Battle of Brothers: William, Harry and the Inside Story of A Family in Tumult

[poppy7]

Yes, TLLK. It also confirms that he was an Apache helicopter pilot, who was appointed a Commander (not honorary, earned) during his service career.

The 2013 BBC report also states, that following his return from Afghanistan, the Air Services authorities

confirmed that the prince "will continue with normal duties as an Apache pilot based at Wattisham Airfield". Says nothing there about being anything other than a helicopter pilot.

I was replying in my original post to the poster before me, who stated that Harry was a co-pilot and 'had never piloted an Apache. Big difference'. That is not so, as I pointed out. Also there was an inference from that poster that the Commander role was 'honorary'. It wasn't.

And I don't think that Harry has anything whatsoever to be ashamed of, either in his tours of service in Afghanistan with Air Services nor in his decade with the Army.

Who honestly cares? He definitely shot gunners but he doesn't fly now or has done for years. His brother was the flyer. Harry was in the army.

 

[Denville]

What is the use of such information ?

What information?

 

[Denville]

Lacey. There are only so many ways he can make this story interesting. Because it really isn't that interesting. Even the Kate and William thing. I mean they were together so young...do we honesty dljnt that there wouldn't have been immature cruelties along the way.

Because Wills and Kate married and seem to be making a success of their marriage. Oh they smoked pot. Who cares.

Harry and William were very close...if there was an element of being under the thumb there...It happens. Harry met Meghan and everything changed. Friends, family, media. It all went peat tong. And that in nutshell is it.

It seems from the extracts that Lacey is blaming everyone but Harry and Meg for his departure.. Its Will's fault, Diana's fault, Charles' fault. My personal feeling is that "nice jolly Harry" was only a small part of H's character. Perhaps he was damaged by his parents bad marriage and bad decisions... but he's a man now...

 

[Betsypaige]

Lacey. There are only so many ways he can make this story interesting. Because it really isn't that interesting. Even the Kate and William thing. I mean they were together so young...do we honesty dljnt that there wouldn't have been immature cruelties along the way.

Because Wills and Kate married and seem to be making a success of their marriage. Oh they smoked pot. Who cares.

Harry and William were very close...if there was an element of being under the thumb there...It happens. Harry met Meghan and everything changed. Friends, family, media. It all went peat tong. And that in nutshell is it.

Well said. LOL. I don’t need, never have needed, to read about William and Harry’s relationship or their private lives. Am I supposed to be shocked at teenage/young adult behaviors (I’m not counting the Nazi Halloween outfit incident as that was already known) between them? There is nothing new under the sun. The book is essentially a rehash of facts already known, but with Robert Lacey’s sleazy brand of pop psychology and opinions mixed in (along with overheated, breathless language and snide insinuations). I’m guessing Lacey went into this project with a notion (that W and H’s rift is devastating - as bad as the Abdication (sorry, that’s still so stupid)- and, therefore, found “evidence” to support his theory going back to the princes’ childhoods. In other words, confirmation bias. There’s just so much wrong with this book..

 

[Betsypaige]

It seems from the extracts that Lacey is blaming everyone but Harry and Meg for his departure.. Its Will's fault, Diana's fault, Charles' fault. My personal feeling is that "nice jolly Harry" was only a small part of H's character. Perhaps he was damaged by his parents bad marriage and bad decisions... but he's a man now...

He is...make no mistake about it. He does criticize H and M to a degree, but it’s relatively mild - Lacey clearly thinks they were done wrong, and has thought so for months. His savage criticisms are directed at everyone else ...

 

[Denville]

Well said. LOL. I don’t need, never have needed, to read about William and Harry’s relationship or their private lives. Am I supposed to be shocked at teenage/young adult behaviors (I’m not counting the Nazi Halloween outfit incident as that was already known) between them? There is nothing new under the sun. The book is essentially a rehash of facts already known, but with Robert Lacey’s sleazy brand of pop psychology and opinions mixed in (along with overheated, breathless language and snide insinuations). I’m guessing Lacey went into this project with a notion (that W and H’s rift is devastating - as bad as the Abdication (sorry, that’s still so stupid)- and, therefore, found “evidence” to support his theory going back to the princes’ childhoods. In other words, confirmation bias. There’s just so much wrong with this book..

Perhaps devastating isn't the word, but IMO it is a sad and bad thing for the RF. Coming on top of the scandal of Andrews... While Harry's behavior is of course noting like as awful as Andrew's it raises the question of "second sons" and whether they are likely to become a problem. I think that some of H's problems do spring from the fact that he's a second son and with Andrew, I think there's something similar going on there. Both of them wanted some independence because of knowing that they'll never be as rich or famous as their elder brother...I think Andrew saw some of the advantages of being a younger son, in some ways, for a time he was able to get away wiht his louche lifestyle because the press attention had gone off him after his divorce and he could lead his life without too much notice... but he still clearly resented not being as rich as the oldest son and knowing that he was now way down the line from the throne... and he wanted to use his position to make private money for himself and Fergie....
And while perhaps in future years, the RF will be able to get along with less people at present, it has commitments which have been affected by the disappearance of Harry Meghan and Andrew all around the same time.
Its not like the 1930s in that someone walking out of Royal life is going to be treated as a black sheep and rarely seen - Harry will still be part of the family and welcomed.. by the queen and Charles.. but I think that Will IS more resentful.. Perhaps Meg and Kate didn't hit it off and he's grouchy about that, or perhaps its simply that he feels he will be most affected by H's disappearance.. so if Harry continues to go along the path of living in teh US, being a bit controversial, following Meg's lead, I am not sure the brothers relationship will improve that much

 

[ACO]

I mean being the "spare" is a crappy position. Always told you are never [as] important as your sibling. I couldn't imagine growing up in that life. And I know damn well I wouldn't want that for my own child. Knowing you can't truly have any real independence because everything in your life must revolve around said sibling.

Andrew is a mess but at least he had other siblings. I would imagine that tension is worse if it is only two of you. This keeps happening throughout generations for a reason. Not all the same way but it is a pattern. And hopefully they can stop the cycle with the Cambridge kids but only time will tell how that plays out once they are older and things truly begun to shift.

Harry's exit might not be pleasant but it might have forced them to reevaluate things for the next generations.

As for Lacey's book? It is just another royal book to join the many others. I don't take any of them serious but it is interesting how some people do pick and choose which ones are "true" or not due to the content. I personally think all of them are just works of fiction with sprinkles of some tidbits that most people already are aware of.

 

[Denville]

I mean being the "spare" is a crappy position. Always told you are never [as] important as your sibling. I couldn't imagine growing up in that life. And I know damn well I wouldn't want that for my own child. Knowing you can't truly have any real independence because everything in your life must revolve around said sibling.

Andrew is a mess but at least he had other siblings. I would imagine that tension is worse if it is only two of you. This keeps happening throughout generations for a reason. Not all the same way but it is a pattern. And hopefully they can stop the cycle with the Cambridge kids but only time will tell how that plays out once they are older and things truly begun to shift.

Harry's exit might not be pleasant but it might have forced them to reevaluate things for the next generations.

As for Lacey's book? It is just another royal book to join the many others. I don't take any of them serious but it is interesting how some people do pick and choose which ones are "true" or not due to the content. I personally think all of them are just works of fiction with sprinkles of some tidbits that most people already are aware of.

and the heirs position? Is that so enviable? He or she is alwaays going to be on show and can rarely have any kind of career of his own...
A junior member can fly under the radar.. He or she may never be as rich as the monarch but he's far from poor.. and usually can do his royal job, as Andy did fro many years, and lead his private life in Private. If Andrew had not gotten mixed up with dubious oligarchs, dubious businessmen and a louche sex life.. he could have had a comfortable life wiht the press paying little attention to him...He was alos able to have a relativley long spell in the Navy.. which he enjoyed.. unlike heirs who can rarely pick a job and do it for many years...

 

[ACO]

and the heirs position? Is that so enviable? He or she is alwaays going to be on show and can rarely have any kind of career of his own...
A junior member can fly under the radar.. He or she may never be as rich as the monarch but he's far from poor.. and usually can do his royal job, as Andy did fro many years, and lead his private life in Private. If Andrew had not gotten mixed up with dubious oligarchs, dubious businessmen and a louche sex life.. he could have had a comfortable life wiht the press paying little attention to him...He was alos able to have a relativley long spell in the Navy.. which he enjoyed.. unlike heirs who can rarely pick a job and do it for many years...

I don't think the heirs have an ideal situation though they will always be set up to succeed and no matter what people will do all in their power to ensure they are protected. They ultimately have the control though especially with their family. Not saying that is easy...

And the dynamics don't work for everyone. I know people focus on the money but I also think about the emotional and psychological burden of the positions. I mean we are already seeing it start with the Cambridge kids. It is a little thing but Sir David visits and only has a gift for the Future King, but not his siblings. You understand why but compound that over years of that message of "less than" being sent to you. "This person is more important to than you" is such a weird ass dynamic in a family but that is the royals.

The older generations dealt with different obstacles and even if it messed with their own psyche they still pushed through. But heck back then talking about mental health was weak. It is seen as a strength today. Times are different. People will react to things in a different way. We are seeing in with everything.

So I agree that none of them have it easy by any means but some have it set up more in their favor. But that is life and some will accept things and others will not. But I will throw this out since money is one of the clear factors --- Harry was a grown man who had to depend on his Father to pay his way. Soon that would be his brother. That was his debt. The idea that things could be cut off and then what would he have?

Harry clearly was in his feelings about that being thrown in his face. The renovation of Frogmore was literally a month long debate. I can totally see with his personally that he felt that burden wasn't worth it. If he fails then he failed by at least he no longer felt in debt to people who used that to try and control him and his child. Right or wrong -- I do think that played a part. And explains why they were so determined to pay it all back.

 

[yukari]

Talking about the heir and the spare, funnily enough we also have Albert Victor - George V and Edward VIII - George VI. For some reason, the heirs had more (rumoured) scandals than the spares.

 

[camelot23ca]

I mean being the "spare" is a crappy position. Always told you are never [as] important as your sibling. I couldn't imagine growing up in that life. And I know damn well I wouldn't want that for my own child. Knowing you can't truly have any real independence because everything in your life must revolve around said sibling.

Andrew is a mess but at least he had other siblings. I would imagine that tension is worse if it is only two of you. This keeps happening throughout generations for a reason. Not all the same way but it is a pattern. And hopefully they can stop the cycle with the Cambridge kids but only time will tell how that plays out once they are older and things truly begun to shift.

Harry's exit might not be pleasant but it might have forced them to reevaluate things for the next generations.

As for Lacey's book? It is just another royal book to join the many others. I don't take any of them serious but it is interesting how some people do pick and choose which ones are "true" or not due to the content. I personally think all of them are just works of fiction with sprinkles of some tidbits that most people already are aware of.

I’ve said before I think it was a disservice to Harry to allow him to be packaged with William as “the boys” well into adulthood. I get that it’s the easier path to take in the short term when there are only two children, of the same sex, and quite close in age. The family doesn’t want the younger child to feel left out, and the press and public love to coo over two cute children/teenagers so presenting them as kind of a two for one deal probably seems like a win for everyone at first.

But then the cute kids grow up and the older sibling continues his climb to the summit, so to speak, and the younger sibling starts getting the message that he needs to step away, even though up to this point he and his sibling have mostly been equal members of a team of two.

I think it would have been a better long term strategy to clearly differentiate William and Harry from the time they were children. William should have been doing more public engagements with his father as a teenager and then solo as a young man. And it should have been made clear to Harry from the time he was a child that he would be playing a supporting role in the royal family but his main work would be elsewhere, (although I think that might have been what the BRF thought would happen naturally when Harry joined the army).

 

[Denville]

Talking about the heir and the spare, funnily enough we also have Albert Victor - George V and Edward VIII - George VI. For some reason, the heirs had more (rumoured) scandals than the spares.

yes, which kind of proves that in spite of claims that "seconds " are badly treated or demonised, by the press etc. in fact quite often heirs have been bad for the job and the second son has been a quiet decent chap who was better for the job than the heir....

 

[Denville]

I’es his climb to the summit, so to speak, and the younger sibling starts getting the message that he needs to step away, even though up to this point he and his sibling have mostly been equal members of a team of two.

I think it would have been a better long term strategy to clearly differentiate William and Harry from the time they were children. William should have been doing more public engagements with his father as a teenager and then solo as a young man. And it should have been made clear to Harry from the time he was a child that he would be playing a supporting role in the royal family but his main work would be elsewhere, (although I think that might have been what the BRF thought would happen naturally when Harry joined the army).

the RF weren't going to differentiate between them when they were children. That would be unkind and unfair, and William was not going to be doing many public engagements as a boy... They wanted him to have some years of freedom. But it should have been well known by Harry that he wasn't going to be King and that over time, his royal role would be supporting his brother, etc...
But it does seem at times that the fact that he was second son, only began to strike him in the past few years and when it hit him, he (and Meg) began to feel upset about it and wanted out...
. I think the RF imagined that Harry would be in the army till he was about 40 and then he'd be doing royal duties.. and he (with Meg) were given a responsible role with teh Commonwealth... Perhaps the RF should have pointed out to him that while there were disadvantages to being the second son, there were also advantages like being able to have a more private life than his older brother...

 

[muriel]

yes, which kind of proves that in spite of claims that "seconds " are badly treated or demonised, by the press etc. in fact quite often heirs have been bad for the job and the second son has been a quiet decent chap who was better for the job than the heir....

Easy to put it down to the Press, but what we recently saw with the spare in the UK was not just a case of dereliction of duty, but also of an exit from from The Firm that not only lacked grace and dignity, but was downright spiteful and ungrateful. This was all down to the couple in question themselves, and for once, they could not blame the Press or the BRF for it.

 

[Claire]

and the heirs position? Is that so enviable? He or she is alwaays going to be on show and can rarely have any kind of career of his own...
A junior member can fly under the radar.. He or she may never be as rich as the monarch but he's far from poor.. and usually can do his royal job, as Andy did fro many years, and lead his private life in Private. If Andrew had not gotten mixed up with dubious oligarchs, dubious businessmen and a louche sex life.. he could have had a comfortable life wiht the press paying little attention to him...He was alos able to have a relativley long spell in the Navy.. which he enjoyed.. unlike heirs who can rarely pick a job and do it for many years...

While I agree the spare can get away with the privacy, spare a thought for the 'pointless' children. Charles had two children - imagine if he had 4. Harry should be thankful for what he got. He got more then Anne and Edward.

 

[Denville]

While I agree the spare can get away with the privacy, spare a thought for the 'pointless' children. Charles had two children - imagine if he had 4. Harry should be thankful for what he got. He got more then Anne and Edward.

but its the same with Edward and Anne.... Maybe they don't get a lot of press but they are able to do their job and then retreat into private life. Given that Harry's claimed to feel the press were unfair to him and to find public attention and hte press very stressful, you'd think he'd be glad to be able to say "in a few years, Meg and I will be very much the seconds and we can shake off the press wehn we are not working..."

 

[Curryong]

yes, which kind of proves that in spite of claims that "seconds " are badly treated or demonised, by the press etc. in fact quite often heirs have been bad for the job and the second son has been a quiet decent chap who was better for the job than the heir....

In which ways were the spares, the future Kings George V and VI badly treated or demonised by the Press of their day? The Press from Victoria's reign until the 1960s was extraordinarily deferential to all members of the BRF. It was only in much more modern times that the spare has been set up by the media in negative contrast to the heir.

And any scandals around Prince Albert Victor certainly weren't known during his lifetime. It was a mere quirk of history that he died young from the complications of influenza.

He never, unlike Edward VIII, expressed any desire to abdicate his responsibilities to the throne and had he not caught the flu from a sister he would have gone on to reign, whether his brother George was a quiet decent man or a rogue. It would have made no difference.

And it was the same with Edward VIII, who was adored by the public at large. It was his decision to leave and if he hadn't met Mrs Simpson he would have undoubtedly reigned, probably resigned and sulky, but still there. The Duke of York was in fact regarded by many at the time as pleasant but rather dull, and nervy and delicate, not as a replacement in any way for an extraordinarily popular POW/King.

It wasn't as if the British public were all screaming 'We want honest quiet serious George' in either of those cases. Death took one away, the other made his choice due to a fateful meeting with a woman, that's all.

 

[Betsypaige]

Perhaps devastating isn't the word, but IMO it is a sad and bad thing for the RF. Coming on top of the scandal of Andrews... While Harry's behavior is of course noting like as awful as Andrew's it raises the question of "second sons" and whether they are likely to become a problem. I think that some of H's problems do spring from the fact that he's a second son and with Andrew, I think there's something similar going on there. Both of them wanted some independence because of knowing that they'll never be as rich or famous as their elder brother...I think Andrew saw some of the advantages of being a younger son, in some ways, for a time he was able to get away wiht his louche lifestyle because the press attention had gone off him after his divorce and he could lead his life without too much notice... but he still clearly resented not being as rich as the oldest son and knowing that he was now way down the line from the throne... and he wanted to use his position to make private money for himself and Fergie....
And while perhaps in future years, the RF will be able to get along with less people at present, it has commitments which have been affected by the disappearance of Harry Meghan and Andrew all around the same time.
Its not like the 1930s in that someone walking out of Royal life is going to be treated as a black sheep and rarely seen - Harry will still be part of the family and welcomed.. by the queen and Charles.. but I think that Will IS more resentful.. Perhaps Meg and Kate didn't hit it off and he's grouchy about that, or perhaps its simply that he feels he will be most affected by H's disappearance.. so if Harry continues to go along the path of living in teh US, being a bit controversial, following Meg's lead, I am not sure the brothers relationship will improve that much

Of course the rift is terrible on a personal level for the BRF ...any rift in any family is tragic.

William is only human - IF he’s resentful about Harry removing himself as a working Royal, I can understand that. If he continues to harbor that resentment, than the brothers probably can’t be truly close again. It hasn’t been all that long, though .. I can only hope that William and Harry repair their relationship...like I said in a previous post, we just need to give it time.

 

[Betsypaige]

I’ve said before I think it was a disservice to Harry to allow him to be packaged with William as “the boys” well into adulthood. I get that it’s the easier path to take in the short term when there are only two children, of the same sex, and quite close in age. The family doesn’t want the younger child to feel left out, and the press and public love to coo over two cute children/teenagers so presenting them as kind of a two for one deal probably seems like a win for everyone at first.

But then the cute kids grow up and the older sibling continues his climb to the summit, so to speak, and the younger sibling starts getting the message that he needs to step away, even though up to this point he and his sibling have mostly been equal members of a team of two.

I think it would have been a better long term strategy to clearly differentiate William and Harry from the time they were children. William should have been doing more public engagements with his father as a teenager and then solo as a young man. And it should have been made clear to Harry from the time he was a child that he would be playing a supporting role in the royal family but his main work would be elsewhere, (although I think that might have been what the BRF thought would happen naturally when Harry joined the army).

Harry knew as a young boy that William was destined to be King - didn’t he make that comment that since he wasn’t going to be King, he could do what he wanted ? So, however close the brothers were raised to be, H was well aware that W would have major responsibilities ahead. That comment, actually, could serve as a theme for H’s life as some of the things he’s done reflect this notion that he could do whatever he wanted (Nazi outfit, Las Vegas, as two examples)

 

[Curryong]

While I agree the spare can get away with the privacy, spare a thought for the 'pointless' children. Charles had two children - imagine if he had 4. Harry should be thankful for what he got. He got more then Anne and Edward.

But at least in Charles's generation the stories and publicity, negative and otherwise, could be spread around. The Press complained at various times about Anne's brusqueness and rudeness on engagements, about Andrew's boorishness as well as the praise for his war service and speculation about girlfriends.
Edward received publicity about his showbusiness links and his abandoned marines career.

In other words the spotlight was on three other people besides the heir. It wasn't constantly on heir and then spare and back again, comparing and contrasting all the time for years.

 

[Curryong]

Harry knew as a young boy that William was destined to be King - didn’t he make that comment that since he wasn’t going to be King, he could do what he wanted ? So, however close the brothers were raised to be, H was well aware that W would have major responsibilities ahead. That comment, actually, could serve as a theme for H’s life as some of the things he’s done reflect this notion that he could do whatever he wanted (Nazi outfit, Las Vegas, as two examples)

We don't know that Harry did make that comment. The Press are always reporting things royals are supposed to have said and sometimes the source for it can't be traced, Charles's apparent expressed wish to slim down the Royal Family for instance. That has been denied countless times but is still believed.

 

[Osipi]

I think the big albatross around the neck for both William and Harry was the realization that their lives were planned out for them from the cradle to the grave and the expectations of how they lived their lives eliminated the freedom of choice. To *not* fall into line with expectations gives the aura of "dereliction of duty" and "letting the family down"

Some people aren't ever going to be concert pianists just because mom and dad bought a piano for the home and the kid practiced for 3 hours a day. Sticking with the parent's plan, the kid may never discover that he's a natural at baseball or gardening or... or.. or...

 

[Denville]

I think the big albatross around the neck for both William and Harry was the realization that their lives were planned out for them from the cradle to the grave and the expectations of how they lived their lives eliminated the freedom of choice. To *not* fall into line with expectations gives the aura of "dereliction of duty" and "letting the family down"

Some people aren't ever going to be concert pianists just because mom and dad bought a piano for the home and the kid practiced for 3 hours a day. Sticking with the parent's plan, the kid may never discover that he's a natural at baseball or gardening or... or.. or...

yes that's royal life.. That's why they are very privileged, and that's why they are of interest ot some of the public - because they are in a very unusual position. They are destined for a life with a lot of publicity, and they haven't done anything to seek it or earn it... so they have privilege and also a burden of duty and responsibility. Even if they have some years of freedom as William did, they are expected to in the end knuckle down to a certain set of duties...
But then we all have responsibilities and duties, and even if they are not quite the same as a royal's - most people TRY to knuckle under and do them.. so I dont feel sorry for royals who are expected to lead a dutiful life, when they have much bigger rewards than an oridnary person.

 

[Denville]

Harry knew as a young boy that William was destined to be King - didn’t he make that comment that since he wasn’t going to be King, he could do what he wanted ? So, however close the brothers were raised to be, H was well aware that W would have major responsibilities ahead. That comment, actually, could serve as a theme for H’s life as some of the things he’s done reflect this notion that he could do whatever he wanted (Nazi outfit, Las Vegas, as two examples)

Actually from what I can remember about them when they were kids, WIlliam was rather fretful at times about the fact that he was a royal and going to be king.. and Harry would say to him "if you dont want to be King, I'll do it.."
#
But I think that as he grew older, he did appreicate that he had a certian liberty that William would not have after a certain age. Will could get away with a certan amount of laddish behaviour.. for a time but eventually he had to sober up. Harry went on with the laddish behaviour longer and was generally seen in the press as "a bit of a lad but all right".. or the "cheeky one.."

 

[Lilyflo]

This may sound harsh to some but I honestly don't agree with the "poor spare" narrative. These are people who are loved just as much as older siblings within the private world of the family - it's just the public world and work that's different, where they have to be subservient to the heir/monarch (which is what absolutely everybody else has to do too!). The spares grow up with enormous privilege, which continues throughout their adult lives and onwards to their own children. They have every opportunity before them to do whatever they want, wherever they want in any way they want. They can either be working royals or not be working royals. They can live in multiple luxurious properties, some of which are subsidised by the crown. They travel widely, have the best health care, have domestic and admin staff, meet tons of interesting people, wear the best clothes, drive the best vehicles and have the best holidays.

If there is a problem with the spare feeling "left out" or "sidelined" then instead of indulging them so they don't feel aggrieved, the strategy should be quite the opposite in ramming home to them how incredibly fortunate they are and any tantrums or sulks will be treated as outrageous entitlement.

 

[Durham]

Well said. I suspect the majority of British people feel exactly the same way. Life is very difficult for many & Britain remains a far more unequal society than many of its peers. Certainly compared to the Benelux or Scandinavia. The wise heads in the monarchy are sensitive to this.

 

[Betsypaige]

We don't know that Harry did make that comment. The Press are always reporting things royals are supposed to have said and sometimes the source for it can't be traced, Charles's apparent expressed wish to slim down the Royal Family for instance. That has been denied countless times but is still believed.

Oh, I assumed Harry definitely said it... but now that I think about it, the only ones who would know for sure would have been William and either Charles or Diana, assuming H said that in private and not out loud where he could be clearly heard by anyone in the media.

Even if we assume that H didn’t say it, I can’t assume that he wasn’t aware to a degree about W’s destiny. As her father prepared Princess Elizabeth for her future role, so I’m sure Charles had to do so with William. I don’t know at what age W really understood that he would be King, but H was only 2 years younger, so he would have been aware of that also. Just to clarify, this is in response to Camelot’s point that there should have been more separation between the boys..

Ultimately, Harry is and was responsible for his own behavior, regardless of circumstances.

Lily, I agree with you ...

This may sound harsh to some but I honestly don't agree with the "poor spare" narrative. These are people who are loved just as much as older siblings within the private world of the family - it's just the public world and work that's different, where they have to be subservient to the heir/monarch (which is what absolutely everybody else has to do too!). The spares grow up with enormous privilege, which continues throughout their adult lives and onwards to their own children. They have every opportunity before them to do whatever they want, wherever they want in any way they want. They can either be working royals or not be working royals. They can live in multiple luxurious properties, some of which are subsidised by the crown. They travel widely, have the best health care, have domestic and admin staff, meet tons of interesting people, wear the best clothes, drive the best vehicles and have the best holidays.

If there is a problem with the spare feeling "left out" or "sidelined" then instead of indulging them so they don't feel aggrieved, the strategy should be quite the opposite in ramming home to them how incredibly fortunate they are and any tantrums or sulks will be treated as outrageous entitlement

 

[Betsypaige]

I think the big albatross around the neck for both William and Harry was the realization that their lives were planned out for them from the cradle to the grave and the expectations of how they lived their lives eliminated the freedom of choice. To *not* fall into line with expectations gives the aura of "dereliction of duty" and "letting the family down"

Some people aren't ever going to be concert pianists just because mom and dad bought a piano for the home and the kid practiced for 3 hours a day. Sticking with the parent's plan, the kid may never discover that he's a natural at baseball or gardening or... or.. or...

That’s been the case with every Royal, especially future Monarchs, down through the ages. I can understand why that would be a huge burden on W - and a responsibility he wished he didn’t have - as a child/teenager (what kid would want that sort of heavy lifting instead of freedom), but as he became a young man and adult, he matured into his responsibilities and he wears his destiny well.

Harry matured so to speak and it turns out that he didn’t want any part of the Royal life....so be it.

 

[Marengo]

It is time to return to the topic of this thread, which is the book of Robert Lacey.

 

[camelot23ca]

To be clear, I’m not saying that Harry didn’t know that William would be King one day. I’m also not suggesting he should have been locked in a closet somewhere and taken no part in royal life with his family. But what you know is one thing. Day to day lived experience is another and I would suggest that William and Harry were treated with too much equality for too long a time. Some of that may have been due to the chaotic events the BRF was living through when W and H were children and adolescents. Everyone had bigger things to worry about for many years.

I don’t agree that early differentiation between William and Harry would have been unkind or unfair. I see most of today’s monarchies differentiating between the heir and the other children more than the BRF did with William and Harry at similar ages and it doesn’t seem to be causing major problems. Just because one child takes precedence in official royal life doesn’t mean the other children are loved any less, or are treated less well in private life.

To me it seems much less kind to bring a child up with certain expectations and attitudes that aren’t realistic.