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

[Sandy345]

William may very well have been pushing the envelope. He tested the waters and when he saw that Harry was not too pleased with this, he could have backed off. In my opinion, it can be a touchy subject when a sibling gives advice which can be unwanted. And it comes to interfering with another couple's relationship or could be interpreted that way. Also Harry was not an 18 year old ready to elope and william caught him. Harry was a grown man who had dated seriously two other women had had other relationships. William's language or approach to Harry may not have been tactful and if so that would certainly cause problems. If Harry wanted advice I believe he would have asked for it. Also other people in Harry's family have been divorced, Harry's cousin Peter is getting a divorce, the latest of several who have sought divorces, so it is not as if all of them had lasting marriages. I think there were many issues that led to their leaving, I do think they worried a lot about Archie and he was getting negative comments from the media and on social media sites. They would be worried about that. I also think William could have been more friendly and accepting of Meghan. Harry welcomed Kate warmly and perhaps he was disappointed william did not do the same with Meghan. It had to have been really extreme for them to leave. I think also the signs of the feud were there and perhaps an intervention could have taken place (through Charles?) early on before it got out of control.

I don't have a problem with Harry's reaction, I think it is not a good idea for a sibling to offer unwanted advice and William may have come across as being negative about Meghan and Harry did not like it. It does take two to make disagreements.

 

[Somebody]

I don't understand the tone of this article. Harry and Meghan could simply have delayed the news and announced "We have a baby!" after they'd returned home, but according to the article, that's not what they did. Instead, after they'd returned home, they announced that Meghan had gone into labor but not that the baby had been born. That's dishonest and, frankly, kind of nuts. William and Kate had already had three children in the same media spotlight, so it's just crazy to say he didn't know what it was like. William is known for having always been very protective of his and Kate's privacy, but I don't think he's ever crossed the line into outright lying to the media about whether a huge newsworthy event has taken place or not.

Not just according to the article. This is a well-known fact that was reported in the days after Archie's birth as the times didn't add up. The only somewhat logical reason was that they wanted to give the press a heads up that they should be ready for the formal announcement.

 

[UglyAmerican]

Not just according to the article. This is a well-known fact that was reported in the days after Archie's birth as the times didn't add up. The only somewhat logical reason was that they wanted to give the press a heads up that they should be ready for the formal announcement.

Thanks! I figured as much, but wasn't sure, because I somehow managed to miss that little drama. Why couldn't they just have said "We'll be making an announcement at 6:00 p.m." or whatever time, rather than "Meghan's gone into labor?"

 

[Sandy345]

I agree with you, siblings need to be careful when voicing an opinion on a potential partner for their sibling. But boy, was William right in this case!

I don't think William was right. The couple is still together and have a baby. If Harry had listened to William and dropped Meghan and married someone else, he could have been miserable with the "second choice." Sometimes it is better not to say anything and it does cause alienation and rifts. I have seen cases where a sibling 'warns' his brother or sister about their partners. The marriage turns out to be a great success but the couple do not welcome the critical sibling to their home nor speak to him ever again. Especially if the criticism of the siblings' partner tends to be harsh.

 

[ACO]

IIRC with the announcement they didn’t say she was in labor. The wording was definitely past tense which many of the media picked up on. They had figured she had already given birth. The issue was that within 15 minute they got that notice and then it was announced on the baby was a boy.

The palace then made it seem a hiccup occurred where the email didn’t send with the heads up but either way they clearly were never going to tell them until meghan was back home. That whole thing was weird cause I didn’t understand why so much media was in Windsor when they knew no one was seeing the baby for days.

 

[Curryong]

At the time that William gave his brother the unsolicited and unwanted advice had he met 'this girl' more than a couple of times himself? And as for taking it way from a confidential talk between the two of them, he went off and spoke to his uncle Earl Spencer about the possible marriage, a man whose own record in marital relationships could be described as spotty to say the least.

And of course William was also thinking about the possible repercussions of Meghan joining the RF in terms of what was later called by the Press as 'the Fab Four'. If Harry had been thinking of proposing to some meek Henrietta from the shires who would have been quite content to trail behind himself and Kate for the rest of their lives on Royal engagements and State occasions I wonder if William would have been so alarmed. I believe not.

 

[Prinsara]

And of course William was also thinking about the possible repercussions of Meghan joining the RF in terms of what was later called by the Press as 'the Fab Four'. If Harry had been thinking of proposing to some meek Henrietta from the shires who would have been quite content to trail behind himself and Kate for the rest of their lives on Royal engagements and State occasions I wonder if William would have been so alarmed. I believe not.

And that would have been a worse thing for the monarchy William is going to have to one day head... how?

 

[yukari]

Well other than the aforementioned above, there's also possibility that (if it really happened) William's advice was not only out of concern for Harry, but especially for Meghan.
Yes, for most of us, two years dating before marrying is normal, but Meghan doesn't marry an ordinary-Joe or a younger son of an owner of global foodchain bussiness. She's marrying a younger son of future king of Britain.

For one, there's a culture shock to consider. More often than not, it's not easy for an ordinary woman to adapt when she marries into different culture, and that without media scrutiny. And on top of it, this is British Royal Family we're talking about, full of old fashioned tradition and protocols.

Being two years older, William surely has better understanding about what their mother had been through more than Harry. And that point, William also understands how BRF and British media work. Diana was from aristocratic family yet she struggled to adapt with the royal family and to deal with the media. Yes she's young but she's from same culture, Meghan is older but from different culture. And a good portion of M-H's dating period was long distance. And to be told of the circumstance and think that "okay, I can handle it", is completely different than to experience it (which we see that she isn't able to).

Perhaps what William meant was for Meghan to stay longer in England so she really knew what she would face, one year maybe. And perhaps, fearing than this girlfriend would bolt out and leave him when things get hard (like his other two previous girlfriends) Harry rushed to the wedding before she changed her mind and sadly in the end, we have Meghan as victim here.

But that's just my opinion.

 

[Claire]

IIRC with the announcement they didn’t say she was in labor. The wording was definitely past tense which many of the media picked up on. They had figured she had already given birth. The issue was that within 15 minute they got that notice and then it was announced on the baby was a boy.

The palace then made it seem a hiccup occurred where the email didn’t send with the heads up but either way they clearly were never going to tell them until meghan was back home. That whole thing was weird cause I didn’t understand why so much media was in Windsor when they knew no one was seeing the baby for days.

I think the royal rota know what happened here - or they have put pieces of information together and are just waiting for confirmation to publish. This is what I think it was - M&H had a agreement for an exclusive with an American TV company , which included first pics of Archie. The palace found out and threw a fit and it was cancelled at the last minute. So the announcement was seen by many of the press of a snub at the palace and them. M& H were told they will informed the public of Archie's birth. They did - they just didn't do it when it was actually happening. The action was seen as childish by the palace, especially when the press pointed it out. There were apparently meetings requested with M&H's press people, the palace and the rota - it was a mess. I have had old royal journalists telling me it was worse then the early 1990's. The offices appeared to be at war with each.

 

[ACO]

That doesn’t really make a lot of sense to me. The media got a lot with Archie’s birth. Harry’s sweet excitement outside the stables. The interview showing off the baby. The image with HMQ, Prince Philip and Doria.

Frankly all this stuff about US media sounds rubbish. By now Meghan and Doria should have had 10 exclusive interviews.

 

[winifred]

I sent a review of the book to Marengo on publication day but maybe it didn't get through or it wasn't deemed appropriate.

I'd just reiterate that Lacey admits that no one knows what was said between William and Harry or at the Sandringham summit.

There is no new information in the book and the quote about "worst crisis since the Abdication" doesn't appear.

The tone is sneery and snide - "dear reader ...sainted Middletons"

Lacey seems completely oblivious to the fact that Charles is the next heir, not William, and that William, until he becomes King, which might be 20 years down the line, doesn't have the power to overrule whatever his monarch, current or next, decides.

The fact that Lacey has said that William should make a public statement about his relationship with Harry, which would obviously give the tabloids days and days of headlines, shows to me where he's coming from - not the respected historian I thought he was, but a biased sensation seeker.

 

[AC21091968]

Well other than the aforementioned above, there's also possibility that (if it really happened) William's advice was not only out of concern for Harry, but especially for Meghan.
Yes, for most of us, two years dating before marrying is normal, but Meghan doesn't marry an ordinary-Joe or a younger son of an owner of global foodchain bussiness. She's marrying a younger son of future king of Britain.

For one, there's a culture shock to consider. More often than not, it's not easy for an ordinary woman to adapt when she marries into different culture, and that without media scrutiny. And on top of it, this is British Royal Family we're talking about, full of old fashioned tradition and protocols.

Being two years older, William surely has better understanding about what their mother had been through more than Harry. And that point, William also understands how BRF and British media work. Diana was from aristocratic family yet she struggled to adapt with the royal family and to deal with the media. Yes she's young but she's from same culture, Meghan is older but from different culture. And a good portion of M-H's dating period was long distance. And to be told of the circumstance and think that "okay, I can handle it", is completely different than to experience it (which we see that she isn't able to).

Perhaps what William meant was for Meghan to stay longer in England so she really knew what she would face, one year maybe. And perhaps, fearing than this girlfriend would bolt out and leave him when things get hard (like his other two previous girlfriends) Harry rushed to the wedding before she changed her mind and sadly in the end, we have Meghan as victim here.

But that's just my opinion.

I agree with you and I would even go further. Perhaps Harry should have waited until Meghan has settle in the UK or even becoming permanent resident or British citizen. Again, it's one thing to understand British culture, but it's completely different to actually experience and live with it.

Julie Montagu, Viscountess Hinchingbrooke, who is an American "entrepreneur, yoga instructor, blogger, writer and reality television star" mentioned that

“You don’t know what you’re getting into until you’re in it, especially with the monarchy. People can tell you and they can try to prepare you, but you don’t know. There is a real difference between Britain and America. We may speak the same language, but it’s completely two different cultures, and more so with the royal family. There are traditions. There are protocols,"​

Link to the article: https://uk.news.yahoo.com/ladies-lo...Elb2ZWa_dXlzb59lPPgEO-t8ePOsJuq_mL1ShGROJA4Df

Back to Battle of Brothers: William, Harry and the Inside Story of A Family in Tumult, if William did speak to Harry on his relationship with Meghan, I don't blame William at all. After all, Chelsy Davy and Cressida Bonas have allegedly mentioned that they may not be suited to Royal life. Both Chelsy and Cressida have lived in the UK and Cressida being a British citizen herself. I would think that Meghan, as a foreign citizen could find fitting into the royal fold much harder (compared to Chelsy and Cressida). Not only she had to adapt into the monarchy (including Palace systems), but also British culture within a short period of time (as she was mostly in Canada).

I know some families think two years relationship before marriage is too short.

 

[Curryong]

If Meghan had waited until she was a British citizen before she married she would have been within hailing distance of forty years old. And she and Harry want two children, which if she had waited she would be giving birth to in her forties.

And it has been said that nobody knows what Royal life (including performing engagements) is actually like until they are in the midst of it. Harry was nearly thirty four when he married, old enough to know his own mind and to object to being lectured to by an older brother.

If in my mid thirties I'd been told to slow down before marrying the person I loved I would have told him what to do with his advice. And hardly anyone waits for eight years before marrying.

 

[moby]

I really don't see what the big deal is in being told by a sibling think twice or thrice about important life decisions. No matter the age, I would expect my own siblings to be extremely honest with me. Welcome or unwelcome, I expect them to tell me what they think and I would hope they know the advice will be taken well.

Maybe William overestimated their closeness...or his brother's maturity.

 

[Curryong]

It depends surely on how well the sibling offering unsolicited advice knows the person their sibling wants to marry.

And I aways remember Harry, on an expedition with Walking with the Wounded at the time, talking about William and Kate's newly announced engagement and saying how he was looking forward to getting to know Kate more. Something which doesn't shout to me of particular closeness between the brothers over the years.

Yet Harry put himself out to welcome Kate to the family, sharing jokes etc with her in public. He presumably didn't offer advice to his brother in his early years of dating Kate.

 

[TLLK]

Well other than the aforementioned above, there's also possibility that (if it really happened) William's advice was not only out of concern for Harry, but especially for Meghan.
Yes, for most of us, two years dating before marrying is normal, but Meghan doesn't marry an ordinary-Joe or a younger son of an owner of global foodchain bussiness. She's marrying a younger son of future king of Britain.

For one, there's a culture shock to consider. More often than not, it's not easy for an ordinary woman to adapt when she marries into different culture, and that without media scrutiny. And on top of it, this is British Royal Family we're talking about, full of old fashioned tradition and protocols.

Being two years older, William surely has better understanding about what their mother had been through more than Harry. And that point, William also understands how BRF and British media work. Diana was from aristocratic family yet she struggled to adapt with the royal family and to deal with the media. Yes she's young but she's from same culture, Meghan is older but from different culture. And a good portion of M-H's dating period was long distance. And to be told of the circumstance and think that "okay, I can handle it", is completely different than to experience it (which we see that she isn't able to).

Perhaps what William meant was for Meghan to stay longer in England so she really knew what she would face, one year maybe. And perhaps, fearing than this girlfriend would bolt out and leave him when things get hard (like his other two previous girlfriends) Harry rushed to the wedding before she changed her mind and sadly in the end, we have Meghan as victim here.

But that's just my opinion.

I agree with you and thank you for pointing out that other women who were born in the UK have found the role to be daunting. I also agree that it would have been better for Meghan to have had the opportunity to live full time in the UK for at least six months to a year prior to becoming engaged. It would have provided her with the chance to experience a new culture and to learn more about the role she would be taking on as the wife of a future king's son. I do understand that her age likely played a major part in wanting to marry and start a family, but in hindsight I do believe that would have given her a more realistic picture of the world she would be living in.

 

[TLLK]

I sent a review of the book to Marengo on publication day but maybe it didn't get through or it wasn't deemed appropriate.

I'd just reiterate that Lacey admits that no one knows what was said between William and Harry or at the Sandringham summit.

There is no new information in the book and the quote about "worst crisis since the Abdication" doesn't appear.

The tone is sneery and snide - "dear reader ...sainted Middletons"

Lacey seems completely oblivious to the fact that Charles is the next heir, not William, and that William, until he becomes King, which might be 20 years down the line, doesn't have the power to overrule whatever his monarch, current or next, decides.

The fact that Lacey has said that William should make a public statement about his relationship with Harry, which would obviously give the tabloids days and days of headlines, shows to me where he's coming from - not the respected historian I thought he was, but a biased sensation seeker.

As someone who thoroughly enjoyed reading Mr. Lacey's other books ie: Majesty, Princess, Grace I had been looking forward to reading this newest one. Unfortunately based upon other reviews that I have read, this book might not be of the same caliber as his previous ones.

 

[ACO]

I really don't see what the big deal is in being told by a sibling think twice or thrice about important life decisions. No matter the age, I would expect my own siblings to be extremely honest with me. Welcome or unwelcome, I expect them to tell me what they think and I would hope they know the advice will be taken well.

Maybe William overestimated their closeness...or his brother's maturity.

I agree to a point. I have siblings and close friends who tell it like it is. But we all know that sometimes it is not what you say but how you say it. It is also history that plays into it. I have certainly said hurtful things and have the same said to me in arguments or "well intended conversations" before.

Harry and William both have tempers. I doubt this rift all steamed from this one alleged conversation but I can see how it could have definitely set things in motion. But that said I do think their closeness has been very much overstated because people *needed* them to be. They are not the little boys walking behind the casket anymore. They are grown men.

No one will ever really know what happened but for two brothers people claim are so close -- for this rift to be so strong it is kind of clear something went down. None of these people are perfect. I am sure they have all been jerks to each other in some way or another.

William could have been offensive. Harry could have been overly sensitive. It could be a little bit of both. We will never really know but most have already made their mind up about an event none were in attendance for.

The monarchy is one giant PR campaign. They do their best to not show their drama and smile for the cameras though it eventually leaks out. This is just another thing to add to the ever growing list.

 

[Betsypaige]

I sent a review of the book to Marengo on publication day but maybe it didn't get through or it wasn't deemed appropriate.

I'd just reiterate that Lacey admits that no one knows what was said between William and Harry or at the Sandringham summit.

There is no new information in the book and the quote about "worst crisis since the Abdication" doesn't appear.

The tone is sneery and snide - "dear reader ...sainted Middletons"

Lacey seems completely oblivious to the fact that Charles is the next heir, not William, and that William, until he becomes King, which might be 20 years down the line, doesn't have the power to overrule whatever his monarch, current or next, decides.

The fact that Lacey has said that William should make a public statement about his relationship with Harry, which would obviously give the tabloids days and days of headlines, shows to me where he's coming from - not the respected historian I thought he was, but a biased sensation seeker.

I agree with all of this. I’ve been saying for weeks that, IMO, the book is overheated, gossipy and judgmental; I’ve lost all respect for Lacey - and it’s a shame, as he’s been one of my favorite Royal go-tos. The only thing different in this book is that it offers up his opinions...it’s a money grab. I mean, he’s equating W and H’s rift with the Abdication. It’s not in the book, by the way - Lacey has said it as part of the publicity.

YES, snide - I also used that word. Presumptuous as well - one “so and so must have thought” was enough...I’m sure there were more.

In interviews, Lacey has whined about Charles, saying that William and Kate are the “golden couple” and “we” - meaning the British people - don’t know how to feel about Charles and Camilla. Obviously the Cambridge’s are far more popular than C and C, but many people do love the latter couple, and I loathe that Lacey has taken it upon himself to speak for everyone.

 

[Betsypaige]

I think it is simply logical to assume William had no malice in his actions, but only concern, by looking into the brothers history. Honestly I have never seen a single time where William was ill treating Harry. There has never been smoke to suggest any different!
I find it quite delusional to suggest otherwise. (sorry for the harsh word, but I can't believe people are seriously thinking William had nothing but loving intentions when asking Harry to maybe take things down a bit slower with a woman Harry barely knew)

Any loving sibling would rightfully be concerned about their sibling and raise the question of whether they are sure about making a specific major life change/decision especially if there is worry that this decision is a bad life direction the sibling would end up regarding (I say this as someone who was in Harry's place a decade ago, and while I don't totally regret the choice I made, I do wish I had made some decisions differently and maybe listened to my older sister advice. In most cases the person who knows you best is your sibling, especially if they are older than you!)

Don’t you know? Everything has to be about Meghan - William must hate her personally, perhaps he even has an issue about her race...sigh. If it’s true that he went to Earl Spencer after not succeeding with Harry, I don’t think that was a good idea... but that doesn’t mean he wasn’t right to share his concerns with his brother. It’s not on W that H freaked out.

I really don't see what the big deal is in being told by a sibling think twice or thrice about important life decisions. No matter the age, I would expect my own siblings to be extremely honest with me. Welcome or unwelcome, I expect them to tell me what they think and I would hope they know the advice will be taken well.

Maybe William overestimated their closeness...or his brother's maturity.

There should be no big deal....W and H could have had a real conversation that might have ended differently, except H freaked out and assumed the worst. He does that a lot - to me, Harry is a “yes” man; he only wants to hear people praise his choices and support him wholeheartedly. Heaven forbid you express concern about anything...

 

[Betsypaige]

Deleted post

 

[ACO]

And again how does one now know a “real” conversation wasn’t had. Now we hearing William went to Charles Spencer to talk Harry into whatever William allegedly wanted (which now seems is not marrying Meghan). So after he talks to his brother he then is confronted by his uncle on the request of said brother? Who wouldn’t be annoyed?

 

[Denville]

William doesn't seem to be at ail close to Charles Spencer. How likely is it that he "went to him." And since H seems to be closer to his Aunts, would it not have made more sense for Will to go to Sarah and Jane spencer and ask them to talk to him?

 

[Osipi]

To me, all this intricate analysis of the familial relationship between Harry and William is futile and a waste of time. *No one* really knows for sure just what has transpired within their private relationship at all except for the two involved and they're not talking about it in public.

I can see it being of interest when it comes down to the very *professional* and *business* aspects of their working relationship as it affects the "Firm" and the workings of the monarchy. That involves a wider circle of people and situations than a private one.

All I know is that I would hate to have my familial relationships and quarrels and disagreements speculated about, rumored about and gossiped about to no end with people not even close to my family claiming they have the "scoop". Some things should remain private.

 

[Denville]

its teh fate of public people whether they deliberately sought a ;public life or not, to be discussed and noticed... It may seem unfair, but I can't see that it is that hard for Will and Harry. Im sure theve been advised not to read social media or gossp about the RF in the papers...

 

[AC21091968]

Rosamund Urwin has written a review of Robert Lacey's Battle of Brothers in The Sunday Times. Unfortunately the article is behind a paywall and I cannot read it all.

Battle of Brothers by Robert Lacey, review — why William and Harry went their separate ways
A portrayal of the royal heir and the spare rebalances our perceptions of both

After Prince Harry announced in January that he and his wife, Meghan Markle, were stepping down as senior royals, Prince William let it be known that their brotherly bond was also broken.

Speaking through a friend, William said: “I’ve put my arm around my brother all our lives. I can’t do that any more.” The implication in this statement, Robert Lacey argues, is that William had previously exercised control over his younger brother.

Lacey, a historian, biographer and consultant to the Netflix series The Crown, focuses for his latest book on the deterioration of relations between the heir and the spare. Why did the brothers, once bonded so tightly by love and loss, fall out? Lacey believes that there was an inevitability to the ...​

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...-and-harry-went-their-separate-ways-v9mh2dg3r

The US Magazine has listed the "12 revelations" in Robert Lacey's book

‘Battle of Brothers’ Book Explores Prince William and Prince Harry’s Strained Relationship: 12 Revelations
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrit...ers-book-12-prince-william-harry-revelations/

 

[yukari]

Rosamund Urwin has written a review of Robert Lacey's Battle of Brothers in The Sunday Times. Unfortunately the article is behind a paywall and I cannot read it all.

Battle of Brothers by Robert Lacey, review — why William and Harry went their separate ways
A portrayal of the royal heir and the spare rebalances our perceptions of both

After Prince Harry announced in January that he and his wife, Meghan Markle, were stepping down as senior royals, Prince William let it be known that their brotherly bond was also broken.

Speaking through a friend, William said: “I’ve put my arm around my brother all our lives. I can’t do that any more.” The implication in this statement, Robert Lacey argues, is that William had previously exercised control over his younger brother.

(...)​

Wow, what an interesting interpretation. On that note, next time someone say "I have your back", I'd take it that she/he was pointing gun onto my back or ready to stab me anytime.

I wonder if he sticked with Charles-Andrew story, would he write that A's friendship with Epstein was C's scheme, since once upon a time A was more popular than him.

 

[Betsypaige]

Wow, what an interesting interpretation. On that note, next time someone say "I have your back", I'd take it that she/he was pointing gun onto my back or ready to stab me anytime.

I wonder if he sticked with Charles-Andrew story, would he write that A's friendship with Epstein was C's scheme, since once upon a time A was more popular than him.

I’m cracking up at your “I have your back” line, lol - that probably is how
Lacey would interpret it. His interpretation of William’s comment is insanely ludicrous, and is a perfect example of not just his bias, but also what this book is ...

Given that Lacey seems to be rather harsh on Charles in the book, I wouldn’t be shocked if he blamed him for Andrew’s issues.

 

[Betsypaige]

Rosamund Urwin has written a review of Robert Lacey's Battle of Brothers in The Sunday Times. Unfortunately the article is behind a paywall and I cannot read it all.

Battle of Brothers by Robert Lacey, review — why William and Harry went their separate ways
A portrayal of the royal heir and the spare rebalances our perceptions of both

After Prince Harry announced in January that he and his wife, Meghan Markle, were stepping down as senior royals, Prince William let it be known that their brotherly bond was also broken.

Speaking through a friend, William said: “I’ve put my arm around my brother all our lives. I can’t do that any more.” The implication in this statement, Robert Lacey argues, is that William had previously exercised control over his younger brother.

Lacey, a historian, biographer and consultant to the Netflix series The Crown, focuses for his latest book on the deterioration of relations between the heir and the spare. Why did the brothers, once bonded so tightly by love and loss, fall out? Lacey believes that there was an inevitability to the ...​

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...-and-harry-went-their-separate-ways-v9mh2dg3r

The US Magazine has listed the "12 revelations" in Robert Lacey's book

‘Battle of Brothers’ Book Explores Prince William and Prince Harry’s Strained Relationship: 12 Revelations
https://www.usmagazine.com/celebrit...ers-book-12-prince-william-harry-revelations/

Here’s an excerpt. What I like about this is that Rosamund Urwin is clearly sees how biased Lacey is towards Harry. It’s really asinine that he’s going back to William’s toddler days to show his temper (and yes, he has one ..,so does Harry, so does Charles, Philip, etc...). It’s like he wants to portray W as some sort of demon child while Harry is the poor, saintly, put upon child. He’s doing the same thing that he accuses everyone else of doing..and he’s blaming W for choices H made, which I find loathesome. His attitude toward Kate (I hope someone else posts that part as I don’t think I’m allowed to post more than I have) is gross, especially as he lays into the BRF about their treatment of Meghan.

Urwin also criticizes the writing style, as many of us have done...

The book’s most interesting theme is that the public perception of William and Harry isn’t fair. William, Lacey writes, started as a horror infant, winning the nickname “Basher Wills” at nursery and once being told by Bob Geldof: “Shut up, you horrible little boy.” Lacey implies that his temper remains. Yet William was painted as the golden child who became the perfect heir, almost idealised. And if the media cast him as Prince Charming, they lumbered Harry with the role of court jester.

Harry, of course, was not the dream teenager or twentysomething: there was the pot-smoking, the Nazi fancy dress and the Vegas nudity. But Lacey argues that when William played a role in any scandals he was effectively edited out. Lacey is critical, for example, of William inviting Harry to join his friendship circle at Eton, exposing his brother to “temptations ahead of his years”. He was also present when Harry picked out the Nazi costume. “It was the function of the elder brother to be perfect ... and the function of the younger one to make the rest of us laugh or complain or feel disapproving,” Lacey writes. This left Harry, he feels, in search of a saviour.

 

[rominet09]

I sent a review of the book to Marengo on publication day but maybe it didn't get through or it wasn't deemed appropriate.

I'd just reiterate that Lacey admits that no one knows what was said between William and Harry or at the Sandringham summit.

There is no new information in the book and the quote about "worst crisis since the Abdication" doesn't appear.

The tone is sneery and snide - "dear reader ...sainted Middletons"

Lacey seems completely oblivious to the fact that Charles is the next heir, not William, and that William, until he becomes King, which might be 20 years down the line, doesn't have the power to overrule whatever his monarch, current or next, decides.

The fact that Lacey has said that William should make a public statement about his relationship with Harry, which would obviously give the tabloids days and days of headlines, shows to me where he's coming from - not the respected historian I thought he was, but a biased sensation seeker.

I completely agree with you, the best for William is to rise above this level of comments.