Princess Lilibet Scandal Tarnishing Queen’s Legacy

Queen Elizabeth II’s reaction to Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s choice of baby name has leaked more than a year after her death prompting some to question the impact on the late monarch’s memory.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex called their daughter Lilibet, which was the queen’s nickname among her closest family and friends.

Princess Lilibet’s birth announcement in June 2021 sparked a major argument when a palace source told the BBC that Elizabeth was not asked for permission when Prince Harry phoned to inform her of their choice.

Senior Daily Mail features writer Robert Hardman says in his book out on Thursday, The Making of a King: King Charles III and the Modern Monarchy, that a palace staff member “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 Queen’s childhood nickname.

“The couple had 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,” Hardman wrote.

However, the leak has itself sparked a backlash with some suggesting the palace staffer quoted risked tarnishing Elizabeth’s memory.

Omid Scobie, whose own book Endgame caused a furor in November and December, wrote on X, formerly Twitter: “None of these Lilibet ‘revelations’ are doing the late Queen Elizabeth II any favours. Not only do they contradict details shared by the Palace with a cooperatively written biography in 2022, they also depict the monarch in a way the public haven’t known her to be.”

Gyles Brandreth’s 2022 biography, Elizabeth, gave a slightly different account, suggesting she took the name as a compliment, though it did also note that she “accepted their choice with a good grace” and felt the shorter “Lili” seemed “just right.”

Needless to say, the queen was famous in Britain for keeping her opinions private and no doubt could have asked her staff to include her anger in the briefing they gave the BBC had she wanted that detail known.

Not all agreed, however, and Celia Walden, the wife of outspoke Harry and Meghan critic Piers Morgan, wrote in The Daily Telegraph that she felt Meghan specifically was attempting to construct a narrative about her own proximity to Elizabeth.

“We’ll never know the truth,” Walden wrote, “but the intention behind the use of that name seems as clear as day: so close were Meghan and the Queen, so informal was the relationship between these two ‘gal pals’ that they knew and used well-worn terms of endearments in one another’s company.

“Why does that implication suggest Megan’s involvement more than it does Harry? Because, in my experience, mothers tend to have far more sway than fathers when it comes to choosing baby names.”

“As with so many areas of her detailed life plan,” she continued, “the Duchess of Sussex will likely have been thinking ahead to her future in the US and the narrative she would run with there. To the books, the Netflix narcissist-umentaries and the talk-show circuit we have to look forward to. One that will, doubtless, last a lifetime.

“So important was it seemingly to carve out the narrative put forward so stridently to Oprah and ensure it was set in stone—Meghan and the Queen would share blankets in cars; Meghan was literally just on the phone to her—that the couple even ordered their lawyers, Schillings, to write to publishers and news broadcasters such as the BBC claiming the Queen was not asked for permission, and insist those claims were defamatory.”

Jack Royston is Newsweek‘s chief royal correspondent based in London. You can find him on X, formerly Twitter, at @jack_royston and read his stories on Newsweek‘s The Royals Facebook page.

Do you have a question about King Charles III, William and Kate, Meghan and Harry, or their family that you would like our experienced royal correspondents to answer? Email [email protected]. We’d love to hear from you.