diana’s own coping mechanisms during the crisis. Low’s sources describe a princess who often sought guidance beyond traditional confidants, noting she turned to mystics, astrologers and spiritual advisers as she sought comfort in a period of isolation. Helena Chard, a British broadcaster and photographer, recalled that Major offered Diana a space where she could speak freely and feel protected. Diana’s private secretary, Patrick Jephson, recounts in Low’s account that Major kept up regular contact with Diana and would visit her frequently in the run-up to the separation and afterward. Those sessions, Jephson says, provided a rare sense of stability for Diana at a moment when she felt adrift within the institution.

Major’s approach, Low notes, was not about reuniting the Prince and Princess of Wales but about preserving Diana’s sense of purpose in the wake of looming separation. Low emphasizes Major’s discretion—he is quoted as saying that Major would not reveal details of his conversations with any royal family member and would never exploit that trust. The former prime minister’s private conduct stands in contrast to the public escalation of the breakdown, and Low stresses that Major’s private conversations with Diana remained confidential, a point he underscores when discussing the confidentiality of those exchanges.

Ian Pelham Turner, another veteran royal observer who had worked within the government, tells Fox News Digital that Major understood loneliness in a way that resonated with Diana. Turner noted Major’s middle-class background and his instinct to safeguard the personal dignity of those involved, describing him as someone who could be both practical and compassionate when facing delicate family matters that also carried constitutional implications. Diana’s own evolution in the years of crisis—rebranding herself as a medical and charitable advocate and ultimately “The People’s Princess”—is framed in Low’s work as part of a broader shift in how the royal family managed personal transition under public scrutiny.

The narrative timeline aligns with well-known milestones. The couple’s marriage began in 1981, with Charles and Diana making a high-profile life together that would unravel in the early 1990s. Major’s role appears as the crisis deepened, with the formal separation announced in 1992 and the Panorama interview given by Diana in 1995. That televised moment—when Diana famously stated, “There were three of us in this marriage, so it was a bit crowded”—is widely cited as a turning point that precipitated the end of the marriage. Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip had hoped the pair could reconcile, but the divorce was finalized in 1996.

The book’s portrayal of Major as a stabilizing force extends beyond the separation itself. Low writes that Major helped shape Diana’s path after the split, encouraging her to pursue roles and philanthropic work that would allow her to connect with the public while preserving her autonomy from the royal machine. The former prime minister’s influence, Low suggests, helped Diana articulate a public identity that balanced royal responsibilities with her growing independence. A former royal aide described Major as a “genuine” and “warm but astute” figure whose counsel helped both Charles and Diana navigate a difficult transition at a moment when the monarchy’s public image was at stake.

Power and the Palace also captures how Major’s relationship with the royal family endured beyond the crisis. Following Diana’s death in 1997, Major was named special guardian to her sons, a role related to the princes’ legal and administrative matters. The queen would later knight Major as a Knight Companion of the Order of the Garter in 2005 and named him chairman of the Queen Elizabeth Diamond Jubilee Trust in 2012, a position he would hold while continuing to support royal engagements. The book notes Major’s attendance at major family milestones, including William and Kate’s wedding in 2011 and Harry’s wedding in 2018, as well as his presence at the queen’s funeral in 2022.

The discussion surrounding Major’s private conversations with Diana remains carefully guarded. Low stresses that Major has kept those exchanges confidential and would not disclose details, a point that royal observers say reinforces Major’s reputation for discretion even in a period defined by public scrutiny of the royal marriage. Still, the broader portrait offered by Power and the Palace illuminates the delicate balance the monarchy navigates when personal relationships collide with state duties.

As a result, Major’s legacy in the period is presented not merely as a political one but as a human one. He is portrayed as a mediator who understood that a royal marriage’s strain could reverberate through the fabric of the institution itself, and as someone who sought to protect Diana’s sense of agency during a period when her life was under intense public visibility. The book situates Major as a rare ally who could speak with both Charles and Diana in a way that helped them weather a very public storm while keeping the long arc of royal duties in view.

Power and the Palace is out now, and Low’s reporting provides a nuanced look at a moment in which the monarchy’s relationship with government, the media, and the public was tested. By centering Major’s quietly influential role, the book adds depth to the widely told story of a marriage under the glare of history and demonstrates how the right kind of private support can influence a public institution under pressure.

As the narrative moves toward Diana’s death in Paris in 1997, and Major’s continuing relationship with the royal family in the years that followed, Low’s book raises questions about how the monarchy interacts with political leadership and how personal support can influence public outcomes. While Major’s private conversations with Diana are described as off-limits by design, the publicly reported elements of his involvement—his sessions with both Charles and Diana, his efforts to minimize drama, and his concern for Diana’s post-separation role—paint a portrait of a prime minister who sought to bridge personal and constitutional concerns at a moment when the royal couple’s saga dominated headlines.

The broader takeaway, according to Low, is that Major’s role was less about salvaging a marriage than about stabilizing a fragile process of separation that could have destabilized the monarchy itself. The result? A more measured transition for Diana and a more measured approach from the royal establishment toward a changing public relationship. In Power and the Palace, the former prime minister emerges not simply as a political figure but as a discreet, principled mediator who helped navigate a historic moment in a family under intense scrutiny.

The book also notes Diana’s enduring impact on public life, a transformation that ran parallel to Major’s governance. Diana’s philanthropic work and her ability to communicate with the public reshaped how the royal family engaged with citizens, reinforcing a dynamic that would influence royal strategy in the decades to come. Major’s role, the book argues, helped shape that shift by offering practical, compassionate leadership when it was most needed.

Ultimately, Power and the Palace contributes to a fuller understanding of how the monarchy and the government worked together during a turbulent era. It presents a portrait of John Major as a careful mediator who, through discreet conversations and a scrupulous respect for privacy, helped guide a family through one of its most challenging chapters and, in the process, helped set the stage for a new era of royal accountability and public engagement.