The late Queen Elizabeth II, known for her stoicism and unwavering commitment to the crown, may have harbored a deep-seated caution toward her youngest grandson in her final years. According to a new account by royal biographer Hugo Vickers, the monarch reached a point where she avoided taking Prince Harry’s calls alone, insisting that a lady-in-waiting be present during their conversations.
The claim, detailed in the book “Queen Elizabeth II: A Personal History,” suggests that the relationship between the sovereign and the Duke of Sussex had deteriorated to a level of distrust that necessitated a witness. Vickers argues that the distress caused by Prince Harry and Meghan Markle during the Queen’s twilight years was significant, describing the pressure placed on the monarch as “unforgivable.”
This reported shift in the Queen’s behavior followed a series of public ruptures, most notably the couple’s decision to step back as senior working royals in 2020 and a subsequent, explosive televised interview. While Buckingham Palace and representatives for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have declined to comment on the book’s claims, the narrative offers a glimpse into the private toll of the “Megxit” era on the woman who reigned for seven decades.
From left: Queen Elizabeth II, Meghan, Duchess of Sussex and Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex watch a flypast to mark the centenary of the Royal Air Force from the balcony of Buckingham Palace on July 10, 2018, in London, England. The couple stepped back as senior royals in 2020. (Max Mumby/Indigo/Getty Images)
A breakdown in trust after the Oprah interview
The catalyst for the Queen’s reported caution was the 2021 interview with Oprah Winfrey. In that sit-down, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex aired several grievances and made allegations regarding the inner circle of the royal family, including claims about the skin color of their son, Archie. The interview reached an estimated 50 million viewers worldwide, creating a public relations crisis for the monarchy.
According to Vickers, this “bombshell tell-all” fundamentally altered the Queen’s approach to her grandson. He writes that “whenever Prince Harry called his grandmother, she asked her lady-in-waiting to stay with her.” This tactical move was not merely about protocol but was a reflection of the Queen feeling “rather cautious” about the nature of their private conversations and how they might later be interpreted or disclosed.
The Queen’s public response to the controversy was characteristically understated. She used the phrase “recollections may vary,” which Vickers describes as a polite but firm way of acknowledging the discrepancy between the Sussexes’ version of events and the palace’s own records.
The ‘half-in, half-out’ conflict
The rift did not initiate with the interview but was rooted in a fundamental disagreement over the nature of royal duty. Vickers claims that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle proposed a “half-in, half-out” arrangement, which would have allowed them to maintain official royal roles and duties while simultaneously pursuing financial independence and private commercial ventures.
The Queen, acting on advice from her private secretary and other senior aides, reportedly rejected this proposal. The monarchy’s stance was clear: royal duties are a full-time commitment. Vickers notes that the Queen gave the couple a year to determine if their “exile” would work, but once it became clear they intended to remain in North America, Harry stepped down from his official positions in England.
This transition saw Harry move from being a highly popular working royal to a private citizen in Montecito, California. Vickers claims the Queen privately remarked to a friend that Harry had “turned into a kind of childminder,” a comment that suggested she viewed his shift away from public service as a loss of purpose.
In his new book, Hugo Vickers claimed Queen Elizabeth II wouldn’t take Prince Harry’s phone calls unless a lady-in-waiting was present. (Chris Jackson/WPA Pool/Getty Images)
A history of early warnings
While the public rift peaked in the 2020s, Vickers suggests that tension existed from the start of the couple’s relationship in 2016. He notes that several figures close to the prince, including his father, King Charles III, and his brother, Prince William, reportedly urged Harry to slow down the pace of his courtship.
The book claims that the Queen herself suggested Harry wait a year before marrying Meghan. Even the wedding in 2018 was reportedly a source of quiet friction; Vickers writes that the Queen disliked the wedding dress, describing it as “too white” with “ungainly shoulders.” He quotes a source close to the monarch stating her attitude toward the ceremony was: “You get on with it. It’s nothing to do with me.”
The friction intensified as the couple’s public image shifted. Prince Philip reportedly dismissed Meghan as “the American,” while other palace staff used the nickname “Sparkle.” These early dynamics created a fragile foundation that struggled to withstand the pressures of the British press and the rigid expectations of the royal institution.
The weight of a final reign
To understand why the Queen Elizabeth II avoided taking Prince Harry’s calls alone, it is necessary to view the Sussex conflict within the broader context of her final years. The monarch was not only dealing with family strife but was also navigating the political turmoil of Brexit and the controversies surrounding Prince Andrew.
Vickers reflects that the Queen should have been “sailing into sort of sunlit uplands” during her Platinum Jubilee, but instead found herself managing multiple crises. The publication of Harry’s memoir, “Spare,” in 2023—which became the fastest-selling non-fiction book ever—further solidified the divide, though it arrived after the Queen’s death in September 2022 at the age of 96.
The cumulative effect, according to the biographer, was a monarch who felt deeply distressed by the loss of a “highly useful” working royal and the public nature of the family’s internal struggles.
As the British monarchy continues its transition under King Charles III, the legacy of these tensions remains a central theme in the royal narrative. The next major checkpoint for the family will be the upcoming series of official state engagements and the continued management of the Duke and Duchess’s relationship with the crown from California.
Do you feel the monarchy’s rigid rules are still relevant in the modern era, or was the ‘half-in, half-out’ proposal a missed opportunity for evolution? Share your thoughts in the comments.
Keep reading
