In a surprising turn of events, a royal biographer has suggested that the recent actions of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex would have deeply unsettled Prince Philip, causing him to be greatly dismayed.
The couple, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, have generated significant attention due to their decision to rebrand.
They revamped their Archewell website to Sussex.com, emphasizing their ties to royalty.
However, this move has reportedly not been well-received within the Palace.
Additionally, according to an expert, another aspect of the couple’s rebranding is likely to have stirred disapproval from Harry’s late grandfather, Prince Philip.
This development has sparked discussions among royal commentators regarding the implications of the choices made by the duke and duchess, particularly concerning the usage of a specific image on their updated website.
One particular action taken by the Sussexes has raised eyebrows and drawn criticism from experts.
It harks back to a previous incident when Prince Philip was dissatisfied upon learning that his descendants would bear his wife’s surname “Windsor” instead of his own name, “Mountbatten.”
A compromise was eventually reached to honor Philip’s wishes by incorporating both surnames for his progeny.
Notably, Harry and Meghan’s children were initially named Archie Mountbatten-Windsor and Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor.
However, it has come to light that as part of their rebranding, the couple has opted to completely discard Prince Philip’s surname, replacing it with Sussex for their offspring.
Ingrid Seward, a respected biographer, expressed disappointment in a piece for the Daily Mail, remarking on the disregard shown by Harry towards his grandfather’s desires.
She lamented this departure from the family name that held such significance for Prince Philip, suggesting that he would be deeply troubled by this decision.
Another contentious issue on the revamped website of the non-working royals is the prominent display of the royal coat of arms.
This move has not gone unnoticed, with critics highlighting the perceived contradiction in the couple’s actions.
Author Angela Levin criticized the use of the royal connections that Harry and Meghan have previously distanced themselves from, implying a betrayal of the promises made.
The sentiment was echoed by Kinsey Schofield, host of the To Di for Daily podcast, who accused the couple of attempting to capitalize on their royal heritage despite their public aversion to it.
Schofield further questioned the authenticity of the couple’s intentions, suggesting that their choice to lean into their royal affiliations was a strategic move aimed at maintaining relevance.
She proposed that they could have opted for a fresh, American-inspired logo, akin to Meghan’s approach with The Tig.
Schofield characterized their actions as driven by a desperate desire to cling to their royal ties
