Anne raised considerations over hat that blocked Harry’s view at Coronation

The Princess Royal had raised considerations to Coronation organisers {that a} feather on her headpiece made for ‘fairly a decent-sized hat’ however was instructed to put on it anyway, in accordance with a brand new royal ebook.

The hat in query turned out to be one of many main speaking factors on social media in the course of the historic event in May – after it blocked the view of Prince Harry, who was seated behind Princess Anne in Westminster Abbey.

The Duke of Sussex, 39, was relegated to the third row in the course of the King’s Coronation, the place he sat between Jack Brooksbank, the husband of Princess Eugenie, and the late Queen Elizabeth II‘s cousin Princess Alexandra.

Many on-line had been fast to invest whether or not the positioning of Anne’s large feather instantly in entrance of her nephew was a deliberate transfer to ‘punish’ Harry, who has been outspoken in his criticism of the Royal Family in his Netflix sequence and memoir Spare.

But in Robert Hardman’s new ebook, Charles III: New King. New Court. The Inside Story, the Princess defends herself, explaining she had modified seats on the final minute within the hopes of a ‘speedy exit’.

The Princess Royal had raised considerations to Coronation organisers {that a} feather on her headpiece made for ‘fairly a decent-sized hat’ however was instructed to put on it anyway, in accordance with a brand new royal ebook. Pictured, Prince Harry and Princess Anne on the historic occasion

The writer writes: ‘At the Coronation itself, Prince Harry was seated within the third row of the royal part, instantly behind Princess Anne, who was carrying a hanging red-plumed bicorn hat that remained on her head all through. 

‘Social media snipers immediately concluded that Harry had been intentionally positioned behind his aunt’s tall hat to obscure his view.

‘This is nonsense. Not solely do the Lord Chamberlain’s Office not assume like that, however the Princess Royal had solely switched to that seat after her request for a speedy exit. 

‘The hat was an attention-grabbing query,’ the Princess recalled later. ‘I stated: “Are you sure you want me to keep the hat on? Because it’s quite a decent-sized hat.” And the reply was sure. There you go. Not my alternative.’

The revelation is made in Mr Hardman’s new biography of King Charles which is being completely serialised by the Daily Mail. 

Elsewhere within the ebook, it’s claimed Queen Elizabeth was infuriated by Harry and Meghan Markle’s declare that she had given her blessing to their daughter being named Lilibet.

One member of her workers says the late monarch was ‘as offended as I’d ever seen her’ after the Duke and Duchess of Sussex publicly acknowledged they’d not have used her non-public household nickname if she had not been ‘supportive’.

The couple even ordered their agency of attorneys, Schillings, to write down to information broadcasters and publishers – most notably the BBC – saying claims she was not requested for permission had been false and defamatory and shouldn’t be repeated.

The hat in query turned out to be one of many main speaking factors on social media in the course of the historic event in May – after it blocked the view of Prince Harry, who was seated behind Princess Anne (pictured) in Westminster Abbey

But when the Sussexes tried to ‘co-opt’ Buckingham Palace into ‘propping up’ their model of occasions, they had been ‘rebuffed’.

Speaking to members of the Royal Family, associates and palace workers each previous and current, Mr Hardman’s perception into Harry’s relations with members of the family is charming.

In 2021, his and Meghan’s determination to name their new daughter Lilibet, who was born in California and has solely as soon as briefly been to the UK, raised eyebrows.

Lilibet was the affectionate childhood nickname of the late Queen, stated to have come about as a result of as a toddler Princess Elizabeth may by no means pronounce her identify correctly.

It was solely ever utilized by her mother and father, King George VI, the Queen Mother, and her sister, Princess Margaret, in addition to her husband, Prince Philip, and a handful of shut associates.

Charles III: New King, New Court. The Inside Story’ by Robert Hardman to be printed by Macmillan on 18 January at £22

At the time, the BBC reported it had been instructed by a palace supply that the Queen was not requested by the duke and duchess as to whether or not they may use it.

Other sources instructed media, together with the Mail, that whereas the Queen was known as by her grandson and his spouse, she felt she wasn’t ready to say no.

But the Sussexes’ spokesman insisted the couple wouldn’t have used the identify had the Queen not been ‘supportive’. 

They stated on the time: ‘The duke spoke along with his household prematurely of the announcement – in reality his grandmother was the primary member of the family he known as.

‘During that dialog, he shared their hope of naming their daughter Lilibet in her honour. Had she not been supportive, they’d not have used the identify.’

Strongly worded authorized letters had been then despatched out.

Mr Hardman writes that a few of the late monarch’s family had been significantly ” that amidst a wealth of personal household data and criticism of workers members, Harry mysteriously ‘omitted’ your complete incident from his memoir.

The writer says: ‘One privately recalled that Elizabeth II had been ‘as offended as I’d ever seen her’ in 2021 after the Sussexes introduced that she had given them her blessing to name their child daughter ‘Lilibet’, the Queen’s childhood nickname.

‘The couple subsequently fired off warnings of authorized motion in opposition to anybody who dared to recommend in any other case, because the BBC had achieved. However, when the Sussexes tried to co-opt the Palace into propping up their model of occasions, they had been rebuffed.

‘Once once more, it was a case of “recollections may vary” – the late Queen’s response to the Oprah Winfrey interview – so far as Her Majesty was involved.

‘Those noisy threats of authorized motion duly evaporated and the libel actions in opposition to the BBC by no means materialised.’

Charles III: New King, New Court. The Inside Story’ by Robert Hardman to be printed by Macmillan on 18 January at £22.