Harry Hates the Royals So Much He Nearly Changed His Name
Prince Harry's family feud takes a new twist
In a stunning sign of the depth of the estrangement between Prince Harry and the Royal Family, it has emerged that the Duke of Sussex seriously considered dropping his royal surname in favor of his late mother's maiden name, Spencer.
Sources told the Daily Mail that Harry raised the idea during a trip last year to the United Kingdom for the funeral of his uncle, Robert Fellowes. During the visit, Harry stayed at the Althorp Estate with his maternal uncle, Charles Spencer, the ninth Earl Spencer and brother of the late Princess Diana. Spencer famously delivered a confrontational speech condemning the royals at her funeral in which he referred to Harry and William as her 'blood family.'
According to the Daily Mail's well-connected social columnist, Richard Eden, Harry reportedly sought advice on legally changing his surname from Mountbatten-Windsor to Spencer, a move that would have amounted to a very symbolic severing of ties with the House of Windsor.
While the report says that Spencer talked Harry down and the idea is not expected to go any further, the fact that Harry seriously explored it underscores the ongoing toxicity of his relationship with the royal family, particularly his father, King Charles; his brother, Prince William; and his stepmother, Queen Camilla.
According to a friend of the duke cited by the Mail, 'They had a very amicable conversation and Spencer advised him against taking such a step.'
The friend added that Earl Spencer pointed out the legal and symbolic hurdles, warning that such a move would not only be complex but would likely deepen already raw tensions with Harry's family of origin.
Had the change gone through, it could have affected not only Harry's public identity but also the names of his children, Archie and Lilibet, both of whom currently use the surname Mountbatten-Windsor—a hybrid of the Queen's family name and that of Prince Philip, who adopted the Mountbatten name upon becoming a British subject in 1947. Had Harry moved forward with a surname change, his daughter, Princess Lilibet, whose middle name honors Diana, would have become Princess Lilibet Diana Spencer.
Such a gesture would have been particularly painful to King Charles, who holds the Mountbatten legacy in high regard. Louis Mountbatten, the first Earl Mountbatten of Burma, was a beloved mentor to Prince Philip. The Queen and Prince Philip decided in 1960 to designate Mountbatten-Windsor as the family name for their direct descendants.
In his memoir Spare, and in numerous high-profile interviews since, Harry has laid bare what he sees as the coldness and dysfunction at the heart of the royal household. His allegations have included neglect, press manipulation, and emotional cruelty—claims that have harmed the Windsors' carefully curated public image and fractured personal relationships behind palace doors.
Names and titles are a fraught issue for Harry and Meghan Markle. The couple were granted the Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles by Queen Elizabeth on their wedding day in 2018, and their children were officially recognized as Prince and Princess following Charles's accession to the throne. But their ongoing use of royal titles has often been called hypocritical.
Harry's office has been approached for comment.
Markle 'steps back' from her weird jam business
The unfathomable and chaotic progress of Meghan Markle's branding empire continued this week with a bizarre interview with Fast Company magazine in which she implied she might not restock her online As Ever store anytime soon.
Fast Company makes much of the fact that As Ever products such as jam and flower sprinkles sold out in 45 minutes, without making the very obvious point that a) this is an easy outcome to engineer by not having much stock and b) not having anything available for your customers to buy when you have momentum is generally considered bad business.
Incredibly, it appears Meghan now 'wants to take a step back' from the logistically complex business of actually selling stuff. Already? Why, yes! Fast Company says her plan during this stepped-back phase is to 'gather data from the launch and figure out exactly what As Ever could be,' adding, 'She says she's planning to announce new products in the first quarter of 2026.'
What?
Meghan is quoted as saying, mysteriously: 'I want to really focus on the hospitality angle of As Ever, but as we take the learnings, we can understand what the customer's needs are seasonally.'
Clears as mud? Good.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
13 minutes ago
- Yahoo
25 People Who Got Roasted So Bad On The Internet So Far This Year, They Honestly Need To Just Delete Their Account Right Now
grades: birthdays: t-bone steaks: hairlines: warnings: the beauty of language: British street food: galas: Related: People In HR Revealed Truly Unhinged Reasons Employees Got Fired, And My Jaw Is On The Floor cooking methods: self-help books: states of matter: cooking prowess: Related: "I've Worked In Various Prisons. I Will Take A Men's Over Women's Any Day Of The Week. Shit Is Scary": Former Female Inmates Are Sharing Their Most Disturbing Prison Experiences, And My Jaw Is Literally On The Floor dog breeds: plugs: growing hair: waterbeds: the art of teaching: pain: strollers: plugs, again: baking: inside jokes: bathrooms: insurance: on being an American abroad: Youch. Also in Internet Finds: 51 Wildly Fascinating Photos Of Disorders, Injuries, And Variations In The Human Body That I Cannot Stop Staring At Also in Internet Finds: 23 People Who Tried Their Best, But Crapped The Bed So Bad Also in Internet Finds: Tattoo Artists Are Sharing The Tattoos They Felt REALLY Uncomfortable Doing, And I Have No Words


Business of Fashion
14 minutes ago
- Business of Fashion
Cartier Reports Some Customer Data Stolen in Cyberattack
Cartier, the luxury jewellery company owned by Richemont had its website hacked and some client data stolen, it told customers according to an email seen by Reuters. The company, whose watches, necklaces and bracelets have been worn by Taylor Swift, Angelina Jolie and Michelle Obama, said 'an unauthorised party gained temporary access to our system.' 'Limited client information,' such as names, e-mail addresses and countries, had been obtained, said Cartier in the email sent to customers on Tuesday. 'The affected information did not include any passwords, credit card details or other banking information,' Cartier said, adding it had since contained the issue. The company said it had further enhanced the protection of its systems and data, as well as informed the relevant authorities, and was also working with 'leading external cybersecurity experts.' Cartier did not immediately respond to a request for comment. The attack is the latest case of a company being targeted by cyber criminals. British retailer Marks & Spencer said last month a 'highly sophisticated and targeted' cyberattack in April will cost it about £300 million ($405 million) in lost profits. French luxury house Dior, owned by LVMH also reported last month that hackers had stolen data from its customers, but insisted no financial data was involved, according to Le Monde newspaper. Fashion brand The North Face, owned by VF Corporation has also emailed some customers, saying it discovered a 'small-scale' attack in April this year. The company told customers the hackers used 'credential stuffing,' trying usernames and passwords stolen from another data breach in the hope customers have reused the credentials across multiple accounts, the BBC said on Tuesday. London department store Harrods also said last month that hackers had attempted to break into its systems, following incidents at Marks & Spencer, and the Co-op Group. By John Revill; Editing by Tomasz Janowski Learn more: Explainer: How Retailers Can Fight a New Wave of Cyberattacks A series of breaches at high-profile retailers like Victoria's Secret and Marks & Spencer is putting cybersecurity back in the foreground. BoF examines what leaves fashion businesses vulnerable and how they can protect themselves.
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Diver who lost leg to underwater machinery awarded more than £750,000
A deep sea diver has been awarded more than £750,000 in compensation after losing a leg when he was crushed by a giant underwater hammer. Allan Peacock, 55, was injured while working underwater off the coast of India in 2011. A heavy pile, which acts like a hammer to nail another pile into the seabed, unexpectedly moved, sucking him between the two pieces of equipment and crushing his foot. Mr Peacock was able to drag himself away and received medical treatment in India and Newcastle after flying home, but his injuries resulted in him having a below-knee amputation. With efforts described as 'quite exceptional' by a surgeon, Mr Peacock was back working underwater within 18 months, with the help of a prosthetic leg. Now, after suing at the High Court, he has been awarded £765,866 in compensation from his former employer, Del Seatek India Private Limited. He had already received £169,000 from the operator of the barge on which he was working. The court heard Mr Peacock qualified in 1998 and was working as a saturation diver for Del Seatek when he was injured while working from a cargo barge in pipe-laying operations in Paradip, Odisha, in November 2011. His barrister, Mark Chapman KC, said conditions were difficult, with poor visibility of only about a metre and a strong tide when he descended underwater in a dive basket to work at a depth of up to 30m. His task was to disconnect two chains holding vertical piles together, one on top of the other, with the top driving the other into the seabed and 'acting like a hammer on a nail'. As he began to work, the top pile parted from the other and the barge began to roll because of the tide, also causing the piles to move, the barrister continued. 'They parted because they were insecurely attached,' he said. 'There was too much slack in the chains holding them together. 'The claimant's right foot was sucked in between the parted piles before the top pile fell back on top of the bottom pile and, in doing so, crushed the foot.' Mr Peacock was transferred to the Royal Victoria Infirmary in Newcastle, where he had to have an amputation because of the lack of blood flow to his foot. Mr Chapman said the extent of his injury had been 'graphically revealed' to him and he was told without warning that amputation was required, which left him 'extremely shocked and quite emotional'. 'Following the accident, the claimant was absent from all/any work for a period of around 18 months,' he added. 'However, he is a stoical, resourceful and determined individual. He was resolute in his ambition to return to his pre-accident work, having independently researched the regulatory position applicable to amputees and commercial diving operations. 'The claimant has managed to return to work in a field which is very demanding with the use of prostheses provided by the NHS.' Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.