How Omid Scobie’s Endgame rocked the monarchy – after Dutch translation named two ‘royal racists’ who discussed Prince Archie’s skin colour

When it comes to royal books, none have been as controversial recently as Omid Scobie’s Endgame.

Although royal watchers had initially canceled Endgame, the release and subsequent hasty withdrawal of the Dutch translation sent shockwaves around the world.

Two years after Prince Harry and Meghan Markle told Oprah Winfrey there were concerns within the Firm about ‘how dark’ their son Archie might be, Mr Scobie had apparently exposed two ‘royal racists’ after their names appeared in Eindstrijd.

And so began a back and forth between Mr. Scobie and the translator of the book, who blamed it on an error in translation; The former later confirmed that a ‘premature and unclear text’ had been sent to the Dutch publisher without his knowledge.

While unproven theories circulated that the ‘gaffe’ was a publicity stunt, Mr Scobie vehemently denied this.

Despite the global controversy, Endgame sold just under 6,500 copies in its first week of release on November 28, 2024, and was deemed by critics to be a ‘press release by ChatGPT’.

By contrast, Mr. Scobie’s first book about the Sussexes, Finding Freedom, sold 31,000 copies in its first five days, while Harry’s autobiography, Spare, sold 467,183 copies, making it the fastest-selling non-fiction book since records began in 1998.

If it weren’t for Endgame’s Dutch translation, the release might have gone relatively unnoticed outside the UK.

Royal fans in the Netherlands couldn’t believe what they read when they saw the alleged names of two royals speculating about the color of Harry and Meghan’s then-unborn child in translated copies of Endgame.

Mr Scobie went so far as to confirm that only two people were involved in the damning conversation in books available in England, adding that libel laws prevented him from naming them.

However, in the translated Endgame, their names were included in a section containing letters between the Duchess of Sussex and the current King Charles discussing the issue.

When the error was discovered, the book was quickly withdrawn; But rumors about the royal family’s identities spread quickly after TV presenter Piers Morgan first named them on his TalkTV show days later.

Mr. Scobie vehemently refused to include these names in the manuscript he initially submitted to his publisher.

However, Dutch translator Saskia Peeters, who worked on the book, later told The Daily Mail that this was incorrect.

Speaking from her home in Arnhem, she insisted that ‘the names of the royals were there in black and white,’ and that she ‘did not add them’.

In the UK copies, Mr Scobie claimed that two people were involved in the conversation but that libel laws prevented him from naming them. However, he claimed that his ‘identity’ was confirmed by ‘private letters’ in the Netherlands

‘I just did what I was paid to do and that was translate the book from English to Dutch.’

Mr. Scobie later admitted in a column:that i paper He said an ‘early’ and ‘uncleared’ draft was sent to translators in the Netherlands ‘without his knowledge’, which was never updated.

‘Other foreign language publishers, including France and Italy, were doing the same thing, but their own versions copied the completed work perfectly.

‘What I can be sure of is that I edited it carefully, took independent legal advice and the finished book I sent was not the version printed in the Netherlands,’ he said.

Mr Scobie explained that he was only working with the publisher responsible for the book in the UK and US. He also said he worked with lawyers for ‘almost two months’, so the book was ‘legally watertight’.

In the author’s acknowledgments, Mr Scobie admitted that the book was written ‘lightning speed’ and also noted the ‘crazy translation times’!

Mr Scobie’s publisher, Xander Uitgevers, who initially blamed a ‘translation error’ for the book’s withdrawal, rejected Mr Scobie’s public account of events.

Meanwhile, Ms Peters said she ‘didn’t know’ why the royal author had denied including the names in her draft.

Initially, Mr. Scobie vehemently denied the inclusion of names when presenting the completed manuscript of the book to his publisher. But Dutch translator Saskia Peeters (pictured), who worked on the book, later told The Daily Mail this was wrong.

He added: ‘I have been translating for years. ‘This is the first time something like this has happened.’

During an interview on ITV’s This Morning, Mr Scobie was asked whether the Dutch farce was ‘a stunt to sell books’.

The royal author strongly denied such speculation, adding: ‘I wish it were so’ and ‘the investigation is ongoing’.

He also claimed that both he and his book had been ‘unfairly’ criticized, adding: ‘I knew this book would be controversial over whether it was about race or the Palace’s relationship with the press. I never expected it to be presented fairly.’

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex claimed in their explosive interview with Oprah Winfrey in 2021 that there was a private conversation with Harry during Meghan’s pregnancy about ‘how dark’ Archie’s skin might be.

“At the same time, there are concerns and conversations about how he will not be given security, that he will not be given a title, and also about how dark his skin might be when he is born,” the Duchess said.

‘This was something Harry told me from conversations the family had with him.’

During the tell-all interview, filmed in California, Meghan refused to say who had these conversations with Harry, adding: ‘It would really hurt them.’

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex claimed in their explosive interview with US presenter Oprah Winfrey in 2021 that there was a private conversation with Harry during Meghan’s pregnancy about ‘how dark’ Archie’s skin might be.

Once the glaring error was discovered, the book was quickly removed from bookstores. While a version in which the two names were withdrawn was later restocked, the two names had already been shared around the world, including by UK television presenter Piers Morgan.

Shortly after the interview aired, a fiery Prince William publicly hit back at claims made by Harry and Meghan during the interview, insisting in response to a reporter: ‘We are definitely not a racist family.’

Buckingham Palace also released a statement on behalf of the late Queen, saying the “issues raised, particularly issues around race”, were “concerning”.

‘While some recollections may vary, they are taken very seriously and will be addressed privately by the family.’

He added that the Royal Family was ‘saddened’ to learn ‘how challenging the last few years have been for the Sussexes’ and concluded: ‘Harry, Meghan and Archie will always be much-loved family members.’

Two years later, in an interview with ITV’s Tom Bradby, Harry doubled down on claims that he or Meghan said the Royal Family was ‘racist’ during their interview with the American broadcaster.

Instead, the Duke claimed ‘disturbing’ comments made about his son’s skin color were about ‘unconscious bias’.

He continued: ‘Did Meghan ever mention they were racist?’

After Mr Bradby said the Duchess claimed offensive comments had been made about Archie’s skin colour, Harry responded: ‘There were – there were concerns about his skin colour.’

When Bradby said it was dangerous not to name the person involved, Harry said: ‘Yes, you’re right, the key word is concern, which was disturbing.

‘But when you talk to any other couple, mixed-race couple, anywhere in the world, you’ll probably find the white side of the family either openly discussing this issue or secretly discussing it, you know, ‘What are the kids going to look like?’ And that’s part of a bigger conversation that needs to be had.’

When asked if the Prince would describe such comments as racist, Harry was firm in his response.

‘I wouldn’t do it because I didn’t live in that family. The difference between racism and unconscious bias; ‘The two things are different.’

In a television appearance on GMA3, Mr. Scobie said he had “always wondered” why the couple never mentioned the remarks again after making them so public during their bombshell interview with Oprah Winfrey in March 2021.

‘Listen, there are a lot of people arguing, ‘It’s normal to talk about what a child might look like at birth.’ “But I think the problematic term Meghan put forward is that there were ‘concerns’ about Archie’s skin colour,” he said.

Mr Scobie, who is known to have a close relationship with the Sussexes, addressed claims in his book that King Charles and Meghan exchanged ‘respectful’ letters about the couple’s decision to make such damaging accusations so public.

He claimed Charles and Meghan had “disagreed” on the issue “to date” but doubled down on his claim that they had had a productive “conversation” about the Sussexes’ claims.

“To learn more about the letters shared between Meghan and Charles after the Oprah interview, they were able to at least share their questions and concerns about conversations that were happening within the family — even though neither of them would agree today,” she continued.

Scobie claimed in the sensational book that Meghan and King Charles now have a ‘pleasant relationship’ after having a ‘respectful back and forth’ via letter about two Royal Family members who made statements about Archie.

She wrote that Charles first reached out to Meghan in the spring of 2021 — shortly after the interview with Oprah aired — to express his “disappointment” that the couple “chose to make their remarks public.”

Scobie claimed sources told him Charles wanted to tell his daughter-in-law that he felt there was ‘no ill will’ when the two men allegedly commented on Archie’s skin colour.

He added that the letters were ‘respectful’ but ‘serious’, according to the source, and concluded: ‘I don’t know if they were both completely on the same page in the end, but at least there was a sense that they were both heard.’