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

[SLV]

Mark Philips was offered a title, but they turned it down.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by SLV

Mark Philips was offered a title, but they turned it down.

yes, and its not at all likely that any other husband of a princess would be offered a title. The queen possibly wanted her first grandchild to be born as something grander than Master Peter Phillips.. but that was a long time ago and I can't see that any future monarch would offer a title or have it accepted. I thtink that Harry MAY genuinely have a bit of a problem with being the second son and not want to be the son who becomes less popular as he gets older and slides down the succession, so they'll try to eliminate that with future younger sons.... by making it clear that they wont be asked to do royal duties and should trian for a career of their own.

[QueenMathilde]

Originally Posted by AC21091968

I cannot really determine the overall opinion of The Royal Forum. However, from reading through the social media, the "Lazy Kate" mostly come from some Republicans (anti-monarchist), Meghan supporters and feminists. Some Meghan fans and 3rd/4th wave feminist have criticised Kate for not having a career before marriage and being "submissive" (i.e. by following protocol and keeping her head down) to the "archaic" "old, pale, stale, male" monarchy.

I get that they're old pale and stale. But male? The queen has been in power forever. So were Victoria and Elizabeth I. They're old pale stale and female.

[SLV]

Originally Posted by Denville

yes, and its not at all likely that any other husband of a princess would be offered a title. The queen possibly wanted her first grandchild to be born as something grander than Master Peter Phillips.. but that was a long time ago and I can't see that any future monarch would offer a title or have it accepted. I thtink that Harry MAY genuinely have a bit of a problem with being the second son and not want to be the son who becomes less popular as he gets older and slides down the succession, so they'll try to eliminate that with future younger sons.... by making it clear that they wont be asked to do royal duties and should trian for a career of their own.

I agree with that.

[Betsypaige]

Originally Posted by Claire

That might explain why the research is so lacking, I was recently told that the saga of prince Andrew will be ongoing for another 10 years at least so any book at the moment would be shortsighted. William and Harry well, many more books can be coming out. That will be the gift that will keep giving.

Well that’s true about Andrew, but the active rivalry between he and Charles is not really ongoing. I don’t count the PoW’s actions/beliefs with regards to his brother as part of this rivalry - I look at it as his genuinely being protective of the monarchy (William agreed/agrees and HM ultimately did/does so as well).

It seems to me that a book largely about the next King would be of historical interest, but very clearly Lacey was and is more interested in simply selling books. There’s nothing wrong with that per se, but if you’re an historian and you had a subject you truly wanted to write about, you don’t let yourself get persuaded NOT to by a Republican film/tv producer who is primarily concerned with ratings. Historians generally do not wrote books to become best sellers, they write books to inform. Lacey to me is no longer an historian, he’s a gossipy sell out.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by Betsypaige

Well that’s true about Andrew, but the active rivalry between he and Charles is not really ongoing. I don’t count the PoW’s actions/beliefs with regards to his brother as part of this rivalry - I look at it as his genuinely being protective of the monarchy (William agreed/agrees and HM ultimately did/does so as well).

Charles and Andrew have come to terms with each other over decades as adults. They no longer have a reason really to have a "feud". They know where they stand with each other, they know how each other thinks and they know how each other tends to relate and react to things. It'll be the same thing as time goes forward with William and Harry. Even though they're physically classified as "adults" now, the brothers haven't been actually been cemented in their roles and how they think of them and react to them for that long of a period.

When we think about it, William has only been "full time working royal" preparing for his life ahead as Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge and then King since 2017 when he quit working for EAAA. That's three years. Harry's been out of the Army since 2015 but he's also struggled with "new" roles to adapt and adjust to with marriage and family being the biggie these past couple of years.

Eventually William and Harry will be like Charles and Andrew. They'll know each other as brothers with their own minds and own ways of dealing with things and having opinions and ideas they may not like or agree with but one thing will remain. They will always remain being brothers and family.

Headline of the Future: George goes off the rails as Charlotte defies him by refusing to stop eating his cake while he's posing for photo ops!" Film at 11.

[Curryong]

Let's not forget, with the Charles and Andrew relationship, that these brothers did not really grow up together. Unlike William and Harry, who were only two years and a bit apart, Andrew was nearly twelve years younger than Charles. By the time he was out of the nursery Charles (and Anne) had been away at school for years.

Those two brothers had quite a different upbringing to the second and third in line throughout W and H's youth, with Charles definitely treated as the heir to the throne within the family and without, from early childhood, while Andrew was the much indulged younger son of the monarch.

[Osipi]

Very definitely true and very good points. Its the closeness in age of William and Harry too that has deemed them as a single entity over the years as "Diana's boys" and "WilliamandHarry" as in joint endeavors starting with the two of them with a joint Royal Foundation. They go their own separate ways as all adults tend to do, any disagreements and exchanges of different opinions and clashes between personalities end up being called a "feud" like the Hatfields and the McCoys (that lasted for generations and for the most part, with the descending generations even forgetting what the original "feud" was even about)

As time passes, I do believe that William and Harry will evolve into having their own cemented "adult" relationship where things can and will be amicable between the families and no need for "feuds". This feud is interesting right now and people like Lacey are latching onto it for big green dollars because its the ongoing process of establishing what their future relationship is going to be like.

Gotta muddy the water before you can pan it for gold.

[Betsypaige]

Originally Posted by Osipi

Charles and Andrew have come to terms with each other over decades as adults. They no longer have a reason really to have a "feud". They know where they stand with each other, they know how each other thinks and they know how each other tends to relate and react to things. It'll be the same thing as time goes forward with William and Harry. Even though they're physically classified as "adults" now, the brothers haven't been actually been cemented in their roles and how they think of them and react to them for that long of a period.

When we think about it, William has only been "full time working royal" preparing for his life ahead as Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge and then King since 2017 when he quit working for EAAA. That's three years. Harry's been out of the Army since 2015 but he's also struggled with "new" roles to adapt and adjust to with marriage and family being the biggie these past couple of years.

Eventually William and Harry will be like Charles and Andrew. They'll know each other as brothers with their own minds and own ways of dealing with things and having opinions and ideas they may not like or agree with but one thing will remain. They will always remain being brothers and family.

Headline of the Future: George goes off the rails as Charlotte defies him by refusing to stop eating his cake while he's posing for photo ops!" Film at 11.

I’m glad there’s no current feud between Charles and Andrew ...which, maybe it’s just as well that Lacey didn’t write that book as that does seem like old news. I recall Anne joking that her conversations with Charles about issues they disagree on are very short, lol. I think that’s the way to handle these things - respect the others’ opinions and agree to disagree.

See, I think that about W and H, also. Unlike Lacey and some others, I’m not ever going to say that they’ll never be close again or they’ll never reconcile. Time will tell... but regardless of how it plays out, of course they will always love each other.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Betsypaige

I’m glad there’s no current feud between Charles and Andrew ...which, maybe it’s just as well that Lacey didn’t write that book as that does seem like old news. I recall Anne joking that her conversations with Charles about issues they disagree on are very short, lol. I think that’s the way to handle these things - respect the others’ opinions and agree to disagree.

See, I think that about W and H, also. Unlike Lacey and some others, I’m not ever going to say that they’ll never be close again or they’ll never reconcile. Time will tell... but regardless of how it plays out, of course they will always love each other.

I doubt if charles and Andrew are the best fof friends, as Charles was probably the one pushing for him to be benched.. (not that they had much choice). Depends if Andrew accepts that he's screwed up badly and is not going ot ever push for acceptance again as a royal. And I'd say Will and Harry are not best of friends at present.. I dont know if they will recover their old friendship.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by Denville

I doubt if charles and Andrew are the best fof friends, as Charles was probably the one pushing for him to be benched.. (not that they had much choice). Depends if Andrew accepts that he's screwed up badly and is not going ot ever push for acceptance again as a royal. And I'd say Will and Harry are not best of friends at present.. I dont know if they will recover their old friendship.

I sincerely would hope they don't recover the "old friendship" but come to a realization and acceptance of each other as adults in their own worlds and have an even better and stronger relationship than they've had before.

[Denville]

I dont know if its all that likely. THey are on separate paths, I think that its not like Harry will come home much, esp in the next few years and the gap between them may take some time to heal.

[Betsypaige]

Originally Posted by Osipi

Very definitely true and very good points. Its the closeness in age of William and Harry too that has deemed them as a single entity over the years as "Diana's boys" and "WilliamandHarry" as in joint endeavors starting with the two of them with a joint Royal Foundation. They go their own separate ways as all adults tend to do, any disagreements and exchanges of different opinions and clashes between personalities end up being called a "feud" like the Hatfields and the McCoys (that lasted for generations and for the most part, with the descending generations even forgetting what the original "feud" was even about)

As time passes, I do believe that William and Harry will evolve into having their own cemented "adult" relationship where things can and will be amicable between the families and no need for "feuds". This feud is interesting right now and people like Lacey are latching onto it for big green dollars because its the ongoing process of establishing what their future relationship is going to be like.

Gotta muddy the water before you can pan it for gold.

It’s kind of like identical twins, where people assume they are the same person. I think the separation may end up being good for them, although both of them are going to need to forgive each other...

[Duchess_Watcher]

Originally Posted by Denville

yes, and its not at all likely that any other husband of a princess would be offered a title. The queen possibly wanted her first grandchild to be born as something grander than Master Peter Phillips.. but that was a long time ago and I can't see that any future monarch would offer a title or have it accepted. I thtink that Harry MAY genuinely have a bit of a problem with being the second son and not want to be the son who becomes less popular as he gets older and slides down the succession, so they'll try to eliminate that with future younger sons.... by making it clear that they wont be asked to do royal duties and should trian for a career of their own.

Well if Mark Phillis had a title, he would have been Prince Peter Phillips and Zara would be a Princess.

If Harry is truly bitter about being 2nd, then that is on him. He never seemed to be upset before until he married Meghan or he was really good at hiding his bitterness. His wife, him were both entitled to perform Royal duties and their son is entitled to a title when Charles is King. He's in no different spot that Charlotte & Louis right now. This is just an opinion, I think it is Meghan who doesn't like being behind Kate and William. She thought having a title would put her out there more but nope you come behind the Queen, Charles/Camila, Kate/William and then Harry/Meghan. She doesn't like the royalty order in my opinion.

[Duchess_Watcher]

Originally Posted by Denville

not at all likely that the younger Cambridges will be expected to do royal duties, and certianly not their wives or husbands. Anne's husband was offered a title in the 1970s, there isn't the slightest possibility that Charlotte's husband will be offered one....
if the Harry mess has any relationship to other royals, it has probalby made teh RF think of the fate of younger children and has probalby made them decide that its best if only the heir and his wife/husband are expected to work as royals.

It could be possible. Just like Mark Phillips was offered one, HRH Princess Charlotte will be in line to succeed George.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by Duchess_Watcher

Well if Mark Phillis had a title, he would have been Prince Peter Phillips and Zara would be a Princess.

If Mark Phillips had accepted a title, it would have been a *peerage* title only.

People are either a) *born* prince(ss) or b) *marry* a prince (its only applicable to females at this time) or one is c) *created* a prince as the monarch *created* Philip as a prince of the UK.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Duchess_Watcher

Well if Mark Phillis had a title, he would have been Prince Peter Phillips and Zara would be a Princess.

Iike the royalty order in my opinion.

No, not at all. Mark would have been offered a peerage, not a royal title and his children would probalby have been Viscount X and Lady Zara Phillips. husbands of Princesses were offered earldoms in the past..but that's not going to happen now...

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Duchess_Watcher

It could be possible. Just like Mark Phillips was offered one, HRH Princess Charlotte will be in line to succeed George.

Mark wasnt offered a royal title, as I've said, and it was never likely even in the 70s that he'd be expected to be "on royal duties". He had his own career as a h horseman and in the army...
And Charlotte is pretty unlikely to be doing more than a few token royal duties. She is only George's heir till he has children of his own and the odds are that she'll be educated to find her own working life.
sorry i know this has gone off topic but Im trying to state that I think from now on, a younger child whihc is what Harry is, wont be expected to do royal duties....