Harry and Meghan likely caused Queen ‘distress’ in her final years over naming of baby Lilibet, royal expert says: Couple accused of acting ‘outrageously’ as aide says they caused monarch’s fury over claim she gave blessing to use childhood nickname

Queen Elizabeth II’s anger over Meghan and Harry’s claim that she had given her blessing to their daughter 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 as saying she was “as angry as I’ve ever seen her” after the Duke and Duchess of Sussex publicly stated they wouldn’t have used her private family’s nickname if she wasn’t “supportive ‘ Has been. .

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 Sussexes’ use of her nickname Lilibet.

Mr Fitzwilliams said it was “despicable” of Harry and Meghan to “co-opt” the name in this way if they had failed to get the right blessing from Her Majesty first.

‘Robert Hardman is one of our most authoritative historians. He quotes a member of the Queen’s staff who said she was “as angry as I’ve ever seen her” at the way Harry and Meghan were handling this,’ he said.

‘Lilibet was the charming and deeply personal childhood nickname used only by the Queen’s immediate family and her intimates. For the Sussexes to take over in this way and then say it was with her blessing was despicable if what the assistant says is true. It was outrageous behavior. It meant spending her last years suffering.”

A member of Her Majesty’s staff told Robert Hardman that the late monarch was “as angry as I had ever seen her” after the Duke and Duchess of Sussex publicly stated that they would not have used her private family nickname for their daughter if she hadn’t been. supportive’

A spokesperson for the Sussexes insisted they would not have used the name if the Queen had not been ‘supportive’, and they used a British law firm to warn the press that saying otherwise was false and defamatory.

He added: “Their infamous interview with Oprah in March of that year had already made that clear. Their attacks on the Royal Family after they resigned as senior working members of it, for financial gain, were therefore entirely out of 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 on June 4, 2021, at Santa Barbara Cottage Hospital in California.

At the time, the couple instructed their aggressive law firm, Schillings, to write to news outlets and publishers – particularly the BBC – claiming she had not been asked for permission, were false and defamatory and should not be repeated.

But when the Sussexes tried to ‘co-opt’ Buckingham Palace to ‘support’ their version of events, they were ‘rebuffed’.

The illuminating revelation comes in the latest installment of a fascinating new biography of Mr Hardman, published exclusively in the Mail.

A remarkable memo has already been revealed about the late queen’s last moments, now in the Royal Archives, in which her private secretary recorded that she had ‘slipped away’ peacefully – but not before filling out her last box of paperwork and sealing two had left letters. one addressed to her son and heir.

In conversations with members of the royal family, friends and palace staff past and present, Hardman’s insights into Harry’s relationships with family members are fascinating.

In 2021, his and Meghan’s decision to welcome their new daughter Lilibet, who was born in California and has only been to Britain briefly once, raised eyebrows.

Lilibet was the late Queen’s affectionate childhood nickname, which is said to have arisen because Princess Elizabeth could never pronounce her name correctly as a child. It was only 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 that a palace source had said the Queen had not been asked by the Duke and Duchess if they could use the name. Other sources told the media, including the Mail, that although the Queen received calls from her grandson and his wife, she felt she was not in a position to say no.

But the Sussexes’ spokesman insisted the couple would not have used the name if the Queen had not been ‘supportive’.

The first photo of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s daughter Lilibet was released in a Christmas card on December 23, 2021

They said at the time: ‘The Duke spoke to his family ahead of the announcement – in fact his grandmother was the first family member he called.

During that conversation, he shared their hopes to name their daughter Lilibet in her honor. If she hadn’t supported her, they wouldn’t have used the name.”

Strongly worded legal letters were then sent.

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 memoirs.

The author says: ‘One person privately recalled that Elizabeth II was “as angry as I’d ever seen her” in 2021 after the Sussexes announced she had given them the blessing to name 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 to support their version of events, they were rebuffed.

‘Once again it was a case of “memories may vary” – the late Queen’s response to the Oprah Winfrey interview – as far as Her Majesty was concerned.

“Those vociferous threats of legal action have disappeared and the defamation actions against the BBC never materialized.”