"Spare" memoir by the Duke of Sussex (2023)

[Mirabel]

As a spare Harry was never encouraged to have any aspirations other than being his brother's stopgap and, on occasion, scapegoat. He was in no way educated or prepared to "earn his own way" than those before him and if we look back just a little we can see how Prince Edward, originally fourth in line to the throne, was hounded by the media.

I'm baffled when you say Harry was not educated.
He attended Wetherby, Ludgrove, Eton, Sandhurst. These are some of the most prestigious schools in the UK.

 

[Denville]

I'm baffled when you say Harry was not educated.
He attended Wetherby, Ludgrove, Eton, Sandhurst. These are some of the most prestigious schools in the UK.

He didnt do very well at education, considering that he was sent to the best school. Odds are that if Diana had not died, he might not have gone to Eton, as it was an academic school and he struggled at it.

 

[FigTree]

He didnt do very well at education, considering that he was sent to the best school. Odds are that if Diana had not died, he might not have gone to Eton, as it was an academic school and he struggled at it.

I think I head Diana and Charles had agreed to send him before she died but he was to spend an extra year at Ludgrove.

It wasn't the right school for him. Ironically Gordonston would have been and he thrived there.

I do believe that recently most male members of the royal family went to Eton though with the exception of James and Peter.

Doubt G and L will go given the security arrangements which would be needed now.

 

[Alison H]

I think it was felt that he’d be better off close to Windsor and at the same school as his brother, especially after Diana’s death. No school is perfect. Gordonstoun might have suited him better, but Charles was very unhappy there and was trying to do what was best for his sons. But, as Mirabel said, Harry was very well-educated.

 

[TLLK]

I'm baffled when you say Harry was not educated.
He attended Wetherby, Ludgrove, Eton, Sandhurst. These are some of the most prestigious schools in the UK.

Thank you for pointing this out. As Prince Harry had long desired to be a soldier, his parents provided him with the means and the support to not only be admitted to but to thrive at Sandhurst. This is a historic and prestigious institution that has educated so many from the UK as well as other nations. Royals from Europe, the Middle East and other regions also received their military education and training there. So he was certainly well prepared to have the military career that he had wanted since childhood. The family and the courtiers were there to support him to continue with that career after he returned from active duty and to make it possible to also support his patronages. Afterall the Firm had years of experience with this with other family members who combined
a military career with royal duty. However the person who chose to deviate from the planned path and retire from that career he'd been prepared for was Prince Harry himself.

 

[Kataryn]

I don’t think that’s entirely fair.

Nothing anyone posts here can be "entirely" fair, but IMHO Marg worded it very polite. Yes, she didn't say that the whole Court of EII and CIII were happily living together baking sandcakes but she only claimed there were "more than a few" who felt threatened by Harry and that might be behind all those "talks" the author of "Couriers" had. Which is a good observation, IMHO.


And seeing how some members of the Royal family's portraits disappeared from the Royal website, I can imagine the king has his own ideas about who would ask Harry and Meghan such a rascist question about their unborn son. But probably just coincidence...


I'd wonder if "Spare" will include more than some personal ancdotes about bad situations between Harry and his inner family, probably all more along the lines "You could have done more to help me" and "You are too caught in the Royal circumstances to feel like I feel". He saw how much Camilla did for Charles and how she managed to be half-in and half-out, maybe he was jealous and that shades his memories. We'll only find out once we read the book and then we can start to discuss the content and not only what we think of fear will be in it.



I personally think it's a brave thing worthy of a former active soldier to open up his memories to public consumation and surely lots of critique but I hope the book will show the RF, especially his father, how he felt when he had to deal with being the "spare" and that they try to cope with that situation all together then.


And I hope that Princess Charlotte will be a rebellious princess and spare!

 

[HighGoalHighDreams]

Due to the popular and polarizing practice of doubling-down, what are the chances of this book's premature critics being capable of expressing an objective thought when it is published? Current trends suggest they will go cherry-picking for the items that bolster their preconceived opinions and long-held prejudices.

.

Here's the thing... the vast, vast majority, if not every single, poster on this board had this attitude for years about the Sussexes. It used to be that if you spoke a word of criticism about them, you had to close your laptop so the tomatoes wouldn't hit you through your screen. I think every person here expressing their misgivings about this book would take delight in being proven wrong. If I found out in January that Harry offered a subjective, rational view of his life, I would personally buy 50 copies to help the sales.

But the reality is that every time people post that they fear the worst from something upcoming from the couple-- the Africa tour documentary, the Oprah interview-- they aren't just proven right. The couple outdoes our wildly low expectations.

Harry has shown us who he is, and we believe him. We are the rational voices.

 

[FigTree]

I think it was felt that he’d be better off close to Windsor and at the same school as his brother, especially after Diana’s death. No school is perfect. Gordonstoun might have suited him better, but Charles was very unhappy there and was trying to do what was best for his sons. But, as Mirabel said, Harry was very well-educated.

I don't think to describe him as well educated would be accurate. Usually that is used to describe a person with deep and extensive knowledge on things which could only have been gained from self or received education.

The best possible education was provided for him. I wouldn't personally say he is well educated though, as he himself wasn't made for academics.

 

[Alison H]

But the reality is that every time people post that they fear the worst from something upcoming from the couple-- the Africa tour documentary, the Oprah interview-- they aren't just proven right. The couple outdoes our wildly low expectations.

.

The general attitude in the Sunday papers is that this book will largely consist of yet more attacks on the Royal Family, and will widen the breach between them and Harry even further. I would love for them to be wrong, but I can’t see it. This comes after William suggested the joint walkabout at Windsor, and the King spoke of his love for Harry and Meghan. I don’t know what Harry hopes to achieve.

 

[Kataryn]

Kataryn, you make a lot of generalisations about the UK, none of which are accurate.

The UK has had a welfare state since the days of Lloyd George and Asquith, when Edward VII was on the throne. Suggesting that public funds are used by "rich people" to make their own lives more comfortable is inaccurate and really rather offensive.

The UK has also had universal suffrage since 1928. Many Members of Parliament are from working class or lower middle class backgrounds: the government is not "controlled" by rich people at all.

And none of this really has anything to do with Prince Harry, so maybe it could be left there.

We were just discussing the claim that Harry's wealth was supplied by "Public funds", so that's the connection.


As for the situation in the Uk you see it your way and I see it my way. But I never said that the government consists of "only rich" people but any member of government is more well-off than most of the people they rule and the people working as adminstrators for the government normally don't live in council estates as tenants of welfare housing. Nowadays the former Chancellor and now PM has double the personal wealth than the king, so I read. Greed is a personal motivation of many people and you cannot in general claim that those who start from low backgrounds don't know that emotion and act on it when they reach the position to do something about.

I personally am not enchanted by politicians and what I've seen in both the UK and Germany does not give me much hope. But, as I said, you have your way to see it and I have mine.

 

[Ghost]

Due to the popular and polarizing practice of doubling-down, what are the chances of this book's premature critics being capable of expressing an objective thought when it is published? Current trends suggest they will go cherry-picking for the items that bolster their preconceived opinions and long-held prejudices.

.

One’s objective is another one’s subjective. People’s opinions differ and that is alright. That is one of the great things that I appreciate about this board: there’s enough room for all kind of opinions.

 

[Denville]

I think it was felt that he’d be better off close to Windsor and at the same school as his brother, especially after Diana’s death. No school is perfect. Gordonstoun might have suited him better, but Charles was very unhappy there and was trying to do what was best for his sons. But, as Mirabel said, Harry was very well-educated.

I think it is more accurate to say that he received a good education in a top school, but I dont think it sank in to any great extent. I dont think he much enjoyed Eton, and it was largely to keep him close to William that he went there. I remember him saying something some years ago to the effect htat he did not much like school and I think he only passed the exams because of pushing and coaching, to get him into Sandhurst.

 

[Erin9]

"Spare" memoir by the Duke of Sussex (2023)

Here's the thing... the vast, vast majority, if not every single, poster on this board had this attitude for years about the Sussexes. It used to be that if you spoke a word of criticism about them, you had to close your laptop so the tomatoes wouldn't hit you through your screen. I think every person here expressing their misgivings about this book would take delight in being proven wrong. If I found out in January that Harry offered a subjective, rational view of his life, I would personally buy 50 copies to help the sales.



But the reality is that every time people post that they fear the worst from something upcoming from the couple-- the Africa tour documentary, the Oprah interview-- they aren't just proven right. The couple outdoes our wildly low expectations.



Harry has shown us who he is, and we believe him. We are the rational voices.

Pretty much my thoughts.

I’m wary about this book based on numerous past experiences with them speaking out. As recently as The Cut in September- they were still lashing out.

I hope for the best with this book- but I don’t expect it at this point. And- I’d love to be wrong.

 

[Alison H]

I think it is more accurate to say that he received a good education in a top school, but I dont think it sank in to any great extent. I dont think he much enjoyed Eton, and it was largely to keep him close to William that he went there. I remember him saying something some years ago to the effect htat he did not much like school and I think he only passed the exams because of pushing and coaching, to get him into Sandhurst.

Yes, I think he was shoved through his A levels. But maybe that’s something he should appreciate. What would he have done otherwise? What is it that he thinks being royal stopped him from doing?

 

[Denville]

yes, but the point is, was he well educated? I dont think so. He was sent to a good school, but I dont think he worked all that hard, and he certainly did not enjoy the atmosphere. and he probably would not have passed his exams without a certain amount of pushing and coaching. I dont know if this book will focus all that much on his schooldays anyway

 

[Durham]

AFAIK he inherited his money from Diana and she got it from Charles' private wealth. No public pension for the princess. Or do you mean the money he got for fighting in Afghanistan? For that is the only "public" funds he got . But that's just AFAIK.

I understand that the late queen provided the bulk of the divorce settlement. Post 1422 (page 72) onwards in the Royal Wealth and Finances thread is a discussion about the origins of present day royal wealth. It shows very clearly how Harry’s inheritance can ultimately be traced back to public funds (meaning resources).

https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f23/royal-wealth-and-finances-9826-72.html#post2335306


https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f23/royal-wealth-and-finances-9826-72.html#post2335723

The point was that if Harry complains that being the "spare" was some sort of disadvantage, then a little bit of honesty & perspective about the advantages of being a royal "spare" should also be included for balance.

Harry has shown us who he is, and we believe him. We are the rational voices.

Well yes indeed. Past behaviour is very often an indicator of future conduct. So unsurprisingly people are wary.

The general attitude in the Sunday papers is that this book will largely consist of yet more attacks on the Royal Family, and will widen the breach between them and Harry even further. I would love for them to be wrong, but I can’t see it. This comes after William suggested the joint walkabout at Windsor, and the King spoke of his love for Harry and Meghan. I don’t know what Harry hopes to achieve.

Money's part of it. They must spend a lot to live the lifestyle they have.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

I find myself astonished at the amount of criticism Harry's book has engendered considering it is yet to actually be published! The false flags are stunning; yes Prince Philip walked behind his Aunt and her family's cortege however, times were different and he knew it was expected which, considering he was 16 years of age, is hardly surprising. Harry was just 12 years of age and not yet even classed as an adolescent when he walked behind his mother's coffin.

All the conversations about Zara, Eugenie etc. being second children is totally irrelevant. Harry, as his uncle Andrew before him was the Spare to the Heir to the throne. As such he inhabited the same world as William in the knowledge that he was destined for absolutely nothing except being his brother's spare and that would not change until such time as his brother married and produced his own heir and preferably spare as well.

As a spare Harry was never encouraged to have any aspirations other than being his brother's stopgap and, on occasion, scapegoat. He was in no way educated or prepared to "earn his own way" than those before him and if we look back just a little we can see how Prince Edward, originally fourth in line to the throne, was hounded by the media.

Sophie had her own moderately successful design career but the moment she and Edward married they were accused of using the BRF to make their fortune. They were both hounded unmercifully until the sad little announcement that they had both decided to forgo their careers and join the family firm like the firm actually needed two more full-time workers at that time.

So here we wait for Harry's biography to be published. We know what he said it would be, i.e. his truth and his feelings growing up to be the man he is today. I am holding out for the book since it will be the first personal account of a Spare. How the world, the country, and his family treated him, and how he felt about it. It will also possibly show what advice and support he got from his family to try to create his own niche.

With all the "leaks" from all the usual suspects, I can only surmise that there are more than a few people who feel threatened by Him and what he may say about them, both family members and courtiers, and the pre-emptive character assassination seems to support that.

Please let’s not go there, “Harry wasn’t encouraged to have any aspirations”? He joined the army for some time and with the help of some aides created the Invictus Games. What do you mean by being his brother’s “stopgap” and “scapegoat”? A lot of the negative things he did that was captured by the media were his own choices he made, the media doesn’t have to make him look bad if obviously what he is doing is questionable. Harry wasn’t educated? He went to some of the best schools in the country and at the end of the day he chose not to go further his education at university so that’s his fault. Edward and Sophie’s business ventures went bust and had to be bailed out (particularly Edwards) and had to promise not be involved in commercial deals again and there was controversy with Sophie and fake sheikh. Who is leaking things? No one needs to leak things from the palace, the Sussexes have their sycophants and mouthpieces for that. I don’t believe anyone from the royal court feels threatened by him, he’s made countless blunders and mistakes on his own and he assassinated the character of his family members and aides in a book written by his pet author, Omid and did a scathing interview about a year ago.

 

[Purrs]

Money's part of it. They must spend a lot to live the lifestyle they have.

Yes, the book will certainly make them a great deal of money. However, IMHO it will be a case of diminishing returns eventually. How many times can Harry keep telling and retelling stories about his past and the royal family? It seems unsustainable and very shortsighted to me, even from a purely financial point of view.

From an emotional point of view, Harry has isolated himself from his family of birth for the future. Even if attempts are made to repair things by both parties, I don't see how the trust can be restored.

The whole thing is very sad for everyone and IMHO totally unnecessary. It is obvious Harry is very troubled and has been for a long time but this will not help him. IMHO, it isn't helpful for Harry himself to continue this course of action. Also the timing is especially terrible for King Charles who is also dealing with his own grief while finding his footing as the new king.

Harry's choices will continue to hurt him and will not bring him happiness long term.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

Due to the popular and polarizing practice of doubling-down, what are the chances of this book's premature critics being capable of expressing an objective thought when it is published? Current trends suggest they will go cherry-picking for the items that bolster their preconceived opinions and long-held prejudices.

.

No one is cherry picking anything, the Sussexes have a tendency to say and do controversial things and which pre conceived notions and long held prejudices are you speaking of? If the Sussexes didn’t do the controversial and unpredictable things they have done previously no one would be so quick to criticize them.

 

[camelot23ca]

Here's the thing... the vast, vast majority, if not every single, poster on this board had this attitude for years about the Sussexes. It used to be that if you spoke a word of criticism about them, you had to close your laptop so the tomatoes wouldn't hit you through your screen. I think every person here expressing their misgivings about this book would take delight in being proven wrong. If I found out in January that Harry offered a subjective, rational view of his life, I would personally buy 50 copies to help the sales.

But the reality is that every time people post that they fear the worst from something upcoming from the couple-- the Africa tour documentary, the Oprah interview-- they aren't just proven right. The couple outdoes our wildly low expectations.

Harry has shown us who he is, and we believe him. We are the rational voices.

Well said. It’s eye opening to look back through the threads on Harry and Meghan from the time they started dating until sometime after the wedding. Neutral or negative posts regarding the couple were not looked upon kindly by their online cheerleaders, and it was only when the negatives started to be too egregious to excuse that that a balance was struck.

I think most of us started out hoping for the best for the new couple. I had doubts about how Meghan would fit into the Royal Family, but would have loved to have been mistaken. The potential was there for the Sussexes to be a real asset for the family, and for them to develop a satisfying and influential portfolio of patronages and activities. But they’ve made one poor choice after another, and they’ve tried their best to drag the BRF through the mud with them. Over and over and over again.

If this book turns out to be balanced and thoughtful I’ll be first in line to get a copy. But right now I’m expecting there to be a lot of whining, false modesty and passive aggressive jabs at everyone who has ever displeased Team Sussex. But we’ll see!

 

[SirGyamfi1]

Nothing anyone posts here can be "entirely" fair, but IMHO Marg worded it very polite. Yes, she didn't say that the whole Court of EII and CIII were happily living together baking sandcakes but she only claimed there were "more than a few" who felt threatened by Harry and that might be behind all those "talks" the author of "Couriers" had. Which is a good observation, IMHO.


And seeing how some members of the Royal family's portraits disappeared from the Royal website, I can imagine the king has his own ideas about who would ask Harry and Meghan such a rascist question about their unborn son. But probably just coincidence...


I'd wonder if "Spare" will include more than some personal ancdotes about bad situations between Harry and his inner family, probably all more along the lines "You could have done more to help me" and "You are too caught in the Royal circumstances to feel like I feel". He saw how much Camilla did for Charles and how she managed to be half-in and half-out, maybe he was jealous and that shades his memories. We'll only find out once we read the book and then we can start to discuss the content and not only what we think of fear will be in it.



I personally think it's a brave thing worthy of a former active soldier to open up his memories to public consumation and surely lots of critique but I hope the book will show the RF, especially his father, how he felt when he had to deal with being the "spare" and that they try to cope with that situation all together then.


And I hope that Princess Charlotte will be a rebellious princess and spare!

How did Camilla get to be half-in half-out? I don’t understand what you are referring to? I highly doubt the book will help anything or anyone apart from line Harry’s pockets. With the type of parents Charlotte has, I highly doubt she will be a “rebellious spare and Princess” and i don’t think she ever will be and don’t think it’s good thing to hope for.

 

[Toledo]

Yes, the book will certainly make them a great deal of money. However, IMHO it will be a case of diminishing returns eventually. How many times can Harry keep telling and retelling stories about his past and the royal family? It seems unsustainable and very shortsighted to me, even from a purely financial point of view.

From an emotional point of view, Harry has isolated himself from his family of birth for the future. Even if attempts are made to repair things by both parties, I don't see how the trust can be restored.

The whole thing is very sad for everyone and IMHO totally unnecessary. It is obvious Harry is very troubled and has been for a long time but this will not help him. IMHO, it isn't helpful for Harry himself to continue this course of action. Also the timing is especially terrible for King Charles who is also dealing with his own grief while finding his footing as the new king.

Harry's choices will continue to hurt him and will not bring him happiness long term.

Your post makes a lot of sense since Harry has become a sort of former Buckingham Palace employee, you know the ones that held a temporary post or got fired and now write books or are guests on TV shows as royal experts, royal commentators, etc. I get his frustration on the Firm and its rules to control his out of boundaries past conduct, like the Nazi costume, the wild strip party that landed his pictures all over the planet, etc. In the USA we have a similar situation with Biden's son and his private, and privates, pictures all over the web.

Harry seems he entered and signed these book and media deals at a time he was frustrated with the persecution of the paparazzi. And once the ink dries on that contract, he can't back-pedal and regret the deal plus return the money without being taken to court.

Part of me thinks he changed his mind on these signed deals which would explain the news on delays, changes etc. Once the book is available, we will know if these decisions were influenced by person(s) near to him to make money fast after leaving the Firm. I would also like to know if he is going to mention his own pre marriage conduct when he was off the rails with his school boys entourage.

Remember when you point the finger at someone in judgement you also have four more pointing back at you.

As coincidence, now we have two 'Spare' princes on a January countdown here: Harry's book on January 10th and Joachin's family titles also affected on January 1st, 2023.

 

[Kataryn]

It shows very clearly how Harry’s inheritance can ultimately be traced back to public funds (meaning resources).

https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f23/royal-wealth-and-finances-9826-72.html#post2335306

Of course the Royal family became rich through using the people's manpower and work. We all kno that. That's how it was and in a way each industrialist and each owner of an officer where computer technicans (just as a modern example) work do the same. Elon Musk uses people to become richer! It's the way our society worlks and if we look for "public funds" that way, we'll find them anywhere! The lower members of society work for the state and the higher ups and for centuries, the "real" end of the chain upwards was the king.



But "private wealth" cannot be organized like that. Even the former kings had part of their wealth that was the state's and part that was private. Thus Buckingham Palace (and its costs) is in the state's ownership and Sandringham is a private residence. Some jewels are part of the Royal collection and others are private. It is all ruled by laws - thus we can clearly say that Harry inherited his part of the private estate of his mother and as such it is private wealth - no matter where it came from. It is the right of the law makers of each country to make (and/or uphold) the laws that differentiate between public funds and private wealth. And to deal with each of it however they want. And when they don't want to take things from the king and give it to the poor, they don't do it and all stays as it is. To get the private wealth from king Charles would mean to get it equally from anyone in the Uk - you can't simply make an example of your Royals when you don't make the same examples of your nobles and other rich people.



The state doesn't belong to the public. The kingdom doesn't belong to the people. When it comes to the political aspects of the state, each citizen of the country can vote for parties and the party with most votes then runs the country. But no citizen can mortgage the assets of the government and those which are payed for for the use of the person holding the top position in the society and this person's family.


In the Uk this is the king or queen regnant. As the king or queen regnant is a private person besides being the holder of the top position (aka "the Crown"), they have private wealth. gathered the legal way over centuries. It is as it is and the alternative (to vote them out) would lead to them having even more private wealth.



So this whole discussion makes no sense. Times were different during the last centuries, the idea of what "kingship" meant changed but what did not change was the right of private persons to inherit or acquire wealth and enjoy it. A right for anyone, including the king.

.

 

[Durham]

Part of me thinks he changed his mind on these signed deals which would explain the news on delays, changes etc. Once the book is available, we will know if these decisions were influenced by person(s) near to him to make money fast after leaving the Firm. I would also like to know if he is going to mention his own pre marriage conduct when he was off the rails with his school boys entourage.

Lots of people make money off the rf. It started with Crawfie(?) & there's been a flurry of books over the last few years. Oprah & now this book are just the latest most extreme example of this trend.

The late Princess Alice (Gloucester) & the present Duke of Kent wrote memoirs but they weren't to make money as such. Certainly nothing like the millions Harry will earn. And they didn't set out to be critical of anyone or the monarchy which this book might well be.

I've never read A King's Story so I can't comment on what sort of book it is but no doubt it made Windsor a lot of money!

 

[CyrilVladisla]

AFAIK he inherited his money from Diana and she got it from Charles' private wealth. No public pension for the princess. Or do you mean the money he got for fighting in Afghanistan? For that is the only "public" funds he got . But that's just AFAIK.

Prince Harry inherited money from his mother. Also, he had inherited money from his great-grandmother, Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother. In Spare, do you think Harry will mention the inheritance from his great-grandmother?

 

[SirGyamfi1]

Prince Harry inherited money from his mother. Also, he had inherited money from his great-grandmother, Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother. In Spare, do you think Harry will mention the inheritance from his great-grandmother?

Yes he did but the large majority of his trust fund came from Diana’s divorce money. Before Diana received her settlement, she had a trust fund that came from her American heiress ancestress, Frances Ellen Work who married into the Fermoy family, but it paled in comparison to her divorce settlement from the Queen.

 

[Alison H]

The Telegraph's reporting that Harry's old friends were asked to contribute to the book. I assume it's OK to post this here as it relates to the book and isn't a new topic:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertain...sedgntp&cvid=f023dcc6069c451cac75473fe7f7e967

***

Mod. answer: no, it is not. Allthough we understand the confusion, all links will need to be checked in advance by the mod., team.

 

[Toledo]

The Telegraph's reporting that Harry's old friends were asked to contribute to the book. I assume it's OK to post this here as it relates to the book and isn't a new topic:

https://www.msn.com/en-gb/entertain...sedgntp&cvid=f023dcc6069c451cac75473fe7f7e967

Thanks, Alison H ?
And when I got to these quotes below from that link my eyes rolled over thinking this book is taking a shape of being part of an assembly line. As in less on Harry's having control of the content and more in the lines of the publishing company determined to turn it into a bombshell.

“...It was felt to be kind of ironic that Harry would hit the roof if he ever had an inkling they spoke to the media, but now he wants them to when he needs their help.”

...It is common practice for ghostwriters to use multiple sources in completing an autobiography, cross-referencing the claims the subject has made and filling in gaps in their own memory.

 

[TLLK]

Thanks, Alison H ?
And when I got to these quotes below from that link my eyes rolled over thinking this book is taking a shape of being part of an assembly line. As in less on Harry's having control of the content and more in the lines of the publishing company determined to turn it into a bombshell.

“...It was felt to be kind of ironic that Harry would hit the roof if he ever had an inkling they spoke to the media, but now he wants them to when he needs their help.”

...It is common practice for ghostwriters to use multiple sources in completing an autobiography, cross-referencing the claims the subject has made and filling in gaps in their own memory.

I have to wonder if those that declined the opportunity to participate realized that their personal recollections of events, conversations etc.. differed from those provided by Prince Harry? Time and distance can alter our recollections.

 

[muriel]

I have to wonder if those that declined the opportunity to participate realized that their personal recollections of events, conversations etc.. differed from those provided by Prince Harry? Time and distance can alter our recollections.

Or to quote HM, "recollections may vary"!