Hardman: The Waleses will ensure that George’s spares aren’t full of resentment

In early 2023, the royalist media was screaming, crying and throwing up over Prince Harry’s Spare, an immediate bestseller and an immediate piece of the royal historical record. For the royalist media, Spare was simply a book full of lies and Harry complaining about how his brother was treated differently! Magically, it only took a few months before the very same people smearing Harry and his memoir started saying “hey maybe Harry made some good points, maybe we should be worried about how Prince William and Kate are raising their ‘spares.’” Only they couldn’t give Harry any credit for revealing the dysfunction at the heart of the royal institution. So now we just get periodic stories about how “Princess Charlotte is the spare, but she’ll be amazing” and “Charlotte alone will break the spare cycle.” Just the fact that they’re putting so much emphasis on how Charlotte will *have* to break a generational cycle of abuse, neglect and dysfunction is…a lot to put on the shoulders of a 10-year-old child. The focus on Charlotte also misses the fact that Louis is also going to suffer from the exact same baked-into-the-system generational trauma. Well, it could be worse, so says biographer Robert Hardman. At least Charlotte won’t share Princess Margaret’s fate.

On the latest episode of the Daily Mail’s Queens, Kings and Dastardly Things podcast, Robert Hardman reveals what the Prince and Princess of Wales are ‘very conscious’ of while raising their three children. The royal biographer said that William and Kate are eager to make sure that Charlotte, 10, and Louis, 7, do not feel any ‘less loved or relevant’ than their older brother and heir to the throne, Prince George, 12.

He explained this commitment to a more equal upbringing is to ensure that Charlotte and Louis do not grow up with the same ‘resentment’ as other recent royal ‘spares’, such as Princess Margaret and Prince Harry. Looking at the worst ‘spares’ from across British history, Hardman however warned that monarchs often benefit from having a controversial sibling who can take the flak and deflect attention from the heir to the throne.

He told co-host and historian Kate Williams: ‘It is said that the Prince and Princess of Wales are very concerned. Of course, Prince George is the heir, and that’s the way it’s going to be. It’s a hereditary, hierarchical, constitutional monarchy. You can’t change that. But there are ways I think, in which you can try and ensure that you don’t leave the younger ones feeling they are any less loved or any less relevant. They’re just going to have to accept their career path is going to be different.’

The royal biographer pointed to Princess Margaret as the best example of how not to raise a spare. He said Margaret, who died in 2002, was ‘subjected to a series of slights’ throughout her life on account of being the younger sister of Queen Elizabeth II. This treatment, Hardman said, created a melancholy and ‘rebellious streak’ in the Princess that remained with her until her death.

‘It was very tough for Margaret’, Hardman said. ‘On the one hand, she was expected to dress like her older sister. To look like her and do the same things. But from an early age [there were differences]. Elizabeth got a proper education. She gets history lessons from Sir Henry Martin at Eton, Margaret doesn’t. Elizabeth gets to wear a uniform and serve in the war, Margaret doesn’t. She got to have her own household and do engagements, Margaret doesn’t. These are things that Margaret resents really all through her life. They do, I think, account for the rebellious streak in her that was there all the way until her death in 2002.’

There may be an unexpected downside to William and Kate’s pursuit of a more equal upbringing for the next generation of royals. Hardman warned that having a controversial sibling who attracts negative attention can actually be an asset to the monarch, drawing criticism away from the heir to the throne.

He explained: ‘There was a very old courtier, Lord Charteris, who was one of Elizabeth’s favourite private secretaries. Later in life, he always said that it’s very important – in every Royal family – to have a wicked fairy to take the flak. Princess Margaret did more than her fair share of her life as the wicked fairy. You have got to have your yin and yang.’

[From The Daily Mail]

Just last year, they were using Margaret’s story to criticize Prince Harry. On Margaret’s death-anniversary, the Telegraph published a truly insane piece about how Margaret was better than Harry because “she never thought of herself as the spare” and “she never pitied herself.” Both of those things are lies, obviously. She was reminded constantly that she was the spare, and she had a deep reserve of self-pity. Hardman isn’t actually saying that Charlotte and poor forgotten Louis will never get the spare treatment – he’s saying that William and Kate will still find value in pitting their two youngest against George because the royals need “to have a wicked fairy to take the flak.” William’s scapegoat has been missing for five-plus years and William has never been so exposed, his deficiencies visible to so many.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Cover Images.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

54 Responses to “Hardman: The Waleses will ensure that George’s spares aren’t full of resentment”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Royal Downfall Watcher says:

    I actually think Will and Kate might try to make an effort in this out of spite. Charles was a dog sh&t father. Learning about how Harry slept in the basement apartment and people bullied him by blocking his only window with their car is INSANE for a crown prince! like….were there not enough bedrooms above the ground??? Harry was treated like garbage and it is amazing he is where he is now and is thriving.

    William got everything and I would bet dollars to donuts that he pampers his spare kids to try to prove Harry wrong/prove he is better than Charles. That is all William cares about – proving he is better than others. It is sick if he uses his kids to do so….but I wouldn’t put it past him.

    At the end of the day, these children are EXTREMELY privileged. Even at their worst – they will have full bellies and luxury 99% of the world could never even imagine. I just hope for their sakes their parents take care of their emotional health as much as their financial health.

    • Nerd says:

      This is just Hardman rambling and not basing any of this from real sources from William and Kate because their actions with their children over the years speaks volumes. It is already very obvious that they single out George over his siblings. They might on occasion take the other children and George to a sporting event and a couple of food banks for photo ops, but the majority of the time they have only taken George to sporting or royal events because he is the heir and they see and treat him as if he is the only one that counts. One of the biggest flaws to the heir and spare concept is that the heir is the only one that the institution ever really focuses on preparing for the role. Yet we have seen through the Queen’s father and since the Queen became the queen, that not preparing the spare for the role blindsides the entire institution and really puts the people behind the scenes at an advantage to control how things are run. It has always bothered me that if the spare is essentially going to be the one who can become responsible if say the monarch is unable to live up to the role or passes away, shouldn’t they also be trained and prepared for the role of monarch also? Maybe not at the same level but them being treated the way that Margaret and Harry was treated did and does more harm for an institution and heir than helping. There truth is that the backstabbing or needing a scapegoat wouldn’t be necessary if the monarchs were adequately trained and competent.

  2. Hypocrisy says:

    Wasn’t Margret a raging alcoholic? I have personally never met an alcoholic who wasn’t self pitying.. what a ridiculous comment. (Alcoholic in recovery are not who I’m refreferring to, but the active drinking ones)

    • JW says:

      You should meet more alcoholics.

      No, they are not all alike, and no, they don’t all fit your pre-conceived notions. In fact, there are certainly plenty of people you know that are alcoholics but you just don’t know they are.

      In any case, I’m less concerned about Char and Louis than I am about George and what kind of little horror they may be raising in him.

      • Hypocrisy says:

        The disease of alcoholism runs in my family so my grandfather, father, aunts, uncles, sisters, cousins, three nephews and one adult child along with an ex husband are my pool of knowledge.. I based my comment on my family experience.

    • Isabella says:

      @Hypocrisy. Sorry to say, your description is acccurate. It’s sad the way alcholism runs in families. It’s not through choice.

    • JW says:

      I too have an entire family full of alcoholics. I know the havoc they can wreak. However, you extrapolating your trauma onto “all alcoholics are X” is flawed reasoning.

      I don’t happen to be an alcoholic (thank God—possibly like you, a childhood of growing up around addicts has made me quite careful of it), but I know plenty from all walks of life, and they are a diverse lot, with a range of backgrounds and personalities. I wouldn’t say any more of them are self-pitying than you find in the general population. What they all have in common is their addiction.

  3. I hate to say it but whenever there are picture of the children none of them look happy. There will be resentment amongst the spares just look at how their parents act!

    • Hypocrisy says:

      They rarely look happy makes you wonder just what kind of childhood these kids truly are living behind closed doors.

    • Mac says:

      I totally disagree. They look uncomfortable when hundreds of cameras are flashing in their face. Photoshoots with private photographers show them very relaxed and happy around their parents.

      • I totally disagree. When they are in private with their parents and their with the photographers they are told to smile. I believe the children look unhappy because they are unhappy.

      • Mac says:

        The photos you see of the children are editorial choices.

      • We are at an impasse. I will go my way and you will go your way and never the two shall meet. It’s good to have differing opinions.

      • Nic919 says:

        Louis would look happier and smile more when he was younger. That changed in the last year or so. Now he looks more like his older siblings.

        And again I will mention Freddy Windsor walking in with his kids to the carol event where the same amount of photographers were set up to catch everyone. His kids showed up smiling and looking happy.
        Since these kids definitely are not getting the same camera coverage as the wales kids, why would they be less intimidated from the cameras as opposed to the kids who have seen them far more?

        I mean we all know the answer is the parents not getting along and the kids are in the middle.

    • Becks1 says:

      I think they are not happy in public, but in smaller settings they seem relatively normal in their expressions and interactions.

      They have parents who hate the press (even as they use the press) and hate the idea of “working” so its no wonder than when the kids have to “work” even at something like Trooping they don’t look happy. They’re being taught that those events are burdens.

      • Nic919 says:

        A lot of the issue seems to be Kate’s need to control the perfect image and that likely adds stress on them at these events along with William not seeming to care much about Kate and her desire to create the perfect image. All these kids are old enough to sense the obvious tension between their parents.

      • Dee(2) says:

        Agree. If you’re on your way to an event and one of your parents is calling where you’re going ” this nonsense”, and saying we’re only staying for an hour, and the other parent is saying stand up straight, don’t interrupt people, make sure you smile when you get out the car, don’t answer any personal questions about our lives, you wouldn’t look happy either.

        They do generally look more relaxed with William solo, and when they’re at events where they’re allowed to just be themselves, Taylor Swift concert, various football games, they do look more relaxed.

  4. Harla says:

    They will never be able to escape the fact that George will have Everything, while Charlotte and Louis will have whatever George gives them. Even if they never do royal work and forge their own careers, their brother will always be leaps and bounds richer and more “important”. Also, just considering how WandK are, I highly doubt they will be able to raise well-adjusted children.

  5. windyriver says:

    The spare question aside, I think Charlotte’s going to have a lot of trouble fairly soon as she enters her teen years and seriously begins attracting attention away from Kate.

  6. M says:

    Those kids are being raised in an emotionally unstable household. They are used as a buffer between their parents at any family event. We have also already seen the favoritism shown to George over his siblings. It will only get worse as they get older. I don’t think any of the kids are going to “break the cycle” as the monarchy inherently creates these roles.

  7. Becks1 says:

    The spare narrative will persist because it benefits the heir, as Hardman pretty much says. Maybe they won’t make Charlotte or Louis live in a basement apartment at KP, but there is no doubt in my mind that they will be used to distract from George’s mistakes. We see it now – Louis is the wild unruly one, George is the serious steady one with a sense of duty. And Charlotte is the next Princess Anne.

    Besides, both William AND Kate were the favored oldest child. they have no reason to treat their children differently because they see nothing wrong with how they were treated vs their siblings growing up.

    • Jais says:

      We’ve already seen the Wales use their kids as distractions from their own bad press so there’s no reason to think it won’t be the same one day when they need a distraction from something negative about George.

    • windyriver says:

      You make a good point in that last paragraph. Unfotunately, sad but probably true.

    • Nic919 says:

      I agree. We all know the institutional favouritism William received, which Diana tried to counter. But the Middletons purposely chose to make Kate the golden child and so Charlotte and Louis don’t have a chance.

    • Isabella says:

      Maybe Charlotte or Louis will get one of the royals’ many properties. There’s always Frogmore Cottage, Adelaide Cottage. I hope they get enough $ each year to maintain their dignity.

      • Christine says:

        I don’t think any dignity is built into this system. For the rest of their lives, they are dependent on their father and brother for an allowance.

  8. Kittenmom says:

    The British press is already gearing up to make charlotte the second coming of Diana and/or the queen. She is the proper and sensible white princess. It’s poor Lou that I fear will have a tough time. Although honestly, I don’t think WanK want any of their children to be fodder for the press – they will try to find a way to put the negative attention on the cousins’ kids or Harry’s kids if they possibly can.

  9. Julie says:

    I sincerely believe Willie wants more for his children than what he got. However, given his rage, jealousy and resentment against his brother and life in general, I don’t see how he can teach better to his children. Kate is slightly better but with what sound like a weak personality. George is probably lost, but I can hope that Charlotte and Louis, like Harry did, will find good people with positive influence in their life.

    • Jais says:

      William does seem more involved than Charles as a parent which is a pretty low bar but still. I don’t necessarily see Kate as a weak personality though. I do think as a whole they’re better parents than Charles was. But at the end of the day, they have already used their kids as distractions to cover for themselves so I don’t have high hopes.

    • Tessa says:

      Keen is a mean girl. The children could overhear some of the bad things she may say about Meghan

      • Sunniside up says:

        They might not be allowed screen time but you can bet your bottom dollar they hear it at school.

  10. Miranda says:

    How dare Harry suggest that heirs are coddled and fawned over while “spares” are neglected! But also, the monarchy is dependent upon sibling scapegoats and we’ve been actively sabotaging “spares” for generations and there’s nothing wrong with that! 🙄🙄

  11. QuiteContrary says:

    Run, Charlotte, run.

    I hope someday she or Louis finds their way to Montecito, so they can get to know the much more normal aunt, uncle and cousins who were kept away from them.

    • Miranda says:

      Smuggle them a burner phone, Uncle Harry!

      That brings up an interesting question, actually. What was the Sussexes’ relationship with their Wales nephews/niece, or the kids of Harry’s cousins, before they left? Did Kate even let Meghan near Charlotte outside of Tightsgate?

      • Nic919 says:

        We all saw Kate try to curtail Louis being curious about his baby cousin at the polo match. They also skipped a birthday party at frogmore.

        Charlotte and Louis will be watched until they are adults so I don’t think they will do much to meet their cousins.

      • Sunniside up says:

        Kate may have been keeping Louis away from Archie simply because Archie was too young to have been vaccinated. She may have maternal instinct even if she dislikes Meghan.

  12. Princess Peach says:

    I’m sure that will and Kate love their kids but there’s truly nothing about them that suggests they will do the work to ensure this dynamic doesn’t continue. Like they can’t even manage to let Charlotte wear a coat when they’re walking into the Christmas piano recital (and both parents are wearing coats) but they have the foresight to break generational curses? I think not.

    Hopefully Louis and Charlotte will be able to lean on each other.

    • Nic919 says:

      The system has been set up to place the eldest above his siblings for over a thousand years and kate and William won’t change the favouritism without actively changing things. To date they have made no changes and just have press people speculate.

  13. Miss Scarlett says:

    The Waleses’ holiday card from Jordan where will, Kate and George were all in one row and in green, while Louis and Charlotte were in a different row and in blue, definitely goes a long way to not promoting the spare/heir narrative 🙄

  14. Amy Bee says:

    Hardman just admitted that despite William and Kate’s best efforts the press is going to pit Charlotte and Louis against George. I feel sorry for them.

  15. CM says:

    doe the sake of their children’s happiness, I hope this is all true. I am sure Uncle Harry would be delighted if his book served as a catalyst for this change.

  16. Lala11_7 says:

    I’m sorry…the choices the parents have made regarding how they run THEIR lives don’t bode well for their children…

  17. Me at home says:

    As role models, William and Kate are teaching their kids to laze about all day watching footie, or shopping online, while staff “craft” tweets with misspellings and vapid short videos about nature. And they’re teaching their kids to obsess about their public images by working out for hours, starving themselves, and raging to the press about perceived competition with Harry and Meghan.

    None of this seems to have made Kate or William happy. And it’s doubtful it will make their kids happy in the way a genuine passion, a passion they work for, a passion that even becomes their life’s work, could make them happy.

  18. Tessa says:

    Charlotte is the spare. She is right after George in line of succession

  19. Sunniside up says:

    “Elizabeth gets to wear a uniform and serve in the war, Margaret doesn’t.”
    Margaret was 9 years old when the war started and 15 when it finished. She was a child.

    • Blubb says:

      And Elisabeth didn’t get an adequate education. As she said herself. And Margerets was even worse.

  20. Feebee says:

    It doesn’t matter how W&K raise George vs Charlotte and Louis, it won’t be enough to counter how they live ‘their’ lives. Kids aren’t stupid. They may not put it together right now but they will in a few years. They’ll understand that it’s ok to kick people out of homes and seal off large swathes of public land because they or at least George can. That they don’t have to go out and actually be with ‘their public’, the great unwashed.

    As for saying it is what it is and you can’t change that, well that’s not accurate. The British could change that any time they wanted but they choose not to.

  21. Beverley says:

    The suggestion that the royal family in general – and the Wales in particular – have learned from their generational trauma and are rectifying past mistakes in raising the Wales youngsters is laughable. The Windsors have no sense of self reflection, no moral compass.

    This article is a prime example of the rota rats trying to act as therapists and give the left-behinds some valuable insight.

  22. Monc says:

    Ironic at best who will be the ones to help the other 2 “spares”

  23. HeatherC says:

    So they all get the same number of sausages for breakfast?