The Crown series three is set to premiere on Netflix next week, and royal fans are excitedly looking forward to the sumptuous fictional imagining of royal life. Matt Smith, who played a younger rakish Prince Philip in series one and two, hands over the reins to Tobias Menzies as the Duke of Edinburgh. He stars opposite Olivia Colman, who is already winning plaudits for her portrayal of the Queen.

However, although the programme sticks closely to some historical facts,  leading royal historian Hugo Vickers believes that series one and two got some things very wrong. 

In his 2017 book ‘The Crown: Truth and Fiction’, he argued that the earlier series of the hit Netflix show portrayed the young Prince Philip in an especially untrue and “cruel” way. 

Mr Vickers writes: “The cruellest and most undeserved victim of the series is Prince Philip.

“The Crown did a great job of reminding a younger generation that the Queen and Prince Philip were once young themselves.

“But sadly, there are many lapses into poor taste.

“Prince Philip [is] portrayed as a fractious, bumptious Jack the Lad, very much the villain.

“Watching the series, I failed to find the man who, in 1962, was advancing Anglo-German relations through remarks such as, ‘It may be difficult for people to see any virtue in forgiving one’s enemies, but let them reflect that it is much more likely to achieve a better future than stoking the fires of hatred and suspicion.’

“This fictional Prince Philip is little more than a self-centred philanderer.”

He continues: “The real Prince Philip told his biographer, Tim Heald, ‘I certainly believe in the need for a ‘free’ press, but there is a difference between freedom and license, and between the honest pursuit of the truth and the cynical pursuit of thoughtless – even vindictive – sensationalism.’”

The author concludes: “Fiction should help us understand the truth, not pervert it.”

In the series, viewers see the Queen discover a photograph of a Russian ballerina in Prince Philip’s luggage as he prepares to go on royal tour, leading to speculation that the Duke of Edinburgh may have indulged in an affair. 

However, Mr Vickers dismisses these rumours by proving the fictional affair could never have happened in real life. 

He writes: “Young television viewers will not have heard of Galina Ulanova, but she was immensely famous.

“Her 1956 visit with the Bolshoi was the culture event of the season, almost as exciting at the time as Nureyev’s arrival in 1962.

“Born in 1910, Ulanova was then 46 years old, and it is impossible that Prince Philip could have met her, as she had never been to England before.”

He also maintains that the prince and the dancer’s time in London only overlapped by a handful of days. 

He writes: “Ulanova arrived in Britain on October 1 and Prince Philip came down from Sandringham on October 9 and left for his trip on  October 15.” 

Mr Vickers adds: “Ulanova was accompanied on this trip at all times by her husband.” 

The author writes that the Royal Family did see the Russian ballerina dance – but Prince Philip was never in attendance.

Source: Read Full Article