Queen Elizabeth II‘s fury over Meghan and Harry’s claim that she had given her blessing to their daughter being named Lilibet will have caused her ‘distress’ in her final years, a royal expert told MailOnline today.
A new book quotes an aide to the monarch who said she was ‘as angry as I’d ever seen her’ after the Duke and Duchess of Sussex publicly stated they would not have used her private family nickname if she had not been ‘supportive’.
Royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams told MailOnline today that he believes author and historian Robert Hardman has finally shed light on what the Queen really thought about the use of her nickname Lilibet by the Sussexes.
Mr Fitzwilliams said that it was ‘despicable’ for Harry and Meghan to ‘co-opt’ the name in this way if they had failed to get Her Majesty’s proper blessing first.
‘Robert Hardman is one of our most authoritative of historians. He quotes a member of the Queen’s staff saying she was “as angry as I’ve ever seen her” at the way in which Harry and Meghan handled this’, he said.
‘Lilibet was the charming and deeply personal childhood nickname which was only used by the Queen’s close family and her intimates. For the Sussexes to co-opt it in this way and then say it was with her blessing, was despicable if what the aide says is true. It was outrageous behaviour. It meant bringing distress to her last years’.
He added: ‘Their infamous interview on Oprah, in March of that year, had already made that clear. Their attacks on the royal family after they stepped down as senior working members of it, for monetary gain, was therefore totally in character’.
Mr Hardman’s new book, Charles III: New King. New Court. The Inside Story, reignites the row over the naming of Lilibet, who was born at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in California, on June 4 2021.
At the time the couple ordered their aggressive firm of lawyers, Schillings, to write to news broadcasters and publishers – most notably the BBC – saying claims she was not asked for permission were false and defamatory and should not be repeated.
But when the Sussexes attempted to ‘co-opt’ Buckingham Palace into ‘propping up’ their version of events, they were ‘rebuffed’.
The illuminating revelation comes in the latest instalment of a fascinating new biography by Mr Hardman, which is being serialised exclusively in the Mail.
It has already revealed a remarkable memo detailing the late Queen’s last moments, now contained in the Royal Archives, in which her private secretary recorded that she had ‘slipped away’ peacefully – but not before completing her last box of paperwork and leaving two sealed letters in it, one addressed to her son and heir.
Speaking to members of the Royal Family, friends and palace staff both past and present, Hardman’s insights into Harry’s relations with family members are captivating.
In 2021, his and Meghan’s decision to call their new daughter Lilibet, who was born in California and has only once briefly been to the UK, raised eyebrows.
Lilibet was the affectionate childhood nickname of the late Queen, said to have come about because as a child Princess Elizabeth could never pronounce her name properly. It was only ever used by her parents, King George VI, the Queen Mother and her sister Princess Margaret, as well as her husband, Prince Philip, and a handful of close friends.
At the time, the BBC reported it had been told by a palace source that the Queen was not asked by the duke and duchess if they could use the name. Other sources told media, including the Mail, that while the Queen was called by her grandson and his wife, she felt she wasn’t in a position to say no.
But the Sussexes’ spokesman insisted the couple would not have used the name had the Queen not been ‘supportive’.
They said at the time: ‘The duke spoke with his family in advance of the announcement – in fact, his grandmother was the first family member he called.
‘During that conversation, he shared their hope of naming their daughter Lilibet in her honour. Had she not been supportive, they would not have used the name.’
Strongly worded legal letters were then sent out.
Hardman writes that some of the late monarch’s household were particularly ‘interested’ that amid a wealth of private family information and criticism of staff members, Harry mysteriously ‘omitted’ the entire incident from his memoir.
The author says: ‘One privately recalled that Elizabeth II had been “as angry as I’d ever seen her” in 2021 after the Sussexes announced that she had given them her blessing to call their baby daughter “Lilibet”.
‘The couple subsequently fired off warnings of legal action against anyone who dared to suggest otherwise, as the BBC had done. However, when the Sussexes tried to co-opt the Palace into propping up their version of events, they were rebuffed.
‘Once again, it was a case of “recollections may vary” – the late Queen’s reaction to the Oprah Winfrey interview – as far as Her Majesty was concerned.
‘Those noisy threats of legal action duly evaporated and the libel actions against the BBC never materialised.’
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/articles.rss
Martin Robinson
