Newly published accounts by royal biographers have revived scrutiny of internal tensions within Britain's royal family, alleging that Prince Andrew privately dismissed Meghan Markle as an "opportunist" and warned Prince Harry that his marriage "would not last more than a month." The claims, detailed in separate books by Tom Bower and Andrew Lownie, add to a growing body of contested narratives about divisions within the House of Windsor.
Neither Buckingham Palace nor representatives for the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have confirmed the allegations, which rely on unnamed sources and retrospective accounts. Still, the convergence of similar claims across multiple publications has drawn renewed attention to the early reception Meghan Markle received within royal circles after her relationship with Prince Harry became public in 2016.
In his book Betrayal, Bower describes strained interactions between Prince Andrew and Prince Harry, including an encounter surrounding the coronation of King Charles III in May 2023. He writes that relations between the two men were "not good," citing tensions linked to housing disputes and broader family divisions following Harry and Meghan's departure from royal duties in 2020.
According to Bower's reporting, Prince Andrew "scathingly dismissed Meghan as an 'opportunist'" during private conversations in the early stages of the relationship. The account suggests the remarks were not made publicly but reflected internal skepticism about Meghan's role and intentions within the monarchy.
Lownie's book, Entitled: The Rise and Fall of the House of York, goes further, attributing direct warnings to Prince Andrew about the viability of the marriage. Lownie writes that Andrew allegedly told Prince Harry the union "would not last more than a month" and criticized his nephew for failing to conduct proper "due diligence."
The language attributed to Prince Andrew is notably blunt. Lownie claims he "openly accused Meghan of being an opportunist" and described the relationship as "the biggest mistake ever," while also suggesting Meghan was "too old" for Harry. These assertions, while detailed, remain unverified and are based on secondhand sourcing.
The allegations carry particular weight given Prince Andrew's own controversial standing within the royal family. The Duke of York withdrew from public duties following his association with Jeffrey Epstein and a civil sexual assault case brought by Virginia Giuffre, which he settled without admitting liability. His diminished role has shaped how new claims about his private views are interpreted by observers.
Lownie, speaking to People magazine, offered a broader characterization of Andrew and his former wife, Sarah Ferguson, saying they believed they could "operate like this under the radar." He added, "They're clearly up to their necks in exploiting their royal status," and described Andrew as having been "pampered all the way through his life, in this bubble."
The renewed focus on early family dynamics underscores the enduring fallout from Harry and Meghan's exit from royal life. The couple's relocation to California and subsequent media projects have kept internal disputes in public view, while competing narratives from royal insiders and biographers continue to shape perceptions.
At the center of the latest claims is a familiar tension between public image and private sentiment within the monarchy. While official statements have emphasized unity and support, accounts from books such as those by Bower and Lownie suggest that skepticism toward Meghan Markle may have surfaced earlier and more sharply behind closed doors than previously acknowledged.
