One of the more contentious aspects of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s exit from the Firm has been their continued use of their HRH titles and the word ‘royal’.
The debate around their honorifics – despite quitting the Royal Family – has been reignited after King Charles stripped his brother, Andrew Mountbatten Windsor, of the ‘prince’ title in an unprecedented statement.
Subsequently, a section of Daily Mail readers have suggested that Harry and Meghan should also lose their titles, considering their ‘appalling’ treatment of the monarchy.
Critics have also suggested the Duchess of Sussex, 44, is cashing in on her royal status to promote her lifestyle brand As Ever, after Meghan released a new ‘Signature Candle’ inspired by her wedding to Prince Harry.
According to royal author Tom Bower, senior royals and Buckingham Palace officials have long speculated on the Sussexes’ intention to ‘monetise the monarchy’ while noting their resistance to stop using their titles – despite the terms of the Sandringham agreement.
Mr Bower claimed the couple’s lengthy message about ‘stepping down’ was out of spite when the Palace insisted they shut down their Sussex Royal brand in February 2020 – following Prince Harry’s $1 million JP Morgan speaking event in Miami, Florida.
Taking a ‘swipe’ at the late Queen Elizabeth, they wrote that she had ‘no “jurisdiction” overseas over the word “Royal”‘ and ‘if they chose to use the word, the monarch – and the government were powerless’.
One of the more contentious aspects of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s exit from the Firm has been their continued use of their HRH titles and the word ‘royal’
In their statement announcing they would be ‘stepping down’ as senior royals, they took a ‘swipe’ at the late Queen Elizabeth II as they declared she had no ‘jurisdiction’ over the world overseas
‘After all, they emphasised, Harry was sixth in line to the throne and an HRH by birth,’ he summarised the statement that was criticised as ‘spiteful’ and ‘unnecessary’ by royal experts at the time.
Mr Bower noted that the 1,114-word statement barely concealed the Sussexes’ ‘simmering resentment’ against other members of the family, including Prince William and his wife Catherine.
At the time, a royal source noted it contained a subtle dig at ‘minor royals’ Beatrice and Eugenie.
They appeared to complain that the Palace is treating them differently from other family members, with the source claiming this was a reference to ‘minor royals’ like the York sisters.
The statement read: ‘While there is precedent for other titled members of the Royal Family to seek employment outside of the institution, for The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, a 12-month review period has been put in place.
‘Per the agreement, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex understand that they are required to step back from Royal duties and not undertake representative duties on behalf of Her Majesty The Queen.’
Speaking to The Mirror, a royal source said: ‘It’s pretty clear they are referencing minor royals such as Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie, which is an odd association to make for two people whose associates were once claiming they had single-handedly modernised the monarchy.’
While Princess Beatrice and Princess Eugenie will retain their royal titles in the wake of their father’s disgrace, royal experts have since claimed the scandal might have ‘tarnished’ their status.
Mr Bower noted that the 1,114-word statement barely concealed the Sussexes’ ‘simmering resentment’ against other members of the family, including Prince William, his wife Catherine. They are seen here with Elizabeth at the Queen’s Young Leaders Awards Ceremony at Buckingham Palace
The Duchess of Sussex with her mother Doria Ragland and Prince Harry as she held her then-newborn son Archie during a meeting with the late Prince Philip and Queen Elizabeth
Both sisters have paid full-time jobs but do not receive cash from the Sovereign Grant as they’re not working royals.
Harry and Meghan’s second statement about quitting The Firm presented as much more hostile than their first message about stepping back as ‘senior royals’ – but it was later revealed Queen Elizabeth had been ‘blind-sided’ by it.
Next January will mark six years since the Duke and Duchess of Sussex announced their plans to step back as ‘senior’ royals while working to become ‘financially independent’.
Mr Bower noted their plan to ‘carve out a progressive role’ within the institution, while splitting their time between the United Kingdom and Canada, was seen by many as ‘an insult’ to the Queen.
‘Their statement was read by the world as intended,’ Mr Bower reflected on Harry and Meghan’s message. ‘A deliberate challenge to the Royal Family.
‘Their promise of “collaboration” in a “progressive” future was, many thought, an insult to the Queen.’
This was the start of the ‘Megxit’ saga that brought Harry face-to-face with his grandmother, father and brother Prince William – as well as senior aides – for a tense meeting in Norfolk that was dubbed the Sandringham summit.
Ahead of the ‘showdown’, Mr Bower said Queen Elizabeth, Charles, and William were ‘puzzled’ about why a “progressive royal” would want’ the HRH title since they are ‘committed to changing an unequal society’.
Mr Bower also noted their plan to ‘carve out a progressive role’ within the institution, while splitting their time between the United Kingdom and Canada, was seen by many as ‘an insult’ to the Queen
He noted that the trio was also ‘concerned’ by Harry and Meghan’s ‘intention to “work to become financially independent” which they understood as a plan to ‘monetise the monarchy’.
They would have to, Mr Bower said, ‘strike a balance’ between ensuring the Sussexes remained ‘loyal’ to the Firm and stopping them from ‘”leeching” off the British taxpayer.
This meant either stripping Meghan of her title – and potentially ‘exciting’ those who felt Meghan was a ‘victim of racism’ – or allowing her to ‘keep the privileges’ that come with the title ‘without the responsibilities’ of it.
When the day of the summit finally dawned, Harry was driven to Norfolk to meet William, Charles, Elizabeth, as well as their advisors including Clive Alderton, Simon Case, and Fiona Mcilwham, he wrote.
There, they would learn that Harry was just as ‘uncompromising’ as Meghan in terms of his demands, as the Duke attempted to ‘persuade’ his grandmother that the couple could serve the monarchy in a ‘semi-detached manner’ from Canada.
Instead, he was given an ultimatum: ‘half-in, half-out was not possible.’
Harry was told, in no uncertain terms, that should the Sussexes leave the Firm, their financial support would be reduced, their honorary titles removed, and royal duties ‘sharply reduced’.
After lengthy discussions with his family, during which they held their ‘negotiating position’, Prince Harry returned to Vancouver, Canada, knowing full well his wife would be ‘raging’ at the terms of their exit arrangement.
Critics have recently suggested the Duchess of Sussex, 44, is cashing in on her royal status to promote her lifestyle brand As Ever, after Meghan released a new ‘Signature Candle’ inspired by her wedding to Prince Harry. They are seen here during a recent date night when they watched the LA Dodgers take on the Toronto Blue Jays during the World Series
Effective March 2020, the Sussexes would no longer be working members of the Royal Family and, therefore, would be unable to use their ‘HRH’ titles.
Harry would give up his military titles and Meghan, ‘her role within the Commonwealth’, Mr Bower summarised the agreement, as he noted: ‘They would repay the £2.4 million for rebuilding’ Frogmore Cottage and, after one year, lose all financial support.’
According to Mr Bower, ‘Harry assured his family’ that the couple would ‘never’ use their titles ‘to make money’ – but less than a month after the Sandringham Summit, Harry jetted out to Miami for the JP Morgan event.
‘Hosted by Gayle King, he flew to Florida on a private jet from Vancouver to earn an estimated $1 million for exposing his wounds,’ the biographer commented.
He recalled how Harry revealed he had been in therapy for seven years to process the loss of his mother, the late Princess of Wales during the keynote address.
Harry also told the crowd he did not ‘regret’ the Sussexes’ decision to step down as senior royals because it was taken to ‘protect his family’.
‘He does not want Meghan and their son Archie to go through what he did as a child,’ one source was quoted as saying at the time.
Mr Bower claimed palace officials were ‘aghast’ after Harry’s $1 million speaking engagement at an event for JP Morgan in Miami, where he spoke in detail about the ‘childhood trauma of losing his mother’ at an early age.
According to Mr Bower, ‘Harry assured his family’ that the couple would ‘never’ use their titles ‘to make money’ – but less than a month after the Sandringham Summit, Harry jetted out to Miami for the JP Morgan event. The Sussexes (centre) are pictured at a mental health awareness event in New York on October 10
This was, Mr Bower suggested, ‘exactly the commercialisation of the monarchy’ that Harry had vowed to avoid during his meetings at Sandringham in January 2020 – and yet, the prince was allegedly negotiating a lucrative contract for further speaking engagements.
Officials insisted that the couple’s SussexRoyal Instagram page – which had 11.4 million followers – and brand ‘be closed down’.
They were given a six-week deadline that they complied with, but Harry and Meghan did not go down fighting, Mr Bower insinuated.
Their statement, according to many experts, was something of a PR disaster for the couple.
Speaking to the Daily Mail at the time, Mr Bower said it had revealed ‘Meghan’s true nature and motives’ as he added: ‘Her comments about the Queen’s decision smack of spiteful fury.
‘I fear it will get worse.’
Richard Fitzwilliams, royal commentator and international editor of Who’s Who, said about the lengthier statement on their website: ‘It is completely unnecessary to add that.
‘Simply because it underlines their differences with the palace in a way that is avoidable.’
During happier times for the family, Queen Elizabeth was pictured with tje Duke and Duchess of Sussex outside St George’s Chapel in Windsor Castle, following the wedding of Princess Eugenie to Jack Brooksbank
Harry and Meghan first began using Sussex Royal in 2019 after they split their household from that of Prince William and Catherine’s known as Kensington Royal.
The Sussexes’ Instagram page, @sussexroyal, had amassed 11.2million followers at the time – the same number of fans as William and Kate’s account.
The following year, the Daily Mail revealed that the Queen and senior officials had decided the couple would have to drop their name.
A source told this newspaper at the time: ‘In many ways, this is inevitable given their decision to step down.
‘But it must surely come as a blow to the couple as they have invested everything into the Sussex Royal brand. The Queen would have had little choice, however.
‘The Sussexes’ original plan – of being half-in, half-out working royals – was never going to work.
‘Obviously, as the Queen has made clear, they are still much-loved members of her family.
‘But if they aren’t carrying out official duties and are now seeking other commercial opportunities, they simply cannot be allowed to market themselves as royals.’