In the latest twist to the Endgame book controversy, a senior U.K. minister has come forward to defend King Charles III and Catherine, Princess of Wales, amid mounting public scrutiny over claims made in the Dutch translation of Omid Scobie’s explosive royal exposé. Tom Tugendhat, a government minister and respected Conservative MP, praised both royals for their “dignity” and “grace,” calling the allegations “completely unproven” and “an attempt to disparage somebody who has served our country with enormous distinction.”
The uproar began after the Dutch edition of Endgame reportedly named King Charles and Princess Kate as the two senior royals alleged to have speculated about the potential skin color of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s son, Archie, before his birth — a detail never revealed in the English-language version. The passage reignited one of the monarchy’s most sensitive controversies since Meghan and Harry’s 2021 interview with Oprah Winfrey, during which they spoke of “concerns and conversations” about their unborn child’s complexion but declined to identify who had made such remarks.
Appearing on TalkTV, Tugendhat dismissed the claims outright. “Some individual has written some rumor and scuttlebutt that has made various claims about His Majesty the King that are, frankly, completely unproven,” he said. “The King’s done a brilliant job for us — not just in the last year since he’s been King, but for many, many years as Prince of Wales. He’s served this country with enormous dignity and grace.” The minister’s defense underscored what many in Westminster and the royal establishment have privately voiced — that the reemergence of this issue, based on an apparent translation mishap, risks unfairly tarnishing the reputations of two of the monarchy’s most visible figures.
Buckingham Palace has declined to comment directly but confirmed it is “considering all options,” signaling that legal action is under review. Kensington Palace, which represents the Princess of Wales, has maintained its usual silence. However, sources close to both institutions say there is “visible frustration” over what they describe as an “unwarranted resurrection” of a deeply painful subject.
The publication of Endgame in the Netherlands on Tuesday set off a firestorm after journalists discovered that the Dutch translation contained names omitted from other editions. Publisher Xander Uitgevers immediately pulled the book from shelves, citing an “error,” though confusion remains about how such sensitive details found their way into print. Scobie, for his part, has denied any wrongdoing. In interviews with The Times and the BBC, he insisted he never named individuals in his manuscript and suggested the Dutch text may have been based on an early or misinterpreted draft. “All of this is frustrating because it feeds into something that couldn’t be further from the truth,” Scobie said. “I’ve always felt the names weren’t needed to have this discussion.”
The author also pushed back against online conspiracy theories claiming the incident was a deliberate publicity stunt. “It hurts,” he told BBC’s Newsnight. “This was not a marketing ploy. The idea that this was coordinated is offensive to me as a journalist.”
Meanwhile, major international outlets — including the BBC, Daily Telegraph, New York Times, and Daily Mail — have since confirmed that the names appearing in the Dutch version were indeed those of King Charles and Princess Kate, even as publishers stress that the inclusion was unauthorized. British broadcaster Piers Morgan was the first to publicly identify the two royals on his TalkTV program, stating that while he disagreed with the secrecy surrounding their names, he personally did not believe any racist intent was behind the alleged remarks.
The reemergence of the issue has reopened wounds that Buckingham Palace had worked carefully to heal after the Oprah interview. In 2021, Queen Elizabeth II responded with characteristic restraint, saying the family was “saddened” by Harry and Meghan’s experiences but adding pointedly that “some recollections may vary.” That phrase, now famous, came to symbolize the Palace’s effort to acknowledge pain without inflaming division.
Prince Harry himself later sought to clarify the context during his Spare book tour, telling ITV that he never accused his family of racism. “The difference between racism and unconscious bias — the two things are different,” he explained, emphasizing that his concern was about awareness, not animus.
For now, Buckingham Palace appears determined not to engage further, while the controversy continues to ripple across media and social platforms. The Palace’s legal deliberations suggest this may not end quietly, yet the institution’s instinct for restraint remains intact — especially as both King Charles and Princess Kate have continued with scheduled public engagements, projecting calm professionalism in the face of the storm.
As Tugendhat put it, the monarchy’s strength has always rested on its endurance through adversity. “The King and the Princess of Wales,” he said, “have shown the sort of dignity and grace that define public service — even when the noise around them doesn’t.”
Whether the “translation error” was an accident or a breach of trust, the episode serves as another reminder of how fragile royal narratives remain in the global information age. In the space between rumor and reality, even a single misprinted page can reignite a controversy the Palace has spent years trying to quietly close.
Leave a Reply