Core Analysis & Perspectives

• The Problem of the “Spare”: Royal historian Robert Lacey argues that the royal institution was originally structured around Prince William and Prince Harry acting as a unified team. However, the monarchy has historically struggled to define meaningful, long-term roles for younger siblings of the direct heir (a dynamic previously seen with Princess Margaret and Prince Andrew).

• “Dangerous Self-Belief”: Lacey noted that Meghan brought an unprecedented level of ambition and self-assurance that did not fit the expected template of a “routine royal” spouse. Instead of quietly assimilating into a supporting role, her individual profile and popularity briefly positioned her and Harry as standout figures, which created friction within a hierarchy built on collective duty.

• Institutional Responsibility: Rather than placing sole blame on Meghan, Lacey criticizes Buckingham Palace for making the mistake of treating her like any typical royal spouse, failing to anticipate or properly manage her ambition and global reach.

• Contrasting Approaches to Royal Life: In Revenge, author Tom Bower contrasts Meghan’s rapid approach to public duties with Princess Catherine’s cautious, line-to-line method of “learning the ropes”. Bower argues that this approach reflected a fundamental misunderstanding of royal duty, where individuals are expected to work collectively under the sovereign rather than build competing individual brands.

Key Royal Biographies Referenced