Royals At War, The Untold Story of Harry and Meghan's Split with the House of Windsor

[Sun Lion]

I love the picture of Meghan and Harry dancing at the top of the New York Post article.

Another book - due for release in a few days, on 30th June.

"Royals At War The Untold Story of Harry and Meghan's Shocking Split With The House of Windsor."

https://nypost.com/2020/06/27/meghan-markle-desperate-to-fix-harrys-coronavirus-cabin-fever/

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...ince-harry-meghan-markle-wedding-royal-family

https://www.booktopia.com.au/royals...MIjZDSs_Wi6gIVggsrCh2ivwmWEAQYAiABEgJojfD_BwE

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...wer-players-create-brand-new-book-claims.html

 

[Muhler]

Hmm.

Don't know the author, but the book does asks some interesting questions.

If the book offer some serious replies to these questions it may actually be worth a read.

- I do find it more than plausible that Harry was sounded out by someone close to him and asked whether he was sure.
Considering the relatively short period H&M had been dating, I find that that to be a relevant question. A question I would even ask my own children planning on marrying after a short relationship.

 

[Sun Lion]

Hmm.

Don't know the author, but the book does asks some interesting questions.

If the book offer some serious replies to these questions it may actually be worth a read.

- I do find it more than plausible that Harry was sounded out by someone close to him and asked whether he was sure.
Considering the relatively short period H&M had been dating, I find that that to be a relevant question. A question I would even ask my own children planning on marrying after a short relationship.

How does someone born into fame, who came to loathe it, and someone who aspired to fame, and came to weaponize it, live happily ever after in La La Land?

An interesting premise from the book.

(Can't see the Duke of Sussex taking up surfing though.)

 

[Hallo girl]

Hmm.

Don't know the author, but the book does asks some interesting questions.

If the book offer some serious replies to these questions it may actually be worth a read.

- I do find it more than plausible that Harry was sounded out by someone close to him and asked whether he was sure.
Considering the relatively short period H&M had been dating, I find that that to be a relevant question. A question I would even ask my own children planning on marrying after a short relationship.

It has always been claimed by those in the know that it was William so there is nothing really new in that. Like you I am sure that is a question that is often asked within families, but it has also been claimed that Harry was offended by the question.

 

[Muhler]

How does someone born into fame, who came to loathe it, and someone who aspired to fame, and came to weaponize it, live happily ever after in La La Land?

An interesting premise from the book.

(Can't see the Duke of Sussex taking up surfing though.)

My reply was written, before the New York Post link was added.
It's more detailed.
I'm not entirely sure what is the journalist's interpretation of the book, and what are direct quotes from the book.

I certainly find it very plausible that Harry is going stir crazy right now - he wouldn't be the only one. Of course that is made worse by the break from his family - especially depending on how dramatic the break was and how much he is in contact with his family. And the no doubt insecurity he must feel about his future.

I notice that most of the critical things about Meghan are pretty much lifted from tabloid articles about her.
And while I find it believable that she had - reservations - about how to conduct her new royal role - ultimately leading to the break with the BRF. I am still on the fence as to how much of that blame can be laid solely at Meghan's door. It usually takes two to tango. And Harry must have had some role. Even though the book seemingly suggest he was/is too dim to realize he is being manipulated.

It seems obvious to me who the authors believe is the villain here.

I have serious reservations about "sources". But at least there is one named source, Ninaki Priddy.
However there really don't seem to be much new here.

It has always been claimed by those in the know that it was William so there is nothing really new in that. Like you I am sure that is a question that is often asked within families, but it has also been claimed that Harry was offended by the question.

I can well imagine Harry going totally into defensive mode, when presented with reservations about the woman he loves. Even if the reservations are mainly to make him think. - It's a little irrational, but also very human.

- I'm personally not at all impressed with the way H&M have handled the break-up with the BRF. Nor am I particularly impressed with their attempts to reform the way the BRF does things from within prior to the break.
But so far none of the books we are currently discussing here on TRF seems to offer serious, unbiased, fact finding accounts let alone answers to what really happened. - And that, alas, seems also to include this book.

I wonder if we are to wait for non-British and non-American royal experts books or documentaries in order to get a more nuanced coverage of H&M.

 

[Iluvbertie]

If you want 'unbiased' you will be waiting a long time. It isn't possible even going back to a modern writer writing ancient history - they will still have a bias.

Getting a more balanced coverage of what happened will probably have to wait a few decades or more likely a century - when all the private correspondence of those involved is made available to historians (assuming it ever is).

 

[Sun Lion]

My reply was written, before the New York Post link was added.
It's more detailed.
I'm not entirely sure what is the journalist's interpretation of the book, and what are direct quotes from the book.

I certainly find it very plausible that Harry is going stir crazy right now - he wouldn't be the only one. Of course that is made worse by the break from his family - especially depending on how dramatic the break was and how much he is in contact with his family. And the no doubt insecurity he must feel about his future.

I notice that most of the critical things about Meghan are pretty much lifted from tabloid articles about her.
And while I find it believable that she had - reservations - about how to conduct her new royal role - ultimately leading to the break with the BRF. I am still on the fence as to how much of that blame can be laid solely at Meghan's door. It usually takes two to tango. And Harry must have had some role. Even though the book seemingly suggest he was/is too dim to realize he is being manipulated.

It seems obvious to me who the authors believe is the villain here.

I have serious reservations about "sources". But at least there is one named source, Ninaki Priddy.
However there really don't seem to be much new here.



I can well imagine Harry going totally into defensive mode, when presented with reservations about the woman he loves. Even if the reservations are mainly to make him think. - It's a little irrational, but also very human.

- I'm personally not at all impressed with the way H&M have handled the break-up with the BRF. Nor am I particularly impressed with their attempts to reform the way the BRF does things from within prior to the break.
But so far none of the books we are currently discussing here on TRF seems to offer serious, unbiased, fact finding accounts let alone answers to what really happened. - And that, alas, seems also to include this book.

I wonder if we are to wait for non-British and non-American royal experts books or documentaries in order to get a more nuanced coverage of H&M.

The Duke’s character has been “un-sugared” so much with Megxit, Muhler.

Not that there weren’t signs before.

The behaviour caught on camera in Las Vegas, the known drug use, the Eton court case where the manipulation of exam results was exposed and so on.

(Not of the Duke’s doing of course, the Eton thing, but this whole burnishing of an image that was not who the individual really was.)

Seems like Prince Harry was always in rebellion to what he was born into.

And it seems like his mother was at the root of at least a good part of it.

In her “battle” against the system she entered into willingly, and couldn’t manipulate to her total satisfaction, both sons were her tools.

The “do what you want, just don’t get caught“ attitude she is said to have imparted.

Very much think the Duke saw his wife as a way out - and she didn’t want or need to stay - so in that a good match for each other, and very much a joint decision.

 

[Curryong]

All senior royals have their images burnished beyond what their own individual characters are.

Known drug use? That can be tracked back to a tabloid creating a heap of allegations about those young people who attended the Rattlebones Inn near Highgrove when Harry was a teenager. Other people were attendees at that inn including Guy Pelly (now a Royal godparent) who was named and dragged into this newspaper's allegations of cannabis use and trading there.

And none of that negates Harry's charity work for years, including the founding of Sentabale and Invictus. Nor his army service which included two tours in war zones.

Most of the books coming out now seem to be catering to those who dislike Harry and Meghan, and are hardly unbiased. I'm looking forward to books due to be released later this year which hopefully may redress the balance a bit.

 

[Madame Verseau]

I looked up the authors of the book. Both earned their stripes in tabloids. Howard was the VP for Chief Content for American Media until his contract ended on March 31 2020. They did a book on Charles Manson that came out in 2019. But when I saw a source for the book is Nikkai Priddy I'm deciding hard pass.

 

[Sun Lion]

This book also covers the pregnancy announcement, by the Duchess of Sussex, at Princess Eugenie's wedding ... and the consternation it caused.

I say consternation, but the book says embarassment for Prince Harry and furiousness for the York family.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...ncing-pregnant-Princess-Eugenies-big-day.html

 

[Curryong]

Again speculation that first appeared on social media at the time and driven by anti Meghan Tumblr sites. These authors have apparently trawled those sites as well as tabloid articles.

Nobody knows what was said about the pregnancy if anything at the wedding, only the KP announcement that the Royals were delighted by the news.

Months Sarah later stated that she had gone through attacks in the media similar to what Meghan was going through, so her 'fury' apparently didn't last!

 

[Sun Lion]

Money, money money ... and the reckless spending of it.

"Royals At War" says this has been an over-looked aspect of the departure of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex from their UK life.

The services of a celebrity acupuncturist, both Harry and Meghan taking a 12-week course of numerology readings at a cost of $4,515 , a $59,100 babymoon, an allowance for the Duchess' mother Doria, private trips to Canada and the US with bodyguards.

Further details from the book in the link below -

https://www.news.com.au/entertainme...k/news-story/6822dbfa7a364db9b7357182fdc88294

 

[muriel]

Money, money money ... and the reckless spending of it.

"Royals At War" says this has been an over-looked aspect of the departure of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex from their UK life.

The services of a celebrity acupuncturist, both Harry and Meghan taking a 12-week course of numerology readings at a cost of $4,515 , a $59,100 babymoon, an allowance for the Duchess' mother Doria, private trips to Canada and the US with bodyguards.

Further details from the book in the link below -

https://www.news.com.au/entertainme...k/news-story/6822dbfa7a364db9b7357182fdc88294

Not sure how credible some of these sources really are!

 

[Muhler]

Forgive my ignorance in such matters but how can a numerology reading course last twelve weeks?!?
Twelve hours would seem excessive to me.

The only interesting things in this article are the sums mentioned.
Everything else is fill, guesswork and detractions. Especially in regards to how the other members of the BRF would have thought and reacted. That IMO is not serious.

How did the author reach the figures mentioned? I guess you can call an numerologist and ask what the price is, so that seems plausible.
And the price of the wedding dress must have been commonly known.

Then there is the spending on clothes. To that I will defend Meghan to some extent at least, she would have needed a new wardrobe for being able to represent the BRF. Even if they planned to leave the royal roadshow within a relatively short period. Kate after all has had several years to build up a wardrobe, some of which can be recycled or remade.
So I don't know whether 700.000 Aus $ is a vulgar amount of money as the article suggests.

As to the baby-shower abroad. Security would go with her no matter where. However, I wonder if there would have been much less criticism had H&M presented their son to the public as per tradition (and to the delight of the press and royal watchers) before heading off to a baby shower?
The presentation of Archie, or the lack of it, was, to put it mildly, poorly handled PR IMO.
He was an infant, he wouldn't care, but just sleep through the whole ordeal or whimper a little. And infants look pretty much the same, so it's not like he would have been recognized walking down the street.
I think that handling was one of the key reasons why the press in particular but also a large segment of the public began to turn against H&M.
The press was "cheated" of hours and hours of coverage, countless articles and photos - not to mention all the "royal experts" who were lined up. That amounts to a serious pile of money!

 

[Curryong]

I remember reading all the above stories of the Sussex's extravagance in the pages of the Daily Fail at the time, and the totals involved came from their journalists, many times inflated if they existed at all. The authors of this book, like Lady Colin, seem to have followed the tabloid route for their 'information' gathering.

 

[Mbruno]

Money, money money ... and the reckless spending of it.

"Royals At War" says this has been an over-looked aspect of the departure of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex from their UK life.

The services of a celebrity acupuncturist, both Harry and Meghan taking a 12-week course of numerology readings at a cost of $4,515 , a $59,100 babymoon, an allowance for the Duchess' mother Doria, private trips to Canada and the US with bodyguards.

Further details from the book in the link below -

https://www.news.com.au/entertainme...k/news-story/6822dbfa7a364db9b7357182fdc88294

As long as all of the above is coming from the Prince of Wales' private income, I would say it is a private family matter which is not of public concern. Unfortunately, Harry and Meghan's "departure" doesn't seem to have fixed the problem as the Prince of Wales is still footing the couple's bill in North America (or so I suppose).


Harry and Meghan's stated intention of being "financially independent" is unfortunately limited by the constraints on the type of businesses or commercial activities royals can be engaged in, especially in the UK. On top of that, the Covid-19 pandemic , at least temporarily, has made it more difficult to launch the type of brand the Sussexes wanted to build, which relies heavily on public speaking and other social gathering events that are not feasible under current social distancing rules.

 

[Madame Verseau]

This book has now rehashed Meghan's approach to royal work chaffed the staff. People expect new material in a book.

 

[Claire]

How does someone born into fame, who came to loathe it, and someone who aspired to fame, and came to weaponize it, live happily ever after in La La Land?

This should be the byline of a book - it is brilliant

 

[Sun Lion]

More from "Royals At War" -

This book claims the excessive spending of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex was part of the reason for the rift between Princes William and Harry.

The expenses for the Sussex's "health drive" included a three-night babymoon at Heckfield Place spa for thirty-three thousand pounds.

And, the Duchess had a "gung-ho" attitude and rushed into situations, and raced to support charities, without consideration of outcomes.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-habits-helped-spark-rift-Prince-William.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...es-Hollywood-gung-ho-attitude-odds-staff.html

 

[Curryong]

I'm not surprised the DM is re-printing all these stories of the Sussexes' high expenditure on God knows etc, considering they all came from their journalists at the time! The authors have just copied the original fairy tales, lies and inaccuracies and all!

 

[Claire]

i heard the numerology reading thing - I though it was terribly funny and this was just after they announced they were pregnant. Yes - London's top astrology is pretty expensive. If that has any truth in it - I will wet myself.

The problem with the money is some of it appears unaccounted for. The press have a rough estimate of what things cost and what funds Harry has - but there is a huge gapping gap. Something does not add up. but it is all based by assumption, so that probably accounts for it.

 

[Sun Lion]

"Royals At War" says the Duchess of Sussex's determination to remain true to herself caused the Duchess of Cambridge to have a meeting with the Queen in December 2018.

As a result of this, the Queen took Meghan under her wing personally to help and guide her.

It also says that the two Duchess's had an argument at the bridesmaid's wedding rehearsal about the titles of the Cambridge children which "unleashed a torrent of pent-up emotions".

https://www.express.co.uk/news/roya...iddleton-queen-elizabeth-meghan-markle-latest



And here is a video of an interview, on Australian television, by one if the authors of "Royals At War", at the top of this article -

https://7news.com.au/the-morning-sh...arrys-relationship-changed-forever--c-1132551

 

[Muhler]

More from "Royals At War" -

This book claims the excessive spending of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex was part of the reason for the rift between Princes William and Harry.

The expenses for the Sussex's "health drive" included a three-night babymoon at Heckfield Place spa for thirty-three thousand pounds.

And, the Duchess had a "gung-ho" attitude and rushed into situations, and raced to support charities, without consideration of outcomes.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-habits-helped-spark-rift-Prince-William.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...es-Hollywood-gung-ho-attitude-odds-staff.html

I notice the figures comes with "allegedly" and "estimated".

Still no named sources.

That W&K advised Harry to take it easy and not rush into a marriage is IMO very plausible, but it's also pure speculation. Because I doubt W&K would have talked about this to anyone but very close family members and perhaps one or two of the most trusted friends and advisors. - All of whom would hardly go yapping to the press.

Without named sources or public statements the notion that a number of staff members were dissatisfied with Meghan and/or quit because of her is gossip.
Unless there are statements from a staff member saying I XX quit my job because of A B C issues with Meghan, it's unfounded rumors.
- Personally I find it very plausible that there were indeed a number of issues between H&M and certainly senior members of their staff. The way they handled the whole thing about cutting lose from the BRF suggests to me that they completely overruled advise from senior staff members. And logic dictates that if H&M had issues with senior staff members it's very likely they had issues with junior staff members as well. - But that is pure speculation from my point.

 

[Sun Lion]

The book says the Queen was the new Duchess' biggest ally, but Meghan insisted on carving her own way and the relationship between the two women soured.

No wonder we got "Megxit".

https://www.usmagazine.com/shop-with-us/news/royals-at-war-new-book-amazon-meghan-markle/

 

[Muhler]

The book says the Queen was the new Duchess' biggest ally, but Meghan insisted on carving her own way and the relationship between the two women soured.

No wonder we got "Megxit".

https://www.usmagazine.com/shop-with-us/news/royals-at-war-new-book-amazon-meghan-markle/

This unnamed quote: “Her Majesty has seen it all and could offer [Meghan] some helpful advice. Meghan would do well to nurture that relationship and pop over for occasional cup of tea with the Queen. Meghan doesn’t need an invitation.”

Makes perfect sense and is believable and I see nothing extraordinary in this - neither one way or the other.
Surely the Monarch (and grandmother) would support and advise a newcomer to the family. And lending the newcomer an experienced advisor would IMO be routine.
Nothing suggests to me that QEII and Meghan were bosom friends or that QEII favored Meghan over W&K.

 

[Madame Verseau]

Perfect sense or not there are no corroborating witnesses to go on record and back up the claims. It's still gossip packaged as a researched book.

 

[Mbruno]

"Royals At War" says the Duchess of Sussex's determination to remain true to herself caused the Duchess of Cambridge to have a meeting with the Queen in December 2018.

As a result of this, the Queen took Meghan under her wing personally to help and guide her.

It also says that the two Duchess's had an argument at the bridesmaid's wedding rehearsal about the titles of the Cambridge children which "unleashed a torrent of pent-up emotions".

I wonder what kind of argument "about the titles of the Cambridge children" they could possibly have had. Did Meghan argue against William's children being HRHs and princes/princesses, which would be totally odd since they are the children of the eldest living son of the Prince of Wales and, most likely, will be the King's children at some point in the future ? Or did she argue that her (future) children should have similar titles, which would not make sense either as, first of all, Harry and Meghan were the first to decline the use of the courtesy title of Earl of Dumbarton for Archie (suggesting they don't care about titles for their children) and, second, when Prince Charles becomes King, Harry and Meghan's children would be HRH Prince/Princess [xxx] of Sussex anyway as per the Letters Patent of 1917.



Honestly that doesn't sound credible to me.

 

[Osipi]

What I see happening is called "jumping on the bandwagon". All the gossip and speculation and rumor surrounding Harry and Meghan amplified in the past six months or so with a whole lot that "supposedly" went down since it became known that Harry and Meghan were a couple.

Everyone sitting on this bandwagon from tabloids to entertainment news to the recent influx of "tell all" book authors have only one motive in mind. Put the green dollars in their pocket. They're making hoards of money by getting the public to read, absorb, talk about and buy the books that bring this couple as alive and decadent as Oscar Wilde's decadent character Algernon Moncrieff.

I'm not buying into it at all. Then again, I'm not much of one for fiction.

 

[Mbruno]

What I see happening is called "jumping on the bandwagon". All the gossip and speculation and rumor surrounding Harry and Meghan amplified in the past six months or so with a whole lot that "supposedly" went down since it became known that Harry and Meghan were a couple.

Everyone sitting on this bandwagon from tabloids to entertainment news to the recent influx of "tell all" book authors have only one motive in mind. Put the green dollars in their pocket. They're making hoards of money by getting the public to read, absorb, talk about and buy the books that bring this couple as alive and decadent as Oscar Wilde's decadent character Algernon Moncrieff.

I'm not buying into it at all. Then again, I'm not much of one for fiction.

I actually like fiction and I am especially a big fan of historic fiction (both in books and in movies), but only as long as it doesn't pretend to pass as fact.

 

[Sun Lion]

Katie Nicholl has come to the defence of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, saying they have "learned from the mistakes of the past" in regards to their approach to their charity work.

Referencing "Royal At War", Ms Nicholl quotes a source who has worked with the couple -

Meghan and Harry "have a tendency to hatch big projects over dinner and expect them to be actioned within days".

https://www.vanityfair.com/style/2020/06/harry-meghan-archewell-launch-delayed