DM: Queen Elizabeth wasn’t ‘angry’ about Lilibet’s name, but she was ‘upset’

5 months ago 36

ARTICLE AD

Over the weekend, the “story” broke: in royal historian Robert Hardman’s new biography of King Charles, royal sources insist that Queen Elizabeth II was incandescent with rage over Prince Harry naming his daughter “Lilibet.” We went through all of this in 2021 – Harry made it clear that he spoke to his grandmother and told her of his plans to give his daughter the Queen’s family nickname. At the time, royal sources screamed to everyone that QEII was not informed, oh wait she was informed but she hated it, oh wait she didn’t tell anyone about the conversation actually but still! Less than a year later, QEII and the Sussexes had a quiet meeting at Windsor Castle with zero leaks, and she personally invited them to her Jubbly. That June, Meghan and Harry brought their children to England for a days-long visit and QEII met her namesake.

Taking the larger view, it certainly feels like poor form for Charles’s supposed biographer to write stories smearing QEII as somehow enraged or inconsolable about her grandson naming his daughter “Lilibet.” At best, the story is true and it makes QEII seem petty, racist and ridiculous, especially given that her favorite son Andrew has been mired in controversy for years for rape and his associations with pedophiles. At worst, King Charles’s court is weaponizing his dead mother to badger and smear the son he exiled. Well, trust that Becky English at the Mail is on the case! English wrote a first-person account of all of this ridiculous bullsh-t, because I guess none of the royal rota want to write about Prince Andrew.

The Lilibet name: In fact, I understand the Queen was so upset by the Sussexes’ decision that she told aides: ‘I don’t own the palaces, I don’t own the paintings, the only thing I own is my name. And now they’ve taken that.’

The Sussexes were too Californian to understand how evil their actions were: Harry and Meghan would not have intended to cause her grief – over this, at any rate. Barricaded in their Californian cocoon, blanketed by the cosy schmaltz of their new showbiz life, it simply wouldn’t have occurred to the couple that such a gesture would cause offence. But it seems that it did – as well-placed sources made clear to myself and others at the time.

The BBC report: The national broadcaster’s royal correspondent, Jonny Dymond, reported being told by a ‘Palace source’ that the Queen was ‘never asked’ by Harry and Meghan about the use of her childhood nickname. Dymond said his source ‘disputed’ reports in the wake of the announcement of the name that Harry and Meghan had spoken to the Queen to garner her blessing. It’s what a lot of us were saying, one way or another, back in 2021.

Becky said the Queen wasn’t angry: In all honesty, I was not told at the time that the Queen was ‘angry’. That was not a word that was ever used to me, personally. But what at least two sources made clear – reluctantly, I might add, since in the wake of their score-settling Oprah interview, everyone at Buckingham Palace was treading on eggshells for fear of further hostilities with the Sussexes – was that the suggestion they had sought the Queen’s approval was a rather one-sided interpretation of what had actually occurred.

The Queen was merely taken aback: As it was described to me, the then 95-year-old monarch was taken aback when she was told by her grandson of his intention to give his daughter the name Lilibet in her honour but didn’t feel, given the circumstances, she could say no. You might describe it as being pushed into an impossible corner. And that certainly makes sense when you now consider her remark about ‘palaces and paintings’ which, as well as most of her jewels, cars and even furniture, were never hers to own. She was, in most respects, simply the conservator of them for future generations on behalf of the nation. However her pet name, Lilibet, which sweetly stuck after she could never pronounce her own name correctly as a toddler, was hers – and hers alone.

This makes zero sense: As someone who had enjoyed a faultless career as an international stateswoman, the elderly Queen, it seems, was still willing to bite her lip (publicly that is) – until she saw her name being weaponised by lawyers in a fight against the British public service broadcaster. And according to Robert Hardman, despite posting their good wishes on social media Buckingham Palace flatly refused to be ‘co-opted’ into ‘propping up’ Harry and Meghan’s version of events. They firmly ‘rebuffed’ their requests to do so, which ultimately, it seems, led the Sussexes’ threats of legal action to quietly dissipate.

It’s all the Sussexes’ fault! In truth, it is really rather sad that the name of a child continues to cause rancour. Little Lilibet deserves none of this. But the fact that loyal staff speak about it even now shows that many consider the Sussexes’ behaviour towards the late Queen to have been at best misguided and at worst unforgivable in the twilight of her reign.

[From The Daily Mail]

This is so utterly asinine, I barely have words. “Buckingham Palace flatly refused to be ‘co-opted’ into ‘propping up’ Harry and Meghan’s version of events…” The BBC lied, or rather, a palace source lied to the BBC and the BBC printed the lie that QEII was never asked. As English herself admits, Harry did ask. QEII “was taken aback when she was told by her grandson of his intention to give his daughter the name Lilibet in her honour but didn’t feel, given the circumstances, she could say no.” She’s admitting that Harry DID ASK. So the BBC lied, the palace lied, and Harry was telling the truth the whole time, huh? So English is admitting in her rancid way that the palace authorized and engineered a years-long public tantrum over an American baby’s name, and the palace is still blaming all of it for the Sussexes’ “unforgivable” crime of reusing a family nickname.

Incidentally, the whole “the name Lilibet is the only thing of her own” stupidity was said back in 2021, although they didn’t dare put those asinine words in QEII’s mouth. While the monarch is the “guardian” of all of those castles, paintings and jewels, let’s not forget QEII’s enormous personal wealth, private art, private jewelry and private homes. “The name Lilibet is all she had of her own, minus the billion-dollar personal fortune, millions of dollars of inherited jewelry, a huge Scottish estate and a huge Norfolk estate. POOR LILIBET!”

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.

Queen Elizabeth II leaves Sandringham House, which is the Queen’s Norfolk residence, after a reception with representatives from local community groups to celebrate the start of the Platinum Jubilee. The Queen came to the throne 70 years ago this Sunday when, on February 6 1952, the ailing King George VI – who had lung cancer – died at Sandringham in the early hours.,Image: 659601837, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: , Model Release: no, Credit line: Joe Giddens / Avalon

Queen Elizabeth II leaves Sandringham House, which is the Queen’s Norfolk residence, after a reception with representatives from local community groups to celebrate the start of the Platinum Jubilee. The Queen came to the throne 70 years ago this Sunday when, on February 6 1952, the ailing King George VI – who had lung cancer – died at Sandringham in the early hours.,Image: 659635986, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: , Model Release: no, Credit line: Joe Giddens / Avalon

Queen Elizabeth II during a reception in the Ballroom of Sandringham House, which is the Queen’s Norfolk residence, with representatives from local community groups to celebrate the start of the Platinum Jubilee. The Queen came to the throne 70 years ago this Sunday when, on February 6 1952, the ailing King George VI – who had lung cancer – died at Sandringham in the early hours.,Image: 659636049, License: Rights-managed, Restrictions: , Model Release: no, Credit line: Joe Giddens / Avalon

Windsor, UNITED KINGDOM – Members of The Royal Family attend day three of the Royal Windsor Horse Show, at Windsor Castle, Windsor, Berkshire, UK.  Pictured: Queen, Queen Elizabeth II  BACKGRID USA 3 JULY 2021   USA: +1 310 798 9111 / usasales@backgrid.com  UK: +44 208 344 2007 / uksales@backgrid.com  *UK Clients – Pictures Containing Children Please Pixelate Face Prior To Publication*

Windsor, UNITED KINGDOM – Members of The Royal Family attend day three of the Royal Windsor Horse Show, at Windsor Castle, Windsor, Berkshire, UK. Pictured: Queen, Queen Elizabeth II BACKGRID USA 3 JULY 2021 USA: +1 310 798 9111 / usasales@backgrid.com UK: +44 208 344 2007 / uksales@backgrid.com *UK Clients – Pictures Containing Children Please Pixelate Face Prior To Publication*

Windsor, UNITED KINGDOM – Queen Elizabeth II at Day Two of the Royal Windsor Horse Show 2022, at Windsor Castle, Windsor, Berkshire, UK.  Pictured: Queen, Queen Elizabeth II  BACKGRID USA 13 MAY 2022   USA: +1 310 798 9111 / usasales@backgrid.com  UK: +44 208 344 2007 / uksales@backgrid.com  *UK Clients – Pictures Containing Children Please Pixelate Face Prior To Publication*

Windsor, UNITED KINGDOM – Queen Elizabeth II at Day Two of the Royal Windsor Horse Show 2022, at Windsor Castle, Windsor, Berkshire, UK. Pictured: Lady Penelope Romsey, Queen, Queen Elizabeth II BACKGRID USA 13 MAY 2022 USA: +1 310 798 9111 / usasales@backgrid.com UK: +44 208 344 2007 / uksales@backgrid.com *UK Clients – Pictures Containing Children Please Pixelate Face Prior To Publication*