Diana told her side on television. Harry put his in a book. Centuries earlier, royal disputes ended on the scaffold. We revisit 20 royals whose lives caused an uproar, and the stories that still divide opinion.
When Charles and Diana married in 1981, millions watched a young bride walk into what looked like a fairytale. Within 15 years, both had discussed their infidelities on television and the marriage was over.
Many of us followed every unhappy development. We remember the interviews and the newspaper front pages, perhaps even the arguments around our own dinner tables about who was to blame.
There has never been a shortage of royal scandal, although earlier generations had rather more at stake than an embarrassing headline. Henry VIII’s determination to end a marriage helped change England’s religion. For two of his subsequent wives, marriage to the king ended in execution.
This selection spans European royal history, from familiar modern figures to rulers whose reputations have been argued over for centuries. They are here for very different reasons: being condemned for marrying the wrong person bears no comparison with using royal power to persecute or exploit.
“There were three of us in this marriage,” Diana told Martin Bashir in her 1995 Panorama interview, leaving viewers in little doubt about her feelings towards Charles and Camilla.
She also acknowledged her own affair and described the unhappiness behind the public appearances. For those accustomed to royal discretion, hearing a future king’s wife speak so openly was extraordinary.
The interview acquired another disturbing chapter in 2021, when the Dyson inquiry found that Bashir had used deception to gain access to Diana. Fake bank statements helped him secure an introduction through her brother. The broadcast that appeared to give her a voice had been obtained through manipulation.
Charles had made his own televised admission the previous year. In 1994, he acknowledged being unfaithful, saying it happened after his marriage had irretrievably broken down.
By then, the publication of an intimate telephone conversation with Camilla Parker Bowles had exposed details few people would want their family to hear, let alone the world.
Charles and Diana divorced in 1996. His marriage to Camilla followed in 2005, but for many who had watched the first wedding with such affection, the disappointment lingered. Becoming king did not make those memories disappear.
There was a time when the idea of Queen Camilla would have been almost unthinkable to many Diana supporters.
Her relationship with Charles made her a target of intense hostility, and their eventual marriage required careful handling. She used Duchess of Cornwall rather than Princess of Wales, the title so closely associated with Diana.
Even her future title remained sensitive until Elizabeth II made her wishes clear in 2022, saying she wanted Camilla to be known as Queen Consort when Charles became king. It was a significant endorsement from the woman whose approval mattered most within the family.
Andrew’s 2019 Newsnight interview was supposed to address questions about his friendship with convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Instead, it intensified criticism, and he stepped back from public duties days later.
Virginia Giuffre accused him of sexually abusing her when she was 17. Andrew denied the allegations and settled her US civil lawsuit in 2022 without admitting liability.
His princely title and HRH style were removed in 2025. In February 2026, he was arrested on suspicion of misconduct in public office in a separate investigation concerning his former trade role and alleged sharing of information with Epstein.
The ABC reported in October that he had not been charged and maintained his innocence. Warrants used to search his homes were quashed that month, although the court made clear that the investigation had not ended.
Harry was no stranger to damaging headlines before he left royal duties. In 2005, he apologised for wearing a Nazi uniform to a fancy-dress party.
His departure with Meghan in 2020 brought a more sustained confrontation with royal life. Interviews were followed by a documentary series and, in 2023, his memoir Spare.
Among the book’s most explosive passages was Harry’s allegation that William had physically attacked him during an argument. William’s office declined to comment at the time.
The disclosures gave readers Harry’s account of his upbringing and family relationships in remarkable detail, while making any private reconciliation considerably harder to imagine.
Meghan’s 2021 interview with Oprah Winfrey went well beyond complaints about palace protocol. She described severe emotional distress and a lack of support, and said concerns had been raised about how dark her son’s skin might be.
Buckingham Palace said the issues were concerning and would be addressed privately, adding that “some recollections may vary”.
The interview widened an already bitter divide over Meghan. Some saw a woman describing mistreatment she should never have endured; others questioned her account and the decision to make it public. Any fair assessment also has to consider the scrutiny she faced from the press, rather than treating every controversy surrounding her as one she created.
An undercover newspaper sting in 2010 caught Sarah Ferguson offering access to her former husband, Andrew, for £500,000.
He was then a British trade representative, making the offer particularly embarrassing. Ferguson apologised for a “serious lapse in judgment” and said Andrew had neither known about nor been involved in the discussions.
Years of tabloid attention had already made Fergie familiar with public humiliation. This episode raised a more substantial concern: whether access to someone holding an official role was being offered for private financial gain.
Margaret’s wish to marry divorced war hero Peter Townsend became a matter for church leaders and politicians in the 1950s, as well as a subject of enormous public interest.
In 1955, she announced that the marriage would not go ahead. She later married photographer Antony Armstrong-Jones, but that union ended in divorce in 1978.
The contrast remains poignant. A young woman’s relationship with a divorced man had caused an establishment crisis; within her own lifetime, divorce became part of her story too. Readers who remember the stigma attached to divorce may recognise something of the pressures she faced, even without the palace setting.
Edward gave up the throne in December 1936 so he could marry Wallis Simpson. His brother became George VI, placing the future Elizabeth II directly in line for the crown.
It is often remembered as a grand romantic gesture, but the couple’s subsequent conduct complicates that telling.
After marrying in 1937, the Duke and Duchess of Windsor visited Nazi Germany and met Adolf Hitler. Whatever sympathy people felt for their desire to marry, the visit left an enduring stain on Edward’s reputation.
Juan Carlos earned widespread respect for helping Spain move from dictatorship towards democracy. Decades later, an elephant-hunting trip to Botswana became a symbol of how far he seemed removed from ordinary Spaniards struggling through economic hardship.
The trip was exposed in 2012. He abdicated in 2014 and moved to the United Arab Emirates in 2020 amid scrutiny of his finances.
Spanish and Swiss investigations were later closed. Reasons included insufficient evidence, while Spanish prosecutors also cited immunity and time limits. His lawyer denied criminal wrongdoing.
Those outcomes matter, but they did not undo the damage to a king once celebrated for his public service.
The schoolroom rhyme about Henry’s wives can make their fates sound almost routine. Anne Boleyn and Catherine Howard were executed; being married to the king offered no protection when he turned against them.
His determination to end his earlier marriage to Catherine of Aragon helped drive England’s break with Rome, while the pursuit of a male heir dominated his personal life.
People far beyond the court had to live with the religious and political consequences. Opposition to Henry’s authority could cost them their lives.
Around 300 Protestants were burned for heresy during Mary I’s attempt to restore Catholicism in England. Many were ordinary people, and the executions helped attach the name “Bloody Mary” to her permanently.
Other Tudor rulers also used religious persecution and execution. Historic Royal Palaces notes that Mary’s Protestant enemies helped shape her reputation after her death, leaving less room for other aspects of her reign.
That does not diminish the horror of the burnings. It does explain why historians look beyond the nickname when assessing her.
Mary’s husband, Lord Darnley, was murdered in February 1567. Three months later, she married the Earl of Bothwell, a principal suspect in his death.
The marriage fuelled opposition that helped force her abdication. Her alleged involvement in the murder remains disputed, as do the circumstances of her relationship with Bothwell.
After fleeing to England, Mary spent years in captivity before being executed in 1587, following her conviction for involvement in a plot against Elizabeth I. The argument over how much she controlled events, and how much she was controlled by others, has never gone away.
The disappearance of Edward V and his younger brother in 1483 remains one of royal history’s most disturbing mysteries.
The boys had been lodged in the Tower of London, and their uncle took the throne as Richard III. Suspicion has followed him ever since.
Richard has long been a leading suspect in their presumed deaths, but their ultimate fate remains unresolved. The familiar version in which he simply ordered their murder goes further than the surviving evidence can conclusively establish.
King John did not give England Magna Carta out of generosity. The charter emerged from conflict with his barons, who wanted restraints on his power.
He sealed it at Runnymede in 1215, then soon sought to undo the agreement. The Pope annulled it, and England descended into civil war.
Its later importance can obscure that failed beginning. John is remembered alongside a document associated with rights and lawful government largely because other people were determined to curb his authority.
“Let them eat cake” has done extraordinary damage to Marie Antoinette’s reputation, despite there being no credible evidence that she said it.
Her extravagant life made her an obvious target as hostility towards France’s monarchy grew. Even a scandal in which she was innocent hurt her: fraudsters used her name to obtain a hugely expensive necklace in the Diamond Necklace Affair.
She had not ordered the jewellery. By then, however, enough people were prepared to believe the worst of her that the truth offered little protection.
Louis XVI struggled to respond to the financial and political crisis consuming France, hesitating over reforms as confidence in the monarchy fell.
In June 1791, the royal family attempted to flee but was stopped at Varennes and returned to Paris. The episode deepened distrust of a king already suspected of resisting the Revolution.
The monarchy was abolished in 1792. In January 1793, Louis was guillotined, bringing a reign marked by indecision to a brutal end.
Catherine took power in Russia in 1762 through a coup that removed her husband, Peter III. He died soon afterwards in disputed circumstances, although her responsibility for his death has not been established.
She supported education and the arts while protecting noble privilege and entrenching serfdom, leaving a record that is difficult to reconcile with a simple image of an enlightened ruler.
Popular accounts have often dwelt instead on her lovers and lurid sexual legends. Her decisions in government provide more substantial grounds for judging her reign than the gossip surrounding her bedroom.
The shooting of demonstrators on Bloody Sunday in 1905 badly damaged faith in Nicholas II. He was not present and did not personally order the firing, but the deaths became associated with his rule.
The imperial family’s reliance on Rasputin, whom they believed could help their son Alexei’s haemophilia, added to distrust of the court. Nicholas then took command of Russia’s armed forces in 1915, tying his reputation more closely to the failures of the war.
He abdicated in 1917. The family’s subsequent murder was a tragedy, but it should not eclipse the repression and failures of government that preceded it.
From 1885 to 1908, Leopold II of Belgium ruled the Congo Free State as a personal possession. The extraction of wealth, especially rubber, relied on forced labour and extreme violence.
Congolese communities suffered under a system in which coercion and killings served commercial demands. International exposure of the abuses helped bring his personal rule to an end, with Belgium taking over the territory in 1908.
“Controversial” barely describes such a record. Far from the familiar drama of royal marriages and family disagreements, Leopold’s legacy is one of systematic exploitation and immense human suffering.
Prince Philip’s unscripted remarks sometimes overshadowed the royal visits themselves. In Cairns in 2002, he asked Indigenous Australians: “Do you still throw spears at each other?” His 1986 warning that British students in China would become “slitty-eyed” also caused outrage.
Admirers defended his humour as an attempt to break the ice, while critics argued that calling such comments “gaffes” played down their racism.
Comments 0
Join the conversation. Comments are reviewed before they appear.
Be the first to comment.
Join the conversation
Tell us who you are to post a comment. We'll remember you next time.