The most salacious gossip from royal memoirs ahead of Harry’s book

The title, cover and release date of Prince Harry’s highly-anticipated memoir were finally revealed last week. Spare will hit shelves on January 10, 2023, and the book, complete with a close-up shot of the Duke of Sussex looking directly into the camera, is set to ruffle some feathers. Speculation regarding the contents of the Prince’s memoir has been rife since Harry announced his multi-million-pound book deal in the summer of last year. While some believe the Duke will delve into his troubled relationships with his family, others have claimed he will focus on his Army experiences, mental health and personal development. In a statement, the book’s publisher, Penguin Random House, described the memoir as ‘intimate and heartfelt,’ adding: ‘Written with raw, unflinching honesty, Spare finds the Prince writing about some moments from his life publicly for the first time.’The title relates to Harry’s destined role within the Royal Family – the younger brother to the future monarch, the ‘spare heir’. The role has been ‘problematic’ in the past, according to royal expert Pauline Maclaran, who noted some of the previous holders of the position, including Prince Andrew and Princess Margaret.READ MORE: Mike Tindall is ‘cheapening royal brand’ as latest TV appearances blasted Many royal memoirs have come before Prince Harry’s (Image: Getty Images / Penguin Random House) The title ‘Spare’ stems from Harry’s destined role within the Royal Family (Image: Getty) Harry has promised an ‘accurate and wholly truthful’ account of his life (Image: Express.co.uk)Marion Crawford was the friend, governess and close confidante of Princess Elizabeth and Princess Margaret. Affectionately known as ‘Crawfie’, she spent years living in close quarters with the young royals and was known to be well-loved by the future Queen and her younger sister. Following her retirement in 1949, Crawfie made a decision that forever severed the trust between her and the Royal Family. She was approached by American mass-circulation magazine, the Ladies’ Home Journal, with an offer for her memoirs of between $6,500 (£5,775) and $85,000 (£75,221), depending on which reports are to be believed. Having been urged to accept by her husband George, Marion went to Queen Elizabeth, later the Queen Mother, for advice. The royal’s reply, given in a letter in April 1949, was unequivocal: ‘I do feel, most definitely, that you should not write and sign articles about the children, as people in positions of confidence with us must be utterly oyster…you must resist the allure of American money…’The Queen did agree that Crawfie could act as an adviser for the magazine, as long as her name did not appear. But she went against the royal’s wishes and, during the summer of 1949, collaborated with a ghostwriter on her ‘affectionate memoir’. Crawfie was Princesses Elizabeth and Margaret’s nanny for several years (Image: Getty) The Royal Family never spoke to Crawfie again following the publication of her memoir (Image: Getty)By today’s standards, ‘The Little Princesses’ was a largely adoring account of her time with the Royal Family, revealing nothing sensational and even humanising the Windsors. However, her former employers deemed it an unforgivable act and never spoke to Crawfie again. She bought a house near Aberdeen that was on the route taken by the family bound for their summer retreat at Balmoral. According to Clive Irving, author of ‘The Last Queen,’ each year Marion ‘watched as they passed, but they never stopped’. ‘Character study of an undistinguished individual’ At around the same time that American money was luring Crawfie, it was also being offered to a member of the Royal Family who had found himself in exile. The Duke of Windsor, formerly Edward VIII, who abdicated the throne after less than one year, worked with the founder of Time Life, Henry Luce, on a series of ghosted autobiographical articles that eventually led to the book ‘A King’s Story’ – an account of his life up to 1936. DON’T MISS Meghan Markle admitted she has a ‘food fixation’ on podcast [INSIGHT]Who is your favourite member of the Royal Family? [POLL]Prince Harry ‘obsessed’ with staying relevant over Prince George [REVEALED] The Duke of Windsor’s memoir was published in 1951 (Image: Getty)The Palace was outraged. But, according to Tommy Lascelles – George VI’s most powerful courtier – nothing could be done to stop the book. In a note to the King, he wrote: ‘I am sorry to say that long experience has convinced me that he has no such feelings when the interests of the monarchy or Royal Family conflict with what he imagines to be the interests of himself and the Duchess (Wallis Simpson).’The book was a best-seller, earning the Duke nearly £10million in today’s money, despite being described by a New York Times reviewer as ‘a character study of a well-meaning, undistinguished individual, destined from birth to a life of monumental artificiality’. To some, it is a surprise that Prince Harry’s book is being viewed in the same way a lifetime later. Writing for The Daily Beast in August, Mr Irving said: ‘…the spirit of Lascelles seems astonishingly to be still alive in the way that Harry’s book is being viewed within the family.’  King George VI’s secretary Alan Lascelles, known as Tommy in 1948 (Image: Getty)He explained that for the late Queen, Lascelles remained very much a fondly remembered tutor and guardian, rather than ‘an irrelevant anachronism,’ adding that the monarch wished ‘the ramparts of her own privacy are as unviolated as they were in the 1950s’. By contrast, in recent years, the Royal Family have been praised for being more open and approachable. Prof Maclaran claimed that Harry’s ‘personal and emotional’ account may earn him some favour, particularly with younger generations of royal watchers, who already have an affinity for the Sussexes and the late Diana, Princess of Wales. She said: ‘I think he [Harry] is hoping this is another chance to appeal to many, I would say particularly that younger generation.’ Mr Irving said: ‘Harry has every right to tell his story, and to have it told well,’ referring to the book’s Pulitzer-winning writer J.R. Moehringer.  Harry’s book is expected to go down well with the younger generations of royal watchers (Image: Getty)It wasn’t until 1992 that the next royal biography was published and sent shockwaves through the Firm. The year that Queen Elizabeth II celebrated her fortieth year on the throne came to be known as her ‘annus horribilis’, and the turbulent 12-month period kicked off with the publication of ‘Diana: Her True Story’ – a detailed account of the late Princess’ experience as a senior royal. The book, written by journalist Andrew Morton, chronicled the steady disintegration of Diana’s fairy-tale life as the heir to the throne’s wife – it recounted the acrimonious battle between the Prince and Princess of Wales, shared Diana’s accounts of suffering from post-natal depression and bulimia, and rebelled against every convention of what was acceptable in a royal biography. After the Princess’ death in August 1997, Mr Morton confirmed what had long been suspected, that Diana had collaborated with him to produce the memoir. It led to accusations of bias against Charles and his long-term mistress, Camilla Parker Bowles, and a chance for  Diana to present her own sense of victimhood.  Andrew Morton collaborated with Diana to write the biography (Image: Getty) Princess Diana shared personal insight into her experience as a senior royal (Image: Getty)Now, 30 years later, Diana’s younger son is attempting to do the same, according to Prof Maclaran, who said: ‘Harry will be evoking a certain sense of victimhood in his memoir,’ having been in the ‘notoriously difficult position’ as the Royal Family’s ‘spare heir’. She continued: ‘He is positioning himself as a victim and he will certainly be hoping that there is a generation who will empathise with him… He’s really trying to say: ‘I’m just like everybody else. I’ve had to face challenges in life.” However, the professor, who co-authored ‘Royal Fever: The British Monarchy in Consumer Culture,’ argued that the Prince’s book would not hold the same shock value as his mother’s. She said it would be ‘hard’ to come up against the personal proclamations in Diana’s biography, explaining: ‘Diana’s memoir was so out of the blue that I think it was truly quite shocking – we just weren’t used to those kinds of revelations at the time.’