Jan Moir: The name ‘Lilibet’ was all the Queen had which was hers alone

Queen's Christmas broadcast

Can you even imagine throwing an international, transatlantic hissy fit over a baby’s name? Wouldn’t you, at some point, just say “you know what, even though I don’t care for the name, a baby is a blessing and God bless”? It’s shocking how so few of the royal commentators, royal journalists and actual royals have been able to do that. After spending this past week throwing a massive tantrum about whether or not Harry informed his grandmother about the name “Lilibet Diana,” one of the top stories on the Daily Mail today is “JAN MOIR: Lilibet is not just a name… Harry has stolen the Queen’s crown jewel.” R U serious? Apparently. The argument Jan Moir makes is that “Lilibet” belonged to the Queen alone because it was a family nickname, no one else can ever use it and it was supposed to be buried with her. And Harry “stole” it. I’m not going to post the entire thing, but here are some notable parts:

During a life devoted to public service and being on almost permanent display, Lilibet was the one thing the Queen had that was entirely her own. It was hers, and hers alone….It was also a private endearment uttered throughout more than 70 years of marriage by her husband who, may I remind certain parties, is recently deceased. Elizabeth may Regina, but Lilibet was something more sublime.

No, it does not appear on patents or seals or official documents, but it was her signature on the most personal of correspondences. It was the cipher that spoke of the bonds of family and also of the flesh and blood woman behind the throne, under the crown, beyond the castle moat. Its use was restricted. It was a tender diminutive spoken only by those who knew and loved her.

And now it is no longer hers, its emotional exclusivity shattered; targeted and then blown apart like a clay pigeon. The jury is still out on whether using the name for the new baby Sussex is a deliberate act of marketing strategy and self-interest or an innocent tribute from a loving grandson that has gone awry. No matter whose side you are on it is clear that whatever it was, it no longer is — its private significance lost forever to the braying world.

Poor Lilibet! She has conducted herself with impeccable discretion and good sense during a faultless 69-year-reign, but once more she is dragged into the bear pit by Harry and Meghan who somehow always do so much harm, under the guise of trying to do so much good.

What is puzzling is that if the Sussexes wanted to name their baby in honour of the Queen — and what a lovely thing to do — there are many non-contentious Elizabethan options. Heavens to Betsy! I lost count at 20, including Thea, Tess and Isabella, not to mention the lovely Scottish Elspeth and Ailsa, the French Elise plus a solid Beth, Liza with a Z, Busy Lizzie and Betty Boop to boot. But no, nothing would do but the one name that would do untold damage, the one name that should have been off-limits, the one name that anyone with a drop of sense would realise was personal, untouchable, just let it go.

Like jewel thieves stealthily reaching in to unshackle the Cullinan Diamond from the grip of the State Crown, the Sussexes only wanted the best for themselves, the choice royal plum in the Windsor pudding.

[From The Daily Mail]

If you ask me, I think everyone throwing a tantrum understands the fundamental reason why Harry chose “Lilibet” and not “Elizabeth” or a variation of her formal name. They understand that Harry was delineating between “his grandmother” versus “the Queen.” He was using a family name so it would continue with his daughter, as opposed to “the Queen’s name.” And that’s what has bothered all of these people too, that despite Harry’s criticism of his family and the institution, he genuinely has so much affection for his grandmother. And so they’ve set out to separate Harry and his grandmother, by any means necessary. Because they don’t want him to “have” or “own” any part of his grandmother. They’re so hellbent on punishing him. That’s what this is too.

Also: “Lilibet was the one thing the Queen had that was entirely her own. It was hers, and hers alone…” You know, except for the personal fortune of hundreds of millions of dollars protected for decades by a succession of Tory and Labour governments’ tax schemes. You know, except for her personal collection of jewelry and art work, and her vast personal real estate holdings. And, you know, all of her horses, dogs, books, children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren. Except for all that, the name “Lilibet” was all she had.

Note by Celebitchy: Sign up for our mailing list and get the top 8 stories about the ridiculous controversy over Lilibet Diana’s name! I only send one email a day after lunch.

Royal Ascot, Portrait of HRH Queen Elizabeth the Second behind TRH Harry the Duke of Sussex and TRH Meghan the Duchess of Sussex

State Opening of Parliament

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.

Related stories

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

287 Responses to “Jan Moir: The name ‘Lilibet’ was all the Queen had which was hers alone”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Merricat says:

    My wish for these people is that they would see how the rest of the world views them: absurdist racists whose purposeful self-isolation will mean the end of their own power.

    I don’t know what else to say about this kind of person. Jan Moir should see a doctor, and she should take the royalists with her.

    • Liz version 700 says:

      Thank you exactly right!

    • DuchessL says:

      The courtiers think they can still do what they want. They have no idea how they are destroying their own crown/monarchy/firm. So stupid. The world is seeing the truth of their spite and they still have no idea.

      • Cecilia says:

        This is what i said yesterday. How the queen is allowing her staff to make a spectacle of the institution she devoted her life to is beyond me.

      • Nina says:

        @Cecelia. Is it possible that the Queen is a shadow Regent and has for all intents and purposes relinquished control to Charles but for tax purposes and her oath at her coronation cannot and will not abdicate? What we are seeing is the first years of Charles’s reign and it is already a disaster.
        She is a 95-year-old woman, grieving for her life partner. I am sure she is pretty happy with her grandson’s decision on a name for his daughter.
        These rota rats should just shut up. They are unhinged. I have several nieces and a grandniece who were named for our gran and every time she was chuffed about it.

    • Dierski says:

      100% Merricat. I know we see it so clearly in the US, hopefully the rest of the world does too.

    • Kebbie says:

      What she has written is truly so deranged. It’s hard for me to believe anyone is reading it and nodding along in agreement. But I guess when your brain is poisoned day in and day out by this stuff it just seems sane after awhile? That’s the only explanation I can imagine for how anyone saw this fit to print.

      • Christine says:

        Deranged is exactly the right word! This lady sounds as nutty as a hardcore Trumper, and that is a feat.

      • observer says:

        ” But I guess when your brain is poisoned day in and day out by this stuff it just seems sane after awhile? ” — that’s what successful gaslighting does

    • Coco says:

      My wish is that she rewrites her will and leaves everything to her new great-granddaughter.

      • Cherriepie84 says:

        Queenie is not going to rewrite aby will in favor of the Sussexes. Betty Betty is the Trojan Horse in the BRF…trust that all this backlash over baby Sussexes name is sanctioned by betty. This was her FU to Harry and Meg after the Oprah interview and the Apple series….hypocrite is thy name queenie. We should stop making excuses for her as she has one aim and that is to preserve the monarchy.

    • minx says:

      The notion that this obscenely wealthy, pampered, elitist person has only a childhood nickname as the one thing that is “all hers”—my eyes are rolling out of my head.

    • Victoria says:

      That how Black people feel about OUR land and manes and culture. Shame, Lizzie and her ancestors didn’t think about that.

      • Christine says:

        Nicely done!

        ETA: The full blow of your comment just keeps washing over me. My God, the utter irony, Black people weren’t even allowed NAMES, whining about the territorial rights of the most privileged woman on the planet’s nickname is beyond unhinged.

    • Nev says:

      just racism taking another form.

    • Pat says:

      You are a billion times correct. Something is wrong with that entire family. The concern should be about tainting the genes of the person that marries in their family. They are strange to say the least but there’s many other words that would describe that family. Harry and Diana was the absolute best they had to offer.

    • Lilibetp says:

      I hate to be the bearer of evil tidings, but the Queen isn’t the only Lilibet in history.

      • JanetDR says:

        Right?! This is unhinged! And deeply weird.

      • Christine says:

        I know this is entirely my petty side, but I’m sort of hoping it becomes a trending dog name. It would serve these a holes right for Lilibet to be the next Buddy.

      • Dawning says:

        @ Christine, OMG you are not alone, I was just thinking that if it were not for my respect and love for H&M, I would give my next dog the name. Just to p1ss off the Brits, of course. I respect H&M too much. Baby girl Sussex is going to make that name a badass respectable name.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        Right! Probably many unrecorded before QE2. Current history shows that Lilibet Foster was named after the Queen-are they going to make her parent’s renounce her name? I’m kind of wanting to see all Lilibet’s step forward-similar to the scene in To Wong Foo, Thanks for Everything! Julie Newmar, when the townspeople all come out and say, “I’m a/the drag queen.” and the one character says, ” Whatcha so afraid of?”.

    • LahdidahBaby says:

      Perfect, Merricat–perfect.

    • missskitttin says:

      The lilibet scandal is a distraction tactic from this “Restrictions on British-produced chilled meats entering Northern Ireland are due to come into force at the end of the month, triggering talk of a so-called “sausage war”.

  2. Vivica says:

    My palace sources say “Oh FFS.” ::facepalm::

    • Tom says:

      I’m by Chicago and Royal Crown cola is the closest I get to aristos. This makes me practically a palace source.

      Here’s my take and you may quote me: HRH Lilibet is delighted with little Lilibet. She plans a California vacay probably next winter to meet her namesake and soak up some rays.

    • purple prankster says:

      FFS lol! Lilibet isn’t even a nice name imo but in the hands of Harry and Meghan it becomes a choice plum. hehehe

    • Truthiness says:

      Exactly! Oh FFS is what I’ve said to most RF stores. Full Disclosure: My name is Elizabeth, I am Elizabeth at work and LinkedIn. My brothers turned my name into Buff in my first year of life because they were 1 and 3 and enunciating wasn’t perfected yet. Turning Elizabeth into a nickname is incredibly common. When I went to kindergarden they tried telling me that my name was Beth and here is how you write it. I told them my name is Buff and this is how you write it. So family and friends use my nickname with my mom saying the nickname was my “real name.” Should anyone want to use my nickname — sweet! Hamster, potted plant, rock in the driveway, whatevs. You’re also welcome to use Buffer, the Buffer, Bufferine and Bufkatoof. Passing on a name is a non-story, holy sh*t. Denying a biracial great grandbaby – from a much beloved grandson – a shared identity and connection is profoundly reprehensible, especially when other great grandchildren are using similar names for their middle name. Do you want to deny Mountbatten-Windsor next?

  3. Amelie says:

    What unhinged lunacy.

    • BlueToile says:

      You are right that it is unhinged and lunacy, and I am not sure we should be laughing and mocking it. This is exactly the type of rhetoric that can get people killed. Using words such as “theives” who have stolen the Crown Jewel and comparing H&M using this particular name to “stealing” from the Queen, it really speaks to some people. Saying that H&M “do so much harm” to the Queen. It is sickening and dangerous. These people really will not stop until one of them is dead. Seriously. I am not being dramatic here. We all saw what this type of speech does to people on Jan 6th in DC. I cannot even imagine how much pain these new parents must be feeling. We all think they are so strong and don’t pay attention to this bunk anymore, but they are human with all the vulnerabilities we share. Somehow, someway, this all has to STOP. The Royal Family allowing this to continue is evil and very telling.

      • AD says:

        At this point, doesn’t matter. The monarchy as we know it all shrouded in secrecy never complain, never explain is dead anyway. I don’t see it lasting forever after the Queen is gone.
        Gen Z’s are not impressed and are not likely to be. The world is changing so the Conniving Vipers can have the stage as very soon the lights will go out. Boom!

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Blue Toile, I agree. That’s why I think if H&M go the UK for any reason they need to leave Archie and Lilibet Diana in California. And, it’s why I think they should see the Queen privately and not put in any appearance at the formal public displays. If they want to be there to support TQ they can do that privately. Frankly, I think TQ would enjoy that so much more, too. The BM and rrs have engendered hate and death threats–I think they do it on purpose. Nothing would make them happier than to have M and their children dead. And, make no mistake, if anything happens to one member of his family, he will burn the palaces to the ground. And, probably the BM and rrs with them.

      • BlueToile says:

        Saucy, I have never seen anything like this campaign of hate and denigration against H&M. It is just scary. As for the RF, they should gave shut this down long ago, but evidently they are all just really enjoying all of this. I am afraid that the rest of the world does not see the truth, does not see the racism, the betrayal by his family, and somehow think that H&M deserve whatever they are getting. After Trump, I have very little faith in people. I am not on social media of any kind. What percentage of people are really against this couple?

      • macko says:

        There is precedent for this kind of fantastical opining. Go back to Post Diana/Charles divorce. The editorials of how Diana was a threat to the monarchy and an outsider throwing stones at the throne and bent on bringing down the house of Windsor, is the same treatment that her son is now getting. Now they have culprit to blame, Meghan, the American ‘who has poisoned his mind’ according to Levin. The fact that Harry has exhibited his antipathy to the people who run the firm(as his mother so eloquently call them the ‘men in grey suits’), means all these royal experts have selective memory of all that Harry has said and feel wary of all his life BEFORE MEGHAN. As for Moir, she is such a harridan on bile, she is a witches coven with Angela Levin and several other too many to list.

    • keroppi says:

      Oh no! I’ve dropped all these straws I’ve been grasping!

  4. Bryn says:

    These people are getting increasingly desperate and grasping at straws about a baby name. Its unbelievable and absolutely psychotic.

  5. Cecilia says:

    A literal horse was named lilibet. Please miss me with this

    • Liz version 700 says:

      Her horse! The woman who only has her name’s horse!

    • SarahCS says:

      Can those with twitter please remind this lady of that fact?

      • Izzy says:

        Done, I just replied to the MailPlus tweet. These people are so dense, light bends around them.

    • equality says:

      It’s not a popular name but others have used it as a baby name also. Is the author in favor of searching them all out and making them change their children’s names, especially since any others wouldn’t be related to HM. This is truly becoming insane.

      • Nyro says:

        According to Caribbean Twitter, it’s not all that uncommon among elderly women there. These people are nuts acting like she’s the only Lilibet in the world and owns the name of something.

      • Feeshalori says:

        Apparently it is favored for royal racehorses too.🙄

    • lisa says:

      there was an actress named Lilibet on young and restless when I was a kid. also it is my cat’s name and she is very regal in her own right.

    • lucy2 says:

      LOL! We should start bombarding these royal hanger on idiots with ridiculous stuff:
      OMG that horse stole her name! Should everyone yell at the horse? (I assume it depends what shade of brown the horse is…)

      • BlueToile says:

        Help me out on this horse situation. Did the Q name one if her horses Lilibet? When was this?

      • Kebbie says:

        I think her father named one of his horses Lilibet after her when she was a kid. Someone can correct me if I’m wrong.

    • Abby says:

      Lol! Yes!!

  6. Anna says:

    OMG the whining from Jan Moir is soo annoying, I rolled my eyes to the moon and back.

    • Dierski says:

      Lol, me too, Anna! First headline I happened to see this morning, and I almost sprained an eye…

  7. LaraW” says:

    I thought Kate was the crown jewel.

    Ms. Moir gets to the heart of the BM’s existential crisis, admitting that H&M are part of that exclusive club of “those who know and love” Lilibet and were allowed use of the “tender diminuitive.”

    Also if I didn’t know better, I would have thought this a piece of satire a la Jonathan Swift’s “Modest Proposal.” Which incidentally, is also about babies.

    • Thirtynine says:

      Honestly, I thought this too. No-one can have written this with a straight face, surely.

      • Carty says:

        She don’t have a straight face. Seriously, google her picture. Hate makes them so unfortunate looking 😬

    • Lizzie Bathory says:

      I actually think much of it is satire, though Moir is happy to swipe at Harry & Meghan. I think the talk of the Harry stealing the crown jewel–right after we were told that Kate is the very same–is mocking. And, I mean, suggesting Lilibet is off limits, but it would have been “lovely” to choose “Busy Lizzie [or] Betty Boop” as tributes to the Queen? I’m waiting for the commenters who thought Lilibet was “rude” to the Queen to reemerge as #BoopTruthers.

      This reads to me as a piece written by someone tasked with trashing the name choice but who also knows the whole “controversy” is nonsense.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        @Lizzie Bathory-Love this post and pretty much agree. The over-the-topness of it all. The whole much ado about a baby’s Name is ridiculous. It read to me like some of the great funny posts around here. Very tongue in cheek. At least I hope so.

      • Christine says:

        I really and truly hope you are right.

    • Dierski says:

      “I thought Kate was the crown jewel.” Nearly spit out my coffee, LaraW! 😂

  8. truthSF says:

    “And now it is no longer hers, its emotional exclusivity shattered; targeted and then blown apart like a clay pigeon. The jury is still out on whether using the name for the new baby Sussex is a deliberate act of marketing strategy and self-interest or an innocent tribute from a loving grandson that has gone awry. No matter whose side you are on it is clear that whatever it was, it no longer is — its private significance lost forever to the braying world.”

    Hahahahahahahha! They’re grasping at anything to attack the Sussexes (especially Meghan and the kids)! Only they’re the ones who look petty, deranged, and desperate, not H&M!!!

    • Dierski says:

      That section is especially unhinged, good lord!! Grasping, desperate, petty, deranged = BRF

      • Lorelei says:

        I honestly wish we could somehow see what the reaction would have been from these exact same people if the Cambridges’ had come up with “Lilibet” first.

    • Moir is literally frothing at the mouth. The excerpt above sounds like pulp fiction at its worst. The tabloid hysteria is pathetic, but — hey — it’s a paycheck. What’s that old saying about, “Only mad dogs and Englishmen go out in the noon day sun.” I think their little 🐀brains are permanently fried at this point.

  9. MsIam says:

    Except for that pony, lol! Better a horse share the name Lilibet than her own flesh and blood I guess, especially if that flesh and blood is black. These drama queens. F ‘em.

  10. Liz version 700 says:

    Dear Lord do these folks have a life?!? It has been a week now of trying to make the richest woman in the world into a victim to somehow punish a 7 day old baby to get back at her parents! Enough …. God supposedly created the universe in 7 days they should be able to learn to let it go! They have made this family a stand in for all of the filter wars for the entire salty parts of the world. Enough!

    • Indywom says:

      it just goes to show the rest of the royals are so boring that these people have to pick a one sided fight with Harry and Meghan. Someone should tell them that Harry and Meghan won the fight when they left. I seriously can’t believe how stupid these people are. This is what happens when there is a lack of diversity and ideas.

      • Liz version 700 says:

        “Harry and Meghan won the fight when they left.” This times 1000. The Bye Bi$ch heard round the world.

  11. ThatgirlThere says:

    Now she and her great grandbaby girl share it. Move along royal press. Lilibet is a week old today and is on the cusp of being an icon.

    • Becks1 says:

      That’s what’s kind of funny, right? If the name had just been announced and that was it, the majority of people would have moved on. Now there are people who are not royal followers who are like, whats the big deal about Lilibet? Her name is Lilibet? Lili Diana is a lovely name. etc. All of *this* is unhinged and insane and omg they are racist and salty, but its also making the baby into an international star at a week old.

    • Beach Dreams says:

      Lol seriously. At this rate they’re going to make her into one of the most famous members of the royal family before we’ve even seen her.

    • TeamMeg says:

      When do we get to see a picture? That’s what I’m waiting for… this name parsing is ridiculous.

      • JT says:

        @Beach Lili Di is well on her way to being iconic. Nobody really cared what the Keens named their kids; they certainly didn’t get well over a week of coverage about it. Even Archie’s name was discussed for quite a while. I said yesterday that it’s fitting that the child of the most famous royal couple will have the queen’s personal nickname.

      • Lorelei says:

        @TeamMeg I presume that as soon as they realize that their manufactured drama over the name has gotten tired (which was days ago), they’ll move on to braying about how disrespectful it is, somehow, that the Sussexes haven’t released a photo of Lili yet.

        Then we’ll get bitching about that until they think of yet something else the Sussexes should be crucified for. My guess is they’ll go back to talking themselves blue in the face about whether or not Harry will be at the statue unveiling, or go all in on where Lilibet’s christening will be.

        (Spoiler alert: no matter when or where the christening is, somehow they’ll find a way to claim that it was “disrespectful to the Queen.”)

  12. Solidgolddancer says:

    Pathetic. It’s a baby! These people have lost the plot.

    • Heat says:

      I agree completely! Are they THAT desperate to find any possible crumb to turn on Harry & Meghan?
      I have no doubt that “granny” is absolutely thrilled about the name. But that wouldn’t sell any stories, I guess.

  13. Feebee says:

    What a load of bollocks. God, they’re really laying it on thick. The name was not unique to her. Faultless 69-year reign? Yeah, nah.

    • BothSidesNow says:

      @ Freebee, yes, a faultless 69 year reign, nope, that is not right either. The entire so called journalists is the UK has gone bonkers or have become straight jacket yankers, have your pick. They are all unhinged and must truly have nothing else to right about and must find anything to bring against Harry and Meghan. They are mad that their golden geese have flown far away from them and are willing to issue warnings with their ludicrous lies!!

    • Moneypenny says:

      Yeah, I stopped reading at that point. I can’t believe anyone, even monarchists who love the Queen, would say it has been a faultless 69 years. Any credibility this “journalist” could’ve had went out the window there.

  14. Becks1 says:

    I am sure this is appealing to a certain segment of the british public, but for the rest of the world……it seems unhinged. American media and blogs etc are laughing at them.

    I mean this part right here:

    ” It was the cipher that spoke of the bonds of family and also of the flesh and blood woman behind the throne, under the crown, beyond the castle moat.” That’s the whole point, that’s why Harry is using Lilibet and not Elizabeth. He wants to honor the “flesh and blood woman” and the “bonds of family” and not the queen. No, he wasn’t going to name her Elise or eliza or anything else.

    And then this:
    Like jewel thieves stealthily reaching in to unshackle the Cullinan Diamond from the grip of the State Crown, the Sussexes only wanted the best for themselves, the choice royal plum in the Windsor pudding.

    Like…..do these people hear themselves?!!!??!?

    • truthSF says:

      This person was clearly in the middle of ✍a novel, and midway decided to change the characters to H&M!!!😂🤣🤣

      • Becks1 says:


        Also let’s talk about the Cullinan diamond while we’re talking about what the queen has that’s “hers alone,” since she personally owns at least two of the cullinan diamonds (I think there is one in the state crown and scepter that is part of the crown jewels, but she owns others as part of her personal wealth.) Like, let’s remind everyone of the jewels that the Queen owns.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        QEII owns Cullinan III & IV out right: Per my research:

        The Cullinan III and Cullinan IV “only” weigh 158 carats (31.6 g) total. That is why the two diamonds are called the Lesser Stars of Africa. With a very British sense of humor, one could call them “chips,” compared to the first two. King Edward gave the “chips” to the Asscher Brothers as their fee for cutting the original stone. After the nation of South Africa purchased the cuttings or “chips” (Cullinan III thru Cullinan IX) back from the Asscher Brothers, the nation South Africa gifted the gems to the Queen Mary. In 1911, she wore the two-diamond clip set (Cullinan III and IV) at her coronation in Westminster Abbey.

      • Becks1 says:

        @Bay – yup, she wears them as a brooch. As.a.brooch.

        But sure, all she has is a nickname.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        The Cullinan III & IV are mounted as two separate diamond “clips” that can be worn together as one brooch or separate as two brooches. Queen Mary often wore the Cullinan III clip and Cullinan IV clip as two separate brooches. The Queen Mother did not wear them that often (maybe once or twice). QEII has always worn the two “clips” as one brooch.

        The word “clip or clips” when describing jewelry is a British word not often used in the USA when describing jewelry.

        Here is the link to the Cullinan IX which QEII has worn quite often: https://www.rct.uk/collection/themes/exhibitions/diamonds-a-jubilee-celebration/buckingham-palace/cullinan-ix-ring

      • Becks1 says:

        @Bay lol yes the point is that QEII personally owns some of the most priceless diamonds in the world, not how her mother or grandmother wore them. But I love your commitment.

    • Merricat says:

      I’ve read better on the back of a cereal box. Gothic “journalism?”

    • SarahCS says:

      Again, they need to be careful where they shine the light if they want to start talking about ‘stolen’ jewels, antiquities, riches….

    • Over it says:

      Funny part of this is most of those jewels were stolen from other countries. Does Jan really want to go there? The entire British monarchy is built on theft of people and other countries property

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Many of the jewels were stolen or looted from other countries but this in the case with the original Cullinan raw uncut diamond.

        The Cullinan Diamond was the largest gem-quality rough diamond ever found, weighing 3,106.75 carats (621.35 g), discovered at the Premier No.2 mine in Cullinan, South Africa, on 26 January 1905. It was named after Thomas Cullinan, the mine’s chairman. In April 1905, it was put on sale in London, but despite considerable interest, it was still unsold after two years. In 1907, the Transvaal Colony government bought the Cullinan and then presented it to Edward VII, King of the United Kingdom, who had it cut by Joseph Asscher & Co. in Amsterdam. King Edward died in 1909. The Cullinan I and II are now considered Crown Jewels or Jewels of the Crown. Cullinan III thru Cullinan IX were given to George V. See my comment below on Cullinan III thru Cullinan IX.

      • Becks1 says:

        Meh I would argue that there is something fishy in spending that much money on a diamond to turn around and gift it to the king. I don’t think it was done bc they loved him so much.

        Regardless she said “most” of the jewels so we don’t need to get overly bogged down into details. I never should have brought it up at this point 😂😂

      • Lorelei says:

        @Becks, no, I’m glad you brought it up! This conversation is very entertaining (and informative, tbh)!

      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Lorelei and Becks1- The raw Cullinan diamond was given to Edward VII by the Transvaal Colony Government not long after the second Boer War. The Transvaal Colony Government was attempting to “make nice” with the UK government thru the monarch, Edward VII. In lieu of a cutting fee the clippings or “chips” were given to Joseph Asscher & Co, This does not bother me at all as it seems a clear transaction.

        What bothers me is that the “clippings or chips” were purchased after the cutting of the stone then given directly and “personally” to Queen Mary. This is where I see some shady shenanigans.

    • Robyn says:

      The DRAAAAAMAAAA of it all!

    • SenseOfTheAbsurd says:

      This is legit some of the craziest shit I’ve ever read. Nothing these people can’t turn into Royal Fanfic Melodrama Theatre of the Absurd.

      From the outside, it looks like the UK is having some kind of collective psychotic breakdown, and all the rational people are essentially hostages.

  15. Mina_Esq says:

    lol your last paragraph is fire! These people are psychopaths. This is the most deranged take on this issue that I’ve seen.

  16. Mina_Esq says:

    lol your last paragraph is fire! These people are psychopaths. This is the most deranged take on this issue that I’ve seen.

  17. Likeyoucare says:

    They do sound like clowns, shrieking at the air and kept changing stories because H&M debunked them.
    There are no accountability for any of the rotas and shame that US medias didnt challange them at all.

  18. Peanut says:

    I actually laughed. Out. Loud. When I read that bc it is just so stupid. They should be so embarrassed.

    • Dierski says:

      Me too, Peanut – I didn’t think the articles could get worse after yesterday… they did it! Rock bottom.

      • Wrin says:

        Me three, Peanut. At this point, I just want a plastic knife to slice my jugular over all of this bs over the baby’s name. Is the British news cycle this freakin slow that “Lilibet-gate” is the show pony for a week?

  19. SlipperyPeople says:

    Lilibet is a terrible name, so she should be honoured that anyone would want to use it. I’m glad H&M are calling their daughter Lili. And I’m glad they got away from that terrible family.

    • tempest prognosticator says:

      I agree with your whole comment.

    • lucy2 says:

      Personally I don’t care for it either, but I too like Lili.

    • (TheOG) Jan90067 says:

      Personally, I don’t care for “Lilibet” at all (though I really like Lili a lot (and Lili Diana sounds so graceful and delicate)), but FFS, if TQ really “loves” her grandson, and this is a PERSONAL gesture between the two, WHY THE HELL DOES SHE NOT ISSUE A STATEMENT?? MAKE A FRIGGIN’ VIDEO MESSAGE (and we KNOW she goes on TV to do her Christmas speeches), and just say something to the effect: “My GRANDSON honors me, choosing to name his child after me with my childhood name. It is a lovely, loving gesture, and I am thrilled to welcome Lilibet Diana into my family.”

      She needs to say SOMETHING.

      This would shut ALL of this shit down stat.

      If my family caused my wife to almost commit suicide, let alone while carrying my first child, AND *NO*ONE* helped (and in fact, piled on and gave NO support), not alone wouldn’t I “honor” them with naming my child after them, but I wouldn’t even be speaking to them ever again!

      But I guess I’m just petty that way.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Jan if that makes you petty, I’m right there with you. I think it’s appalling that Betty has let this go on for almost a full week now without so much as issuing one sentence of support.

      • Lady D says:

        Agree with everything you said. It is time and past flipping time Her Maj spoke up. Twenty to twenty five years from now when the House of Windsor implodes for good, I hope it’s traced back to the queen not speaking up in defense of her newest family member.

      • Saucy&Sassy says:

        Frankly, I’m starting to think that she’s not allowed to make a statement. I think the grey men and either or both PC and PW are making sure there is no statement. Or, the congratulations on BP’s social media is her statement. Maybe that needs to be retweeted more often.

      • SenseOfTheAbsurd says:

        Her Maj has been out in public for G7, cameras and reporters crawling all over the place, but has said nothing.

      • TeamMeg says:

        I agree. Only QE2 can lay this mess to rest. What is the point of even being the QUEEN of England if you don’t have the power to shut BS like this the F down?

      • Truthiness says:

        TQ never comments on personal matters, whether it is about husband cheating, son cheating, son’s marriages, son bringing pedophiles to the palace, son being a pedophile, son getting money for palace access, it is a long list. It is a boundary issue. If she loses THAT boundary, there is a world of shady behavior up for discussion. I wish she would comment but I also hate it when people want to push and trample my boundaries.

  20. truthSF says:

    “Poor Lilibet! She has conducted herself with impeccable discretion and good sense during a faultless 69-year-reign, but once more she is dragged into the bear pit by Harry and Meghan who somehow always do so much harm, under the guise of trying to do so much good.”

    Y’all, I’m dying!!🤣 “Faultless”…except for when the institution was found to have blocked POC from getting hired during her reign, and not defending her biracial granddaughter-in-law and great-grandson from years of racist abuse. And oh yeah…her Nonce of a son! But of course it was a faultless 69-year-reign!

    • Salma says:

      I can’t think of one thing that the queen did for progress:women’s right,gay rights,minorities..Rien de rien..She is just there….She has poor leadership qualities,she is not super bright,she is not educated:during her reign she was just a puppet for the establishment and for all the fancy things she had or all the titles she has or her family have,she and her family are not respected:they are used for entertainment and mockery

      • Alexandria says:

        Hmmm now you got me thinking. If they were not related, would Harry and Meghan like or respect someone like Liz??

      • Salma says:

        Liz has nothing admirable about her:born in the ‘right’ family(not for me but for others), alive since 95 years , reigned during 69 years,wearing fancy clothes and blood diamonds and crazy jewelry,taking gifts(jewels,horses….) from the Saudis and all those shady families or dictators(we blame Andy but he just learned from the best with all his sheenanigans)…She didn’t do anything when Margaret Tacher was wrecking England with her policies even though allegedly she hated her…She has no power and she is just there for the establishement to keep their wealth and their status and she lives by the monarchy even if it is super absurd(the ‘duty’ to rob ppl)…If Kate is modeling herself on her,she is doing great:she is wearing fancy clothes,talking with peasants and wearing jewelry of dubious orign…maybe the ‘work’(she bothers to interact less with peasants)
        She did volunteer during the war,I give her that…

      • Lorelei says:

        @Salma “She was just there” is the perfect summary of her entire reign. If reigns had taglines, this would for sure be hers.

    • windyriver says:

      Well, “never put a foot wrong” was already taken, so…faultless it is. Both equally absurd to describe the people they refer to.

  21. Shannon says:

    It amazes me how much attention is given to Harry, while Pedo Andy is just going about his day undisturbed.

    • MsIam says:

      Almost seems like it was planned that way doesn’t it.

    • My3cents says:

      Lets give people a stupid made up “crisis du jour” to make them forget the most important and horrible stories out there about this family and institution.
      The deflection is insulting.
      I’m just sorry that little Lilli will probably read all these unhinged stories about her one day.

    • Dierski says:


    • SarahCS says:

      And that’s the crux of the whole relationship between the BRF and BM. Toxic.

    • Eurydice says:

      Oh, I think Andrew will be disturbed once the Maxwell trial starts – that, and the Disney+ docuseries on Maxwell.

  22. Sofia says:

    Oh please it wasn’t a private nickname. I mean sure only a select group of people could call her it but *we* all knew that her nickname is Lilibet. So not that private.

    And for the last time, Philip didn’t invent the nickname. It was a childhood nickname that was in use before Philip even met Elizabeth. So stop that narrative please.

  23. BayTampaBay says:

    I always love it when Kaiser post pictures of the BRF that include a glimpse David Rocksavage Cholmondeley.

  24. SarahCS says:

    My first thought when I saw the headline was ‘who owns the gold piano???’ So OUTSTANDING picture choice yet again.

    As for these whiny racists, they have made it clear they are never going to stop and while they are enabling/empowering some (see also Trump), my fervent hope is that this open activity will help the more middle of the road fence sitters understand how bad it truly is and start to feel angry and thee are far more of those.

    • My3cents says:

      Who own that gold piano? She who has nothing but her name left.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        The Crown owns that Gold Piano in the same way the White House owns the Lincoln Bed. The Gold Piano originated with Victoria & Albert.

        Queen Victoria’s gold piano: The White Drawing Room is one of the most opulent state rooms at the palace and its standout piece is a stunning grand piano made for Queen Victoria.

        Built by the company S & P Erard in 1856, it was gilded by François Rochard and decorated with elaborate oil-painted scenes of cherubs and singeries — humorous vignettes of monkeys playing musical instruments and causing trouble.

        The piano was regularly used by Queen Victoria and Prince Albert, both accomplished pianists who enjoyed playing together.

        QEII does NOT personally own the gold piano.

  25. Water Bearer 💧 says:

    These people are disgusting but this stuff drive sales and clicks. Two we know the daily fail has an agenda against the Sussexes which got even more hateful when they lost those court cases. This kind of negative commentary gives legitimacy to the racist anti Meghan haters on and offline. I’m despairing. It’s so wrong.

    When Lilibet gets older she is going to know that there were people out there who believe her name is an insult to her father’s much loved grandmother. Disgraceful.

  26. Noki says:

    I honestly hope Meghan especially at this emotional time, is one of those people who can genuinely kill all the noise. Block,mute or stay away from all the toxicity online and also tell her friends not to engage her in any nonsense. This is complete madness!

    • Becks1 says:

      My guess is that’s part of why lawyers were deployed so fast – they’re handing this mess over to their legal team. and I also think Harry is probably the point person, I hope Meghan is just sitting in a glider or on a porch swing or wherever drinking iced coffee and rocking her baby.

      (iced coffee always reminds me of maternity leave lol bc my first was born in mid-may, and i spent a lot of time at my parents house on the water that summer and my mom always brought me iced coffee as I was nursing or rocking him.)

    • Snuffles says:

      I do. I really do. She and Harry have their little piece of paradise. Their daily lives involve each other, their children, dogs, rescue chickens, friends and work they are passionate about. She is no longer cut off from the love and support of friends and family. She’s home. She’s back in control of every aspect of her life.

      They probably have their PR and Schillings monitoring the press to keep an eye out for libel and only hear about what they might consider actionable.

      I doubt they are marinating in this bucket of crazy on the daily like we are.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Snuffles “marinating in the bucket of crazy” is such a perfect description, and you’re right. Yet here we all are 😬

    • Tammy says:

      Harry said during ‘The me you can’t see’ that she saw the headlines about the interview and that she cried all night and she knew about ‘cry Kate story’ so she knows about some stories..to what extent,don’t know but like you said I hope she is not aware of all these ‘names problems’ stories who just seems unhinged and crazy

      • Snuffles says:

        That crying Kate story is like the thing that wouldn’t die. I’m convinced remote tribes in Africa with no technology probably heard that story. The Amish even knew. There was no avoiding it.

      • BayTampaBay says:

        Who cried all night?

        Did “she” cry all night after or before the Oprah interview?

      • Tammy says:

        @Bay Meghan cried..Harry said that he woke up to Meghan crying in her pillow and they talked and she cried and cried

      • ABritGuest says:

        It was the smears before the Oprah interview (bullying claims, Mohammad bin Salman’s blood earrings etc) that Harry said had upset her in The me you can’t see.

        Hopefully they are focused on their family & letting their team handle this although wouldn’t have to if his dear granny threw him a bone for once. I don’t like the full name Lilibet (Lili is nice) and am meh on Betty from what I’ve seen of her as a grandma let alone monarch. but for whatever reason Meghan did light up taking about her on Oprah & Harry seems to have a good connection with her. So it’s typically entitled of palace sources & the press to think they have any say about what parents names their own kid.

        Interestingly enough a U.K. govt minister met Mohammad Bin Salman this week & doesn’t even look like this meeting got any media attention when you’d think journalists would be on the government’s ass because of the awful murder of their colleague Jamal Khashoggi. So much for checks & balance by the 4th estate. The government clearly benefit from an invisible contract too.

      • Feeshalori says:


      • BayTampaBay says:

        @Tammy – Thanks for the clarification. I could not follow the post. I did not know which crying episode was being discussed.

    • Beach Dreams says:

      Same. I hope Harry is the one dealing with this nonsense and that he’s shielding her as much as possible.

  27. Zaya says:

    All the queen has (save for the millions and power) is her nickname…that she shares with a horse. No one else can have her name ever, especially not her own great granddaughter 🙄

  28. Miranda says:

    “It was the cipher that spoke of the bonds of family and also of the flesh and blood woman behind the throne, under the crown, beyond the castle moat. And now it is no longer hers, its emotional exclusivity shattered; targeted and then blown apart like a clay pigeon.”

    Damn, that is some purple-ass prose. Even Amanda McKittrick Ros would tell her to dial it back a bit.

    • LaraW” says:

      You have to admit it’s quite evocative. I now have a mental image of Charles shooting clay pigeons named Lilibet, since he was the first to break those beloved blood bonds and criticize his mother publically about her maternal shortcomings.

    • BayTampaBay says:

      And the critics and Daily Fail racists actually complain that Megan writes in a “word salad” mode.

      • Lorelei says:

        Seriously, these are the same people who complain that MEGHAN’S writing is “too flowery??”

  29. SusanRagain says:

    The tabs, the talk show hosts, these daily mail writers, Dianas former butler, the endless book authors rehashing old stories, that awful sister/father constantly selling stories and giving their 2 bit opinions, plus the media paps, etc. they are all making money by using the BRF and H&M.

    If no one would give this crap clicks or attention and stop buying the books maybe, maybe the world would keep turning. lol
    Ugliness and endless trash talking to make money.

    I’m starting to think that H&M are now going to be more hounded for decades because they stepped down.

    • Alexandria says:

      If they did not step down, they will still get hounded as much and it could really get worse after the Queen dies. The Palace refused to protect them then unlike what was promised to Meghan. That won’t change after Queen dies.

      They are in a much better place now. Their kids are not safe on salty island and it would be even harder for Harry to provide private protection for them because his job opportunities would be severely limited by the institution. He would then be held hostage by his father, brother and even sister in law and her mother! Just so that he can get some money to get private protection for the kids. That’s no way to live. This would stress their marriage because both of them have to sacrifice themselves to be under the bus and then generational trauma because their kids are next as scapegoats.

  30. Amy Bee says:

    Harry naming his daughter Lilibet makes liars of the courtiers as well as the British media who have said for months that the Queen was unhappy with Harry, that their relationship is no longer close, that she was involved in the decision to not allow Harry to be a part-time royal, to strip him of his military titles and patronages and to ban his participation in last year’s Remembrance Day service. I think the real anger behind this whole thing is Harry has exposed that the Queen is no longer in charge. He hinted at it in the Oprah interview but I think his desire to honour his grandmother in this way shows that she still supports him and they remain close. I think Harry will be totally done with the rest of the family when the Queen dies.

    • MsIam says:

      “When the Queen dies”? Why wait?

      • Amy Bee says:

        @Msiam: He’s almost done with the family now. He loves and respects the Queen only. When Harry put out his statement regarding his decision to step back he spoke of a desire to continue to support the Queen not the Royal Family. It’s the Queen that keeps that link alive and the reason why he hasn’t totally cut ties yet.

      • Beach Dreams says:

        Because he loves her and she’s probably the only living family member he loves unreservedly. He strongly gave that impression when he talked about her and Philip in the Corden and Oprah interviews. At the time I got the keen (lol) sense that he was waiting for them to pass before cutting off the RF completely. I know we’ve all discussed his desire to work things out with Charles but I don’t think that involves coming back for the RF in any capacity. Not after everything that happened post-Oprah interview (which was filmed in February, before that awful bullying smear).

    • Merricat says:

      +1, Amy Bee

    • Alexandria says:

      Think Harry will still be close to Eugenie I guess.

      • Humbugged says:

        The Sun was trying to drag Bea into a row between them this week after Eug sent a great message out about the baby .Bea is realy pissed with Harry becoz of made up shit

  31. OriginalLala says:

    if “Lilibet” is the Queen’s crown jewel and the “only” thing that is hers, then I guess she’s cool with returning all the stolen jewelry she hoards?

    • Miranda says:

      I was actually reading about Queen Mary just the other day, and her habit of “gifting” other peoples’ jewelry and objets d’art to herself whenever she visited a stately home. She was awfully brazen about compelling her hosts to pay tribute.

      • Lorelei says:

        @Miranda if this was in a book you’re reading, by any chance, please drop the name because it sounds interesting!

      • Feeshalori says:

        I’ve always read stories that people had to hide their favorite possessions when Queen Mary came visiting because she’d persuasively acquire them for herself. She wasn’t called the Magpie for nothing!

      • notasugarhere says:

        A beautiful amethyst parure came in to her possession in a similar way. It was a prize for some auction – and the host just ‘happened’ to pick her ticket after she expressed her admiration for it. Sold off to cover some debts of the Queen Mum.

        Anna Wintour has been seen wearing the necklace. Sorry the tiara hasn’t surfaced at an auction to be bought by another royal house. It is one of the prettiest amethyst ones out there.

  32. Smices says:

    This shit is mad dramatic.

  33. Normades says:

    These “ journalists ” are completely unhinged.

  34. MsIam says:

    This is reminding me of that episode of Seinfeld where George Costanza wanted to name his yet unconceived kid “Seven” and he pitched a fit after Susan’s friend or family member “stole” the name, lol. These Rota rats are all being very George like imo. And frankly if one of her “white” family members was named Lilibet they would be going on and on ad nauseam about how “Now the name Lilibet will live on!” Assholes.

  35. KT says:

    Jan Moir will forever be remembered for declaring that Stephen Gately’s (member of the boyband Boyzone, and the first boyband member to ever come out as gay while the band was actually active) tragic early death from an undiagnosed heart condition was ‘anything but natural’ after the coroner ruled it was due to ‘natural causes’, just because he was gay and in an open relationship.

    She is a bigot.

    • February-Pisces says:

      Yes whenever I see Jan Moir’s name I always think about what she said about Stephen Gatley. She is truly disgusting.

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      What Moir wrote about Stephen Gately is unforgivable.

      I don’t care for her negative stories about Harry & Meghan, she has written unfavorable articles about William and courtiers-which most here would agree with. She does seem to like Kate or feel sorry for her-maybe she has a point, can’t say I agree.
      A writer from The Guardian was upset with one from 2011. The link to Moir’s story is in the Guardian’s story.
      The other article that was interesting was from 2016 when Will & Kate went to the Taj Mahal. If you search Jan Moir Prince William Taj Mahal it should come up. She really isn’t kind to William in the story.

      It does seem like she she is making fun of the hoopla over Lilibet’s name while trying to appear that she’s questioning Harry & Meghan’s decision making.

  36. Over it says:

    So it was restricted to those who knew and loved her all except for her grandson Harry who married a woman of color and then went on to have children with her, is that correct? So if I am to read the bold print, if Harry had just married a white English rose then all this non-shit about a frigging name won’t ever have been a problem.

    • Myra says:

      This is what all this is about. The person who is carrying the legacy of “Lilibet” forward is a person of mixed race. Their precious queen is forever linked to the mixed race branch of the family tree. After all their tantrums, the name Lilibet has grown on me. I don’t even want to call her Lili, anymore. Baby Lilibet it is.

  37. Alexandria says:

    I’m convinced these clowns and fools are propped up by exoskeletons because their backs have broken from all the reaching and twisting from the past 3 years. Spineless, soulless cowards indeed.

  38. BW says:

    That’s rich, considering it’s Queen Elizabeth THE SECOND. Royalty lives to have someone named after them.

  39. aquarius64 says:

    Lili is one week old today and this is still an issue? The REAL issue is a child (actually two) of African American lineage are legitimate blood relations to the Queen of the United Kingdom. Therefore they are successors to the British throne. Lilibet cements that tie. Archie’s middle name Harrison (son of Harry) cements his tie as a son of a British blood prince and heir to the title Duke of Sussex. The RRs are showing their behinds to the world…as usual.

  40. Jess says:

    Oh give me a break. Who cares about nicknames like this? Oh wah wah poor queen who will probably be dead in a few years has a great grandkid named lilibet who goes by Lili anyways. Wah wah.

    Imagine saying the richest woman in the world, with the most prolific land ownership of anyone alive, only has a childhood nickname

  41. Jay says:

    I know the queen’s MO is not to be confrontational, but this is getting ridiculous. Baby names are not a zero sum game! I think most grandparents would see this as the honour and gesture of love this was clearly meant to be, or at least have the good taste not to complain openly if they don’t see it that way. Think how likable the queen was for sending a waffle maker to Archie – a baby with her nickname? A chance to run cute photos of the beloved monarch and her family, emphasizing stability and continuity? They should be all over this for a boost of goodwill.

    Who is running this shambles? Who thinks hinting that the monarch is so fragile that she would be insulted by sharing her nickname with her newest great granddaughter is a good look? Or alternatively, that she’s so hard of hearing and out of it that she didn’t understand the name. Who thinks that’s helpful?

    My theories are 1. The press is trying to bait Meghan and Harry into suing, so even when they lose, they’ll have Sussex content for the lean years to come.
    Or 2. The queen really is past it, Charles has secretly been discharging her duties more and more, and various reporters are hinting at exposure, which is why the palace has to stay mum.

    • Salma says:

      The Queen will never say a word to defend Harry and he probably knows it,even if she was younger(with all her ‘head’ and senses) and even if she is fond of Harry…Her first priority is the crown and the monarchy,she believes it’s her duty and it’s probably the most important thing to the world:you can’t reason ppl who thinks like that,that’s just what they believe….and all those PR shenanigans we are seeing is also her doing:Charles is probably the regent now but he inherited the mess and all those backstabbings methods from the queen who reigned during 69 years:I am sure it’s just chaos there because she isn’t a great leader and she will never go against what courtiers are spewing cause it will be going against the monarchy.She will always protect Charles or William even if she likes Harry:Crown and monarchy before everything even beloved family.

      • Elsavita Williams says:

        The Queen has defended some people that I have read about. Paul Burrell , Prince Andrew and Kate Middleton when she was photographed topless when in France on holiday.

        A. https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/queen-saved-man-jail-intervening-23525437
        B. https://www.thecut.com/2021/03/the-palace-protected-prince-andrew-but-not-meghan-markle.html

        Excerpt from the Press:

        As the Evening Standard reports, the reporter lied on his application form and gave a fake reference yet was responsible for serving the Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip breakfast. The Royal Household quickly won a High Court order, reports the BBC, banning the newspaper from printing any more inside details. It also announced plans to sue.

        But a few days later, the queen settled the legal action after the reporter and the newspaper promised not to disclose further information. They also paid 25,000 pounds toward the monarch’s legal fees, notes the Telegraph.

  42. Amy T says:

    What did I just read? Moir’s prose is a deeper purple than the the royal robes. @Cecelia – thank you so much for the info on the horse. After I finished guffawing, I thought, “Anyone who names a baby after Jan Moir will be a horse’s ass….”

    Then I imagined teenage Lili and Archie asking their parents why they left, and this scene played in my head.

    H&M walk the kids down a long hall in an unused part of the house and stop at a door they’ve never thought much about.

    “But Mom,” Lili says, “That’s a junk room.”

    “Yes dear, it is” Meghan says.

    “And it’s time for you and your brother to spend some time here,” Harry tells them. “When you’re done, Mom and I will answer any questions you may have.”

    {Meghan opens the door. On the walls are shelves filled with bound magazines, neatly stacked newspapers and a row of portable hard drives in boxes, all neatly labeled. In the middle of the room is a conference table, a pair of upholstered reading chairs face the window.}

    “Have fun, kids!” Harry says.

    Archie & Lili stand in the doorway watching their parents walk, arm in arm down the hall, Harry leaning down to hear what Meghan is telling him.

    Archie turns to his sister.

    “Let’s get started, then.”

  43. Snuffles says:

    Shakespeare has entered the chat to tell Jan to stop being so dramatic.

    • Lorelei says:

      @Snuffles this just made me laugh so hard, oh my god 😭

    • LaraW” says:

      O Lilibet, Lilibet, wherefore art thou Lilibet?
      Deny thy duty and refuse thy reign.
      Or if thou wilt not, be but sworn monarch
      And you’ll forever be Elizabeth.
      ‘Tis but thy name that is thine identity:
      Thou art a symbol, though not a grandmother.
      What’s Lilibet? It is nor unique nor sacred
      Nor cipher nor affection nor endearment
      Belonging to a horse. O be Betsy, Bess, Betty Boop.
      What’s in a name? That which we call Regina
      By any other name would be a peasant;
      So Lilibet would, were she not Lilibet call’d,
      Retain that bright Cullinan which she owns
      With that title. Lilibet, doff thy name,
      And for that name, which is no part of thee,
      Take all the Crown.

  44. Jais says:

    “The sussexes only wanted the best for themselves, the choices royal plum in the Windsor family.” So she is admitting that Lilibeth was the most choice and best name of all the Windsor family and they wanted it all for themselves? More choice than Elizabeth or Charlotte or Gabriella or Beatrice? I mean someone could have used it before if they wanted. But oh yeah no one else even thought of it.

    • Lorelei says:

      @Jais I think you hit the nail on the head. What’s hilarious is that I’m sure that b!tch Jan doesn’t even realize what she accidentally just did there. It’s actually an enormous compliment to Harry and Meghan, lol.

      • Jais says:

        Right? She basically admitted that Harry and Meghan’s daughter has “the most choice royal plum,” and “the crown jewel” of royal names. Sure Jan, you said it.

    • Merricat says:

      Lol. If any of the duller Windsors had actually thought of using the name themselves, they’d be congratulating themselves from now to autumn.

  45. La says:

    I just keep thinking of the saying “you die a second time the last time someone says your name”. By naming the baby Lilibet her beloved nickname, and by extension memories of the queen, lives on. I would hope and suspect she thinks of it that way rather than something was stolen from her.

    • Alexandria says:

      If Queenie is indeed being two faced with Harry and Meghan as some speculate here, I would really pity Lili! If so and if it were me, I would change my name because I wouldn’t stand for the betrayal towards my parents.


      • Carty says:

        I know, agree. One video statement from Betty would nip it all in the ass, but for whatever reason that won’t happen.

      • February-Pisces says:

        I definitely think the queen can’t do sh*t even if she wanted to, it’s her henchmen that are doing this. After everything that’s happened harry paying tribute to the queen like this is the best form of pr she could have had this year. It separated her from the what the rest of the royals did to harry and Meghan, keeping her legacy intact. Racism doesn’t age well, and Willie keen and Charles will forever be tarnished with that brush due to the part they played in smearing Meghan.

        But the queens own henchmen thought it would be better for her to look like a grumpy old grandma and complain about such a tribute. Her own people created controversy for no reason, out of nothing. It benefits no one. Also the queen can’t do sh*t without these people doing it for her.

      • Salma says:

        @Alexandria,I don’t think she is being too faced:she believes in the Crown and her duty and all her life she was told was to do or think and she will do everything to protect the monarchy and her heirs even if it means hurting her beloved grandson…Ppl think that Charles is in charge now and she has no say but I think that even if she was younger and in charge,she wouldn’t say anything:courtiers run the show…Even Harry said that he was only aware living in a bubble when he met Meghan…

      • windyriver says:

        Harry was very specific in the Oprah interview that TQ was getting bad advice. In addition to what @Salma notes above about HM’s concept of duty to the monarchy, we know about her propensity to stick her head in the sand, and we discussed here in the last couple of days the possibility due to age and isolation for her to be subtly manipulated and not fully informed about what’s going on. So it’s not a surprise she hasn’t made any public statement here, and I don’t interpret her behavior as being two faced.

        Harry must know what’s what. He and Meghan both spoke fondly of TQ in their interviews, and at that point, they had already faced things like the wreath debacle, and stripping of patronages. If they felt TQ was primarily responsible for things like that, I can’t see them still choosing to name their daughter in her honor.

  46. Julia K says:

    Just read that the Queen is not refuting the BBC account of the name story. Taking their side against Harry.

    • Beach Dreams says:

      I dont know if she can, or if she’s even fully aware of the courtier-fueled drama at this point. I’m NOT defending this woman because I still believe she could’ve done the bare minimum of telling the press to take it easy on Meghan during her pregnancy (like she’s done for all the royal wives). But with all the frenzied attacks coming out of the palace(s) this week, it seems like the courtiers are desperate to assert their power and control over her. They (and the British press) are certainly trying to regain control of the narrative after constantly claiming Harry and his grandmother are on the outs. Given everything that’s happened and come out in the past few months, I kind of feel it’s a miracle that Charles and William didn’t get their way in forming the response to the Oprah interview bombshells.

    • Saucy&Sassy says:

      Julia K, that doesn’t mean anything. She just doesn’t say anything about private matters. She said what she said on social media welcoming the baby. That is her statement and she used the baby’s name. I think that’s all she’ll do. What I find much more interesting is what will probably become a lawsuit against the BBC. They will have to give up their source in order to defend against it. What happens when it’s filed? Unless it was someone present when H&M talked to TQ, that’s not going to be good for the palace. The BM wanted this sh!tstorm, now let’s see if it’s worth the money they’ll end up paying.

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      @Julia K, are you referencing the Daily Beast story? Outside of that I couldn’t find any other mention of it that doesn’t reference back to the Daily Beast. The DB’s article was a bit of a mess. Sykes was basically trying to factualize that Johnny Dymond had an off the record press briefing-apparently being the only member of the press invited to said off the record press briefing by an unnamed “palace source” – equivalent to imaginary friend. Then, through informal exchanges with “palace aides or sources” is the attempt to show that the Queen isn’t disputing the BBC story. And, then and then and then, this almost certainly came from Edward Young, the Queen’s press secretary. who she trusts *cough* with everything. (maybe took some license with the last part) Oh, and by the way, the Queen is totally in charge. The creepy “grey men” don’t really run the show. How sweet of Tom Sykes to throw Diana’s words/experiences under the bus (along with her son Harry’s)! The BBC would never be negligent with headlines either! Patrick Ennis might see things differently along with the other angry complaints against the BBC and that Manchester Arena story. Harry & Meghan are called litigious. Guess William isn’t considered litigious with the teets lawsuit and threats of legal action with other tabloid stories & the media harrassing Kate when she was his girlfriend. So, we have off the record press briefings, informal exchanges and an almost certainly as an “official” show of support from the Queen to the BBC and against Harry? Love that Meghan & Harry are keeper’s of receipts. This name thing is obviously really bothering me. If a true,formal and on the record statement, from the Queen, comes out against Lilibet’s naming-I’ll sign my name to a petition to abolish the monarchy. Don’t know if Americans have much input in it or can sign, we can provide a lot of signatures considering the population differences between USA/Canada and the UK. To the courtiers, rotas, BRF- Big mistake. Big. Huge. I have to go shopping now.

  47. daziee says:

    I named my cat Lilibet 10 years ago. I had no idea I was committing such a crime. Also – faultless reign? I know a few South Africans who would love to argue that one.

  48. MTC says:

    Of course her children are not her own, they are a duty of the crown: heir and spares! Can’t let that sweet dynasty slip away…

    I really love how the British press can’t separate family from the job! Harry gave up royalty not the blood in his veins. It truly points out how ridiculous it is to have a monarchy, it is all choice! Of course the ones in direct lines to this power want to keep it, they have been raised to see it as what they are owed, what is due to them. Of course baldy needed to get the name of a future king approved by the Queen, and the spares. Just like when George has kids of his own, the names will need to be approved by the King. But for anyone else? It is not necessary. Do you think Sophie gets her kids names approved by the queen? If anything, Harry is showing that he can see the BS position of the queen and separate it from the person who is his grandma. And that is what kills the press, he has the birthright to do so and they, the people of England, do not have that same luxury.

  49. AuntRara says:

    I mean… “Diana” was always going to be a part of her name. Imagine if they HADN’T honored the Queen in her name. The headlines! The tantrums about Harry and Meghan “snubbing” the Queen, choosing Diana’s side, etc etc. And if they’d named her “Elizabeth” they’d be squawking that H & M are trying to steal the Queen’s identity or something. There was truly no way for them to win with these unhinged people. But they know that and don’t care. They’re all wrapped up in their beautiful little family and I’m so happy for them.

  50. NCWoman says:

    It’s like the BRF has a death wish. The more they go after his daughter, the more I see Prince Harry burning Will and Chuck down to the ground. He’s a military man, and he’s employed the soft options so far. I bet he has a nuclear option.

  51. Robin says:

    I wish the muck-raking press would drop this and let the happiness of the birth just be. But, hey, that’s how they make their money. H&M did this with the best of intentions and I suspect they had the Queen’s blessings. As I have said, though, my understanding from a report years ago is that this name is incredibly special to the Queen and that she guards who can use it. I imagine it is a relic of a childhood and nursery life innocent of what her father’s role in life would mean for her as the oldest child. She was devoted to her father, and perhaps this is a cherished memento in verbal form. What the press is implying therefore is that H&M have made an insulting and indelicate over reach. I relate what they’re saying to when one of my sisters suggested I give a musical box of mine to her daughter. It’s just a music box from when I was little but I wanted to keep it, perhaps for a child I didn’t have at that point, but she made me feel awful about it. My instinct on this occasion, however, is that the Queen realised it was a delightful gift to give the child of a grandson she cherishes; the gesture would give the name an eternal life. Am I being too romantic here?! It’s one of those days in the UK when the weather is glorious and you can get a bit mushy.

    • MsIam says:

      The woman has lived for 90 years with the knowledge that a horse was named Lilibet after her. There is no good thing to be made out of this argument at all period. Lilibet was used by many people, I don’t know why the media keep putting this lie out there like it’s some secret society. I haven’t seen anyone mention this but there was a scandal years ago involving one of the queen’s distant relatives and an out of wedlock baby. This relative wrote to the queen for help and she addressed her as “Dear Cousin Lilibet”. Somehow the press got a hold of this and it ended up in the papers. Point is, she was known to all her family as Lilibet and not just that way to Philip.

      • Robin says:

        Her cousins and nanny called her Lilibet. Philip called her “cabbage”. Which is silly and a bit sweet, I suppose.

  52. Lara says:

    British people: you are insane. Get help.

  53. Okurr says:

    I’d love to see an long form exposé on the courtiers. They seem racist and shady as hell, and more in control of the royal family than the royal family.

    • Dierski says:

      I think that same thing each time these lunatics put out these unhinged opinions – let’s see an in-depth exposé on all of these courtiers and royal reporters. Please!! Shine the light on the cockroaches!

    • Salma says:

      Yup…I think it is mainly racist white men with classist views

  54. February-Pisces says:

    The good thing about harry naming his daughter after the queen is that it exonerates her from the racist smear campaign. The bad news for racists is that it exonerates the queen from the racist smear campaign.

    The ‘not racists’ look up to the queen as a symbol of whiteness and Britishness. Harry honouring the queen proved they have a good relationship, and that the queen didn’t banish him from the family for stepping out with a woman of colour. The ‘not racists’ want to cling to the idea of the queen punishing harry because he chose to marry Meghan. The queen supporting her grandson is something they don’t want to believe to be true.

  55. Malificent says:

    TQ could stop this whole debacle with one sentence. But she won’t.

    • Carty says:


    • Riverandtree says:

      @Malificent- exactly this. I don’t understand why she can’t put out a short, simple statement. They are attacking her grandchild and his family, and not a word yet.

    • Salma says:

      She can’t go against the monarchy : duty before family,crown needs before family,going again courtiers is a threat to all of that system

      • Lorelei says:

        @Salma: but how would that be “going against the monarchy?” If she put out a short statement saying she approved of the Sussexes naming their baby Lilibet ahead of time, is delighted about it, and looking forward to meeting her namesake?

        She’s already referred to Harry and Meghan publicly as “much loved family members” and has still retained all of her racist supporters…why would this be any different?

      • MsIam says:

        @Lorelei, I think it has to do with the whole “the Queen cannot be seen to be part of petty arguments” or whatnot. Like with Kate and how Meghan wanted her to squash that tights story. Its a convenient shield to hide behind and always appear “royal”. I think they only get involved out in the open when the FBI are threatening to come calling. I imagine things are being said behind the scenes and already the story is fading.

      • teecee says:

        She IS the monarchy.

      • Salma says:

        @lorelei Who do you think went to the BBC,once a reputable news organization to talk about Lilibeth name?Courtiers…some even said it was the CEO of courtiers,Edward Young…I watched a documentary some time ago and the narrator something like ‘Even though the Queen chose Buckingham as her main residence and London office since taking over the monarchy in 1953, her majesty is said not to have control over her own home,royal courtiers have long been in charge of the London palace.’…but she did have some control over her family: she forbade the Kent to divorce if I remember…and going against the grain is not her forte:she is for patriarchy and her ‘duty’ to rob British ppl,hoard wealth and hide it.

    • Beach Dreams says:

      Like I said to another poster, I’m not sure she can even do that at the moment, given how hysterically the courtiers have reacted to Lili Diana’s name. Don’t get me wrong, I still firmly believe the Queen could’ve and should’ve told the media to back off of Meghan during her pregnancy with Archie. But IMO this week has shown how deep the power struggle in the palace is. You have RRs associated with different camps all spewing clashing excuses for why the Queen couldn’t have possibly approved of the name, while one of those RRs admitted that the courtiers were *pissed* about being left out of the loop on Lilibet’s birth. This week’s crazed reaction was them (and possibly Charles and/or William) trying to reassert control and maintain the invisible contract.

      • windyriver says:

        @Beach Dreams I think this is true (including that TQ should have taken steps early on re: the media). TQ did what she did – gave her approval of H&M using that name for their daughter – and probably thinks that’s enough of a statement, because she is, you know, TQ. And in fact, it is. But the “advisors” are batsh*t crazy that she had a private conversation and made her own decision without any input from them, hence the insanity this past week. I can see her not wanting to push things BTS any further by an additional statement (if she’s even able to make one under the current conditions as you describe).

    • Abena Asantewaa says:

      @malificent, I have a strong feeling that, the queen lives in a cocoon. She reads what News is brought to her, the courtiers control her life, at 95, she is being handled. Every statement that goes out is written and approved by the courtiers and perhaps, Charles and William before it is handed over to the queen. All the drama about the name and other unsavoury headlines are kept away from her, she is kept in the dark. John Dymond was faffing about with his answer about the queen endorsing the statement, he said, directly or indirectly from the queen, he was covering all bases incase he gets sued. BBC has done a bargain with the palaces at the expense of The Sussexes.

  56. Steph says:

    What does Elizabeth may Regina mean?

  57. Abby says:


  58. Steph says:

    this is the most insane thing I’ve ever read about a damn name. Then after all that about it being family bonds and whatever she turned around and called the queen Lilibet. These ppl are so crazy.

  59. Dierski says:

    OH FFS, Jan!! 🤦🏻‍♀️

  60. Che says:

    This has probably been said before, but it really hit me yesterday. They are mad that a biracial child has now been named after the queen. Not only named after her, but a significant and personal name. I imagine them freaking out over her skin tone worse than Archie and it makes me sick.

    • Kelsey says:

      I hate constantly bringing up Wont and Kant whenever they aren’t even mentioned in a topic, but I’d bet they are kicking themselves for not thinking of such a sentimental name first.

      • MsIam says:

        That’s what the real story is. Die a thousand deaths, you haters. I hope their jealousy keeps them warm at night.

      • Beach Dreams says:

        Absolutely. Anyone who thinks these two honestly weren’t/aren’t seething over the name is giving them more credit than they deserve (and they deserve none). They have shown themselves to be horribly envious towards the Sussexes even after the latter left last year. They couldn’t even bother to acknowledge Archie when he was born. Lilibet Diana is a name to remember, and it manages to be unique while paying a clear tribute to the women she was named for.

      • swaz says:

        That’s the whole story, nobody thought of using the name before. They are all so dull and uninspiring😜

      • Feeshalori says:

        Fully agree, the Cambridges are gnashing their teeth over this missed opportunity. William believes he’s the only brother with the right to his mother’s name and to bestow on his daughter. For Harry to give his own daughter Diana’s name so prominently that it’s a double barreled cognomen along with the queen’s beloved nickname has to really stick in their craw. And so many of the grandchildren and great grandchildren have Elizabeth in their names, but there’s only one Lilibet, for now. As l said in another thread about this, you snooze you lose.

    • February-Pisces says:

      I also think the ‘not racists’ are mad at harry having a good relationship with the queen. The fact he paid tribute to her makes it look like she wasn’t the one who banished him and Meghan out of the family. The ‘not racists’ look to the queen as a figure head of their white supremacy.

  61. Katherine says:

    They cannot be serious about this? Isn’t it a sign of respect to name a baby after a person in your life? My teacher named her baby after me when I was a teen and I was floored – could not understand why I deserved it, but it was no big deal, she just thought I was a good kid and wanted her kid to be smth like me in that regard. It still felt very special.

  62. Jaded says:

    It’s up to Charles to stop this verbal diarrhea because it’s clear he’s acting as Regent now, it just hasn’t been formalized and likely won’t be until TQ falls off her perch. However he won’t stop it. Tacitly ignoring the RRs and tabloid head-lice is his passive-aggressive way of punishing Harry and Meghan, protecting himself, and promoting Mean and Keen as the saviors of the world.

  63. Ainsley7 says:

    Ever since all this started, it’s made me wonder whether the Queen even really likes being called Lilibet. Like, it was a nickname given because she couldn’t pronounce her name. I think it’s cute, but I also know what it’s like to have a childhood nickname that everyone else thinks is cute, but you don’t. For all we know, the Queen insisted that Lili be known as Lili because she hates the nickname. It’s all speculation and nonsense. Until the Queen says something outright, I’m going to assume she is fine with it. It wasn’t a super special secret nickname. All the foreign Royals refer to her as aunt/cousin Lilibet. She’s not particularly close to all of them.

    • Merricat says:

      Lol. She loves her family nickname. She did not “insist” on anything regarding the baby’s name. The only people who hate this are the racists at the BM and the other oatmeal rf members.

      • Ainsley7 says:

        My point was that literally no one in the press actually knows how she feels about it at all. It’s 100% speculation. I don’t think she actually hates her nickname. The idea that the Queen actually hates her nickname while the press is going on and on just struck me as a funny possibility in this sea of possibilities.

  64. Robert says:

    I think the press and the monarchy are starting to realize that no one wants Charles or William as King. And with Harry leaving and flourishing without the monarchy, more people realize they don’t need a royal family. And all these people are going to lose their jobs. So they are doing everything they can to prop up the belief that England needs a royal family. Their doing a bad job at it mainly because England doesn’t need a royal family.

  65. Elo says:

    Geeze this is crazy.
    The queen was probably extremely touched by it. Harry wouldn’t have done it if he thought she would have been bothered by it. It’s such a tender tribute.
    It’s like this reporter has never known a grandma before.

  66. L4frimaire says:

    I guess they can no longer lie about how Lilibet was named so they are at the whining and emotional blackmail stage by using the Queen. It’s just amazing how they constantly try to make these incredibly powerful and privileged people look hard done by this one woman refusing to be torn down and humiliated daily.

  67. Coco says:

    If this was a good-faith argument, one might go a step further and ask why the British people expect a person to sacrifice her entire life and identity to the position of monarch, so much so that the ONLY thing belonging to her is a name she gave herself as a toddler.
    But this is not a good faith argument, so I hope a flock of seagulls swoop down on Jan Moir and pull out all her hair.

  68. TheOriginalMia says:

    I don’t think I rolled my eyes more than when reading this insane scribe. It was Dan Wootten-esque in its level of projection. So much teeth gnashing about a baby’s name. It’s the same as has been done for the other granddaughters, but it’s an insult for Harry’s biracial child. We see you, racists.

    • Lorelei says:

      @TheOriginalMia you’re right — this does actually make Wooton’s writing seem *slightly* less ridiculous in comparison, which is quite a feat to pull off

  69. Nyro says:

    I wasn’t here for the name Lilibet when the Sussexes first announced it. But now I see what they were doing and I’m 100 percent loving it. And the fact that it’s driving these royalists completely insane is a bonus. I will be saying that baby’s full name from now in. No “Lili” over here. It’s LILIBET all day and they can die mad about it.

  70. Tessa says:

    The Queen can shut this down with a statement. Of course she won’t issue one.

    • Feeshalori says:

      It would be such a great tactic if she casually mentioned to Jill Biden at their meeting how delighted she is about her latest great grandchild who is her namesake. Boom, end of story! No need for a statement but getting the message across loud and clear of her support for H&M.

  71. Andrew’s Nemesis says:

    As I said before, I do think this is cover for the Cambridges’ failing marriage. The child George let it slip that they don’t live together, the whole Rose controversy, Ma Middleton and Uncle Gaz going mad in the tabloids, then they were to be relocated to Scotland – there’s something big afoot and once again, they show their arses/complete lack of moral compass to use the Sussexes and their brand new baby as a smokescreen. I bet they’ll divorce the minute Brenda kicks the bucket; PWT can’t stand to be anywhere near Keen Kween.
    The Sussexes have been sacrificed – especially Meghan – in order to shield the RF’s blunders and dirty secrets, in the form of PaedoAndy. It’s one of the most inhumane things I’ve ever seen.

    • Sofia says:

      “The child George let it slip that they don’t live together”

      When did that happen?

    • Lexistential says:

      When did George say his parents don’t live together? (Not that I don’t believe you, but I missed that and am curious as to what year.)

    • Phoenix_Rising says:

      I completely agree hen you mentioned how inhumane it is that Meghan continues to be sacrificed. No thought, care towards her whatsoever. I really, really hope they ALL receive their comeuppance.

    • Jaded says:

      @Andrew’s Nemesis — ooooh, when did little George let this slip? I’ve done some sleuthing but can’t find anything, although it’s blatantly obvious that their marriage has become one in name only and PWT can’t be arsed to show her even the slightest bit of affection.

  72. lucylee says:

    The lady’s legacy will be the Empire’s decline on the world stage, racism, toxic family relations, bringing children into the world to be used as human shields to protect the chosen one(s). A quick search on Google for information about the early years of her reign on the Africa continent is BRUTAL!!!! She can at least know Lili is a nod to affection for her rather than mindless adherence to some outdated tradition.

  73. Salma says:

    Why RR,courtiers are not more outraged by who Louis Cambridge is named after? FBI files on Prince Charles’ beloved uncle describe him as “homosexual with a perversion for young boys.
    Can these ppl be more outraged by real things…?him and his wife were described as persons of extremely low morals and he was Charles’ mentor…I wonder what he taught him…

  74. Teddy says:

    Ahhhh, thank you. I was having trouble pinpointing the crux of this toxic baby name narrative and you’ve nailed it. The courtiers want to deny Harry any claim to his heritage. By naming his daughter Lilibet, and with the Queen’s blessing, the courtiers lose. They are disgusting.

  75. KL says:

    Right… Totally believable that an extremely old lady wouldn’t want her beloved grandson to honour her by naming his first-born daughter after her adorable childhood nickname. That’s absolutely how human relationships and affection work.

    These people. My God.

  76. JRenee says:

    Empty wagons make the most noise. Stirring the pot because they don’t have a real story whilst they cover for something else. I think these stories are a screen for other shenanigans that are occurring.
    They are also fanning the fire of hatred. I pray for the safety of all of the Sussexes!

  77. The Recluse says:

    Those yahoos need to give it a rest.

  78. Purple cupcakes says:

    Considering the bloody history behind most of the Crown Jewels, you would think this person would be more cognizant of the fact that Britain looted other countries to obtain its wealth. But alas, these are the same people who insist that “blue lives matter” or that BIPOC privilege exists. You can’t “steal” names. Give it a rest.

  79. Noor says:

    Jan Moir’s claim is the height of absurdity. How ludicrous!!
    The BBC report and the Palace refusal to issue a statement just add fuel to the fire .

    The Palace actually had issued statements on trivial matters for eg denying that Kate Middleton had botox done . They also issued a statement that William did not bully Prince Harry. But when it come to the naming controversy, they prefer to keep mum.

    • MissySnow says:

      I think the Kate Botox denial had more to do with the company wanting to be seen as using the Royal’s to make money and not because Keen had her face tweaked and that the product was endorsed by Keen.

      • Carmen-JamRock says:

        Um……..no. The Palace (in this instance, KP) issued denial of botox usage by karen mumbleton. Full stop. The end. Thats all we know for a fact

  80. Noor says:

    But by keeping mum does not mean you are not making a statement .

    Your silence in itself is a statement , and a very divisive statement that you are supporting the unnamed Senior Buckingham Palace aide account and BBC report.

    Hence you leave Prince Harry no choice but to issue a legal warning to BBC.

    • Salma says:

      Agree with you Noor but the queen like the entire family doesn’t run the show: the courtiers do ..do you remember that anecdote when Megan was wearing that chain with her and Harry’s initials and Palace courtiers,not Harry,called her and told her not to do that again…I wonder how Meghan saw that relationship between courtiers and the family like you guys don’t run anything. ,you are just told what to do and you have to oblige…lands,properties,castles,horses,art,jewelry,the show(trooping colors,Mbe or Obe ceremonies showing that you cares about ppl):can you see the queen or William or Charles running all that?like Meghan it’s their CEO running all that

  81. Kitty says:

    To think Jan has a degree in journalism and is writing a daft piece like this is astonishing , you have to feel sorry for her really, now just like de other ignorant , uneducated Daily Mail fools !!!

  82. Serena says:

    Good lord, they’re so embarrassing. How can they think this is good PR strategy? They’re making fool out of themselves for the whole world to see.

  83. Phoenix_Rising says:

    A thought came to mind yesterday, how are we so sure TQ is not fully aware of all the going ons? I’m quite sure she Harry and at times Meg have had many conversations, and she has been kept abreast of the truth. I believe she trusts him and knows his heart and knows he is the most level headed out of her deranged family, that he is the only one who has his head screwed on right. He’s not scheming, trying to throw her under the bus, but just stating blatant facts. She’s ninety five and I’m quite sure she was well aware when she gave her blessing to Harry to wed, it was going to be a bumpy ride, somewhat similar to Guess who’s Coming to Dinner with Sidney Poitier and Katherine Hepburn, but this racial hate has taken on a life of its own. For all we know, maybe she’s also waiting for this to all implode and hopes it happens before she passes.

    This grieves me and grieves me greatly. When I read about how Meg and the abuse she has suffered, contemplating suicide (while pregnant), the pain and injustice both her and Harry continue to unnecessarily deal with, cannot have the peace to enjoy their children, Archie being compared to a chimpanzee, Lilibet Diana, a one week old newborn being subjected to not deserving of her name due to being biracial, it is infuriating and on too many levels.

    My wish is for every single piece of scum/trash who have directly/indirectly caused them any pain and suffering throughout the years, to receive everything back ten fold, that Karma will not hold back and have NO mercy on any of them.

  84. Likeyoucare says:

    The queen know what happen around her.
    Didnt all of you notice she kept wearing flower themes dresses these couple of days.
    The rotas are to dense to interprate it.

    • equality says:

      They pay more attention to her jewelry so if she really is supportive she needs to wear a lily brooch.

  85. equality says:

    I don’t understand the Queen at all. If someone was a beloved member of my family, I would back him after he was attacked by the media. Even if he hadn’t asked about using the name, I would put out a statement about how honored I was that he did use it.

    • Phoenix_Rising says:

      I completely agree with you 💯. I’ve gone through the comments of more experienced individuals who indicated TQ is loyal to the monarchy and only the monarchy. I just wish this would all come to an end and Meg and Harry + the children can live in peace.

  86. paddingtonjr says:

    So apparently this is the new “Meghan made Kate cry” nothing-burger debate that will rage for years. Seriously, this is what the RRs and and courtiers spend their time on? In a time of Brexit, Covid and a pedo prince, the great tragedy is a newborn little girl’s name?!?

    Since Meghan and Harry started dating, we have seen that they (especially Meghan) are well-prepared and do research before making a decision or announcement. So I don’t doubt that they at least mentioned naming their daughter Lilibet to TQ at some point during Meghan’s pregnancy. Whether TQ took them seriously or paid any attention is on her. H&M seem to be trying to give their children less “Royal” names so that they can grow up without the burden of the BRF history and have more normal lives without expectations. They also wanted to honor Harry’s mother and grandmother but in a way that honored the women, not the position. I’m not really a fan of Lilibet as a given name, but she’s not my child.

  87. Londongal says:

    So the name can’t be anything other than a kick in the balls by H+M. They may consider it complimentary but they know Queen would see it as intrusive. Not begrudging Harry being mad as hell. Not begrudging M for being angry. But jabbing yer gran….is it to be applauded? Regardless of how poisonous your family are? Not in my book, no. So I hope at some stage H+M get on with their lives, become hugely successful in their own rights, stop the toxic cycle and leave all the toxic Royals to die. Because given the Andrew scandal alone…..Royalty and the establishment’s time seems pretty nigh. If I was them, I would choose total disassociation rather than petty affiliation.

  88. Marivic says:

    The Brits are in destroy Harry and Meghan mode again (as if it ever stopped). Boris Johnson was a disappointment in the G7 summit due to severe distrust of him by the EU countries. Kate was hilarious and pathetic in her welcome remarks during Jill Biden’s school visit and looked so childish, mediocre, and unprofessional beside the First Lady. Now the Brits want to cover up this big booboo by getting the royal rota to get their bag of tricks. What they have is the Meghan-smear-at-all-costs campaign again. To give oxygen to this smear campaign they conveniently have the money-hungry, insecure, and selfish Thomas Markle who’s ever ready to feed the rota clowns with his nonsense. These obsessed rota rats are crazier, louder, more rude, and obscene this time around. They have to protect the racist whites.

  89. eggcentric1 says:

    Kinda confused as to why they would name their daughter after the head of a racist, pedofile-protecting, colonial institution?

  90. Sandra says:

    Oh this reminds me of my cousin. He named his daughter after our grandmother because “no one had named any of their kids after her!”. We all told him that it was because her best friend had named her first born daughter after our grandmother when they were teenagers. So she promised in turn to name one of her kids after the friends name(which she did!). It was a childhood pact that everyone honored. But no my cousin named his daughter after our grandma and she was so mad! He couldn’t understand why she was so upset. Our grandmother had lost her best friend a few months before that but he didn’t care. I’m only putting this out there because obviously Harry and Meghan had asked permission and the queen was ok with it. None of the other royals are even looking at it fondly as family should. They are destroying themselves inside out.

  91. Well Wisher says:

    There are several Lilibets in Jamaica. It was customary among some people in the Caribbean to give their children names from the Bible, precious stones and royalty.
    Harry and Meghan got permission to use that name for their beautiful daughter, it was not written because a given name is unlike a given title being dissimilar so the procedure/protocol is different.
    Probably the Queen did not share the contents of the conversation between her and the Sussexes.