Britain's 1,000-year-old monarchy shuddered Sunday under another agonized outpouring by Prince Charles.
Sympathy for the 45-year-old heir to the throne also seemed to erode as the Sunday Times published the second installment of Charles' authorized biography, revealing his mistress as the love of his life.
One survey showed that even a sizable percentage of vicars from the anti-divorce Church of England think Charles and Princess Diana, 33, should now divorce quickly.
Charles returned to his country residence, Highgrove, southwest of London, with his two sons on Sunday. He has been at Queen Elizabeth II's Scottish castle, Balmoral, the past week while a national debate on his marriage and the monarchy raged.
A 40-minute drive away in the southwest village of Pickwick, Camilla Parker Bowles, the army officer's wife to whom Charles "lost his heart" as a 23-year-old, according to the latest installment, was besieged at her mansion home.
Her brigadier husband, Andrew, and their son, Tom, shielded Mrs. Parker Bowles, 47, when reporters spotted her on a walk.
She has never commented and, according to a report in the Mail on Sunday by Nigel Dempster, a well-connected gossip columnist, she begged Charles not to reveal their affair.
Sunday's installment of The Prince of Wales said Charles initiated the couple's December 1992 separation when he finally snapped over what he saw as Diana denying him access to the children, Prince William, 12, and Prince Harry, 10.
The biography said Charles thought he could save his marriage until that summer, when a book giving the first definitive account of the unhappy marriage was published after Diana let her friends talk to author Andrew Morton.
Diana refused to sign a statement saying the book, which portrayed Charles as cold, uncaring and unfaithful, was distorted.
Many observers see the biography as Charles' revenge. He gave author Jonathan Dimbleby long interviews and access to letters and private diaries.
Buckingham Palace reiterated Sunday that Charles had checked the book for factual errors, but that the interpretations were by Dimbleby.