'Goes against everything the Queen would have approved of': How Prince Harry and Meghan's 'royal-adjacent' lives could backfire

Four years ago, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex defended their controversial decision to snub royal tradition by forgoing the hospital photocall after the birth of their son.

"The amount of abuse we got for not wanting to serve our child up on a silver platter was incredible," Prince Harry said of the pressure he and Meghan felt to do the photoshoot when all they wanted was privacy for Archie, who was born in May, 2019.

Fast-forward to this week, where the duchess has launched two $90 candles promoted using the full royal titles of her children. The words "prince" and "princess" were $90 candles promoted using the full royal titles from the As ever website days later.

But not before press materials announcing their launch, for Mother's Day, declared the candles were named for "Prince Archie of Sussex's birthdate" and "Princess Lilibet of Sussex's birthdate".

"We are seeing [Meghan] use her children to serve a commercial enterprise and that absolutely goes against everything that the Queen would have approved of," royal commentator Victoria Arbiter tells nine.com.au.

"The queen was emphatic at the Sandringham summit that you cannot use your titles for commercial gain."

The late Queen Elizabeth II insisted on such a rule because "she needed to protect the institution of monarchy and its reputation".

READ MORE: 'Uncomfortable' moment that 'shocked' Queen Mary's loyal supporters

READ MORE: Meghan quietly removes children's royal titles after backlash

READ MORE: Glaring divide exposed in rare royal group photo taken inside palace

Prince Harry and Meghan's recent tour of Australia was heavily criticised because they had blended commercial endeavours with charitable engagements, adopting the half-in, half-out model rejected by Elizabeth II in 2020.

"Prince Harry and Meghan could do absolutely everything they wanted, and yet they still adopted the royal blueprint," Arbiter says.

"And I think this is where we get a lot of mixed messaging from them, because they've spent the last six years rallying against the institution, criticising Harry's family openly, and yet they then adopt all the hallmarks of a royal tour."

It was a deliberate move by the Sussexes, Arbiter says, "because it reinforces this idea that they're not celebrities".

"They are royal adjacent because, ultimately, it is that royal mystique that carries them through.

"Harry and Meghan exercised a non-royal, very heavy royal leaning tour, but as a fully out couple."

The biggest issue, for many observers, was the monetisation of Meghan's wardrobe through an online shopping platform that allows the duchess to earn a commission on clothing worn throughout the visit.

"Harry and Meghan have to earn an income, merch the commercial outfits, and by that I mean what Meghan wore for the MasterChef appearance, what she wore to the Best Life retreat," Arbiter says.

"Don't merch the outfits that are worn to a homeless shelter, to a children's hospital, or indeed to meet survivors of the Bondi attack."

Arbiter suggests the couple could avoid criticism by dropping their Sussex titles altogether when embarking on money-making endeavours.

"Be Harry and Meghan. Very few people in the world can go by single names – they can."

Prince Harry and Meghan's continued use of their royal titles for commercial gain isn't likely to result in retribution from King Charles.

"I think the King's hands are tied. He is doing what the Queen had to do before, which is be the head of state and a parent and that is a very, very difficult balance to get right," Arbiter says.

"He also would run the risk of being accused of being spiteful.

"There would also be issues over the fact he stripped [former prince] Andrew of his titles, and you cannot compare Harry and Meghan's reasoning with Andrew's.

"But I do think William might."

Arbiter's instincts may well be right.

She has lived a royal-adjacent life since she was a toddler – her father, Dickie Arbiter, was one of the first royal correspondents and later became an employee of the royal household working for then-Prince Charles and Diana, Princess of Wales.

Having lived at Kensington Palace in her late teens, which she describes as "a unique experience", Arbiter was able to closely observe the inner-workings of the royal household and some of its key players.

"So much of our life revolved around royal stories that [my dad] was having to cover, whether he was on tour, whether he was late to sports day because he had to go to an engagement. He did everything he could, he was an amazing dad.

"But the royal family very much served as the backdrop to my life."

Many years after becoming a royal correspondent herself, Arbiter has now written a book about the royal family's late matriarch.

Queen Elizabeth II: An Icon of Modern Monarchy charts the queen's historic 70-year-reign across less than 200 pages, an extraordinary exercise when presented with so much material to work with.

"Some people just want to learn a little bit more, but they don't have the time or the inclination to delve into something that is quite so daunting," Arbiter says of her book, published to coincide with the centenary of Elizabeth II's birth.

Arbiter describes the book as "a concise breakdown of the Queen's reign" including "the moments that everybody knows about, the pivotal moments".

"But that's 70 years, we're talking about a massive life. So, really, it was about going through and finding the elements, the nuggets that people could take away where they learned a little bit more about just who she was and what made her tick."

Arbiter "regrets" never actually meeting the queen, even though she came close many times.

"I saw the queen close up on so many occasions – literally just one or two metres away – but I never got to shake her hand. And that is one of my lasting regrets.

"For this small diminutive elderly lady, she really did have a magnificent aura."

Arbiter has fond memories of attending the above events, including a Buckingham Palace garden party and the Royal Windsor Horse Show "when the queen was at her most relaxed public persona".

"She'd be sitting there in the front row of the royal box clapping along, just so excited by all of it.

"So often in a headscarf, in a long kilt, in her tweed, in her wellies, in her Barbour – not that sort of formal queen that you would see in her bright coats and her hats at engagements.

"Still very much needing to maintain the persona, but in a relaxed, happy environment and it was a real delight to see her in those types of places."

This week King Charles lead commemorations marking what would have been the late queen's 100th birthday on April 21.

He was joined by Queen Camilla, the Prince and Princess of Wales and the small group of working royals for a party at Buckingham Palace, paying tribute to Elizabeth II's legacy.

Queen Elizabeth II was, Arbiter believes, a one-off.

"With both her and Prince Philip, we will never see a total dedication to others at the detriment of self, ever again," Arbiter says.

"Yes, she had enormous privilege. Yes, she didn't have to worry about the bills and food on the table and healthcare and all of those things that regular people have to worry about.

"But that doesn't mean the position didn't come with tremendous sacrifice. You never once heard her complain, ever.

"Members of the royal family are there to serve the people. That is their sole purpose.

"When we look back at the queen we will see a woman utterly devoted to duty, to nation, to country, to Commonwealth, to the people, at the expense of herself.

"And I don't think those types of qualities exist anymore."

Queen Elizabeth II: An Icon of Modern Monarchy is officially out in Australia on June 1.

FOLLOW US ON WHATSAPP HERE: Stay across all the latest in celebrity, lifestyle and opinion via our WhatsApp channel. No comments, no algorithm and nobody can see your private details.