Meghan Markle saw marrying Harry as her ‘big break’ & thought she ‘knew better’ than 1,000-year-old Royal institution

The marriage of Meghan Markle and Prince Harry in May 2018 was heralded as a transformative moment for the British monarchy. Their union promised to bring diversity, modernity, and global appeal to an institution steeped in centuries of tradition. However, as revealed in royal author Tom Quinn’s 2025 book, Yes Ma’am: The Secret Life of Royal Servants, their integration into royal life was fraught with challenges, misunderstandings, and cultural clashes. Drawing on anonymous accounts from palace staff, the book offers a candid look at the couple’s time within the Firm, shedding light on why their royal journey took such a dramatic turn. This article explores the key revelations, the dynamics at play, and the broader lessons about navigating an institution as complex as the monarchy.

Meghan wasn’t aware of was how long it would take her to learn the ropes of royal lifeCredit: PA

A Hollywood Star Meets Royal Protocol

Meghan Markle, a 36-year-old American actress known for her role in Suits, entered the royal family with a resume that included humanitarian work and a successful career. Her confidence, independence, and outspoken advocacy for issues like gender equality set her apart from traditional royal brides. However, according to Quinn’s sources, these qualities led to immediate friction when she arrived at Kensington Palace. Staff described early meetings with Meghan as “awkward” and even “hilarious” due to her assertive approach. One former aide recalled, “She was so confident that you could see she wanted to run the meeting rather than learn about the Royal Family through the meeting.” This contrasted sharply with the monarchy’s hierarchical culture, where deference and gradual integration are expected.

Meghan’s belief in “grabbing the bull by the horns” was admirable but ill-suited to an institution that, as one staffer put it, “is not really a bull.” Another source claimed she thought she “knew better than an institution that has been in business for 1,000 years.” Her approach—rooted in a can-do American mindset—clashed with the palace’s rigid protocols, setting the stage for tensions that would define her royal tenure.

A new book has now claimed that her lack of knowledge did not stop her from taking charge behind the scenes of the Royal Family Credit: AFP

The “Messiah Complex” and Ambitious Vision

Quinn’s book suggests that Meghan’s ambitions went beyond fitting into the royal mold—she aimed to redefine it. Former staff claimed she was driven by a desire to become the “best known and most loved” member of the royal family, a goal that some labeled a “Messiah complex.” This term, implying a belief in being destined to transform or save, was tied to her focus on global impact. One ex-aide recounted Meghan saying, “What Diana started, I want to finish,” referring to Princess Diana’s legacy of humanitarian work and emotional openness. While this reflected her admiration for Harry’s late mother, it also signaled her intent to carve out a prominent role, which alarmed palace officials.

The book alleges that Meghan’s vision was at odds with the monarchy’s carefully curated “pre-approved programme.” Staff reportedly grew concerned that her plans—such as high-profile charitable initiatives or media engagements—did not align with the institution’s pace or priorities. An aide noted, “When joining the Royal Family, you don’t do as you please, you do as you’re told.” This disconnect highlighted a fundamental misunderstanding: Meghan saw herself as a change-maker, while the palace expected her to conform.

Cultural Clashes and Staff Reactions

Meghan’s American background and informal demeanor further complicated her integration. Her habit of hugging staff and offering cheek kisses—gestures common in Hollywood—unsettled the palace’s traditionalist “old guard.” Quinn’s sources describe how these actions led to unfounded rumors, including gossip that Meghan was “flirting” with Prince William. One staffer explained, “The hugging and cheek-kissing fuelled gossip among the staff… which deepened the rift between the brothers.” While there was no truth to the rumors, they contributed to a “tense atmosphere” that exacerbated existing strains within the royal family.

Some staff nicknamed Meghan the “Duchess of Difficult,” a moniker reflecting their frustration with her demands and perceived overconfidence. Quinn’s book attributes part of this to snobbery, with one source admitting that the old guard were “terrific snobs” who resented an American trying to “change things.” However, younger staff saw her as a “trailblazer,” appreciating her efforts to challenge outdated traditions. This split—between those who admired her modernity and those who resisted it—mirrored broader public debates about her role.

Sources claimed that the late Queen handed the new Duchess some of her trusted hands to help her learn the ropesCredit: Getty

The Palace’s Efforts to Support Meghan

Contrary to narratives of outright hostility, Quinn’s book reveals that the royal family made efforts to help Meghan adjust. The late Queen Elizabeth II assigned trusted aides, including Sophie, Duchess of Edinburgh, and Lady Susan Hussey, to guide the new duchess. However, Meghan reportedly rebuffed their assistance, preferring to rely on her own instincts. One source claimed this stemmed from her belief that she could navigate the system independently, a decision that some staff felt hindered her ability to adapt.

The book also notes that Meghan formed a close bond with a junior staff member, which senior royals deemed “inappropriate.” Her warmth, while genuine, blurred professional boundaries in a palace where hierarchy reigns supreme. This incident, combined with her frustration at Harry’s deferential attitude toward staff, underscored her discomfort with the royal pecking order. Quinn writes that Meghan found Harry “too deferential,” particularly when he politely asked staff to perform tasks rather than issuing direct orders, a norm among blood royals.

Harry’s Role and Transformation

Prince Harry, described by staff as “one of the easiest and nicest” to work for, was not immune to criticism. Quinn’s sources recount moments of irritation, such as when he snapped over misplaced papers in his private apartments. However, the book portrays him as deeply influenced by Meghan’s vision. One aide claimed the couple became “drunk on a shared fantasy of being instruments of global transformation,” a mindset that fueled their ambitious plans but alienated palace insiders.

Meghan’s influence also sparked concerns about Harry’s shift in demeanor. Staff jokingly called the couple “Monica and Chandler,” likening them to the Friends characters—a controlling Monica and a more pliable Chandler. Some aides worried that Meghan had turned Harry into a “tree-hugging leftie,” a nod to her progressive ideals and “new age-y” beliefs, which earned her the nickname “Mystic Meg.” While these labels were partly tongue-in-cheek, they reflected unease about the couple’s divergence from royal norms.

The Bigger Picture: Why It Unraveled

The revelations in Yes Ma’am point to a deeper truth: Meghan and Harry’s struggles were less about personal failings and more about an irreconcilable clash between their ambitions and the monarchy’s structure. Meghan’s desire to modernize—through initiatives like mental health advocacy or gender equality campaigns—was laudable but clashed with an institution that prizes stability over rapid change. Harry, caught between loyalty to his wife and his royal upbringing, struggled to bridge the gap.

The book also contextualizes their experience within the royal family’s broader dynamics. Staff noted that senior royals, including King Charles and Prince William, could be “picky” and prone to tantrums, suggesting that Meghan’s challenges were not unique. However, her outsider status and high-profile background amplified scrutiny, making her a lightning rod for criticism.

Lessons from the Palace

Quinn’s account offers several insights into Meghan and Harry’s royal chapter:

Adaptation vs. Transformation: Meghan’s confidence was an asset, but her push to overhaul traditions alienated key allies. A more gradual approach might have won over skeptics.

Cultural Sensitivity: Her American warmth was misread in a formal setting. Understanding palace etiquette could have eased tensions.

Teamwork with Staff: Rejecting experienced aides limited Meghan’s ability to navigate the system. Building trust with insiders might have smoothed her path.

Managing Ambition: Her grand vision inspired some but unnerved others. Aligning her goals with the monarchy’s pace could have reduced friction.

Public Perception: The gossip and nicknames, while unfair, highlight the palace’s rumor mill. Meghan and Harry’s openness later—through interviews and Harry’s memoir Spare—shows they learned to counter narratives directly.

Life After the Palace

By January 2020, Meghan and Harry stepped back as senior royals, relocating to California to pursue financial independence. Their Archewell Foundation, Netflix projects, and Meghan’s lifestyle brand, As Ever, reflect their commitment to impact on their terms. Quinn’s book suggests their palace experience shaped this pivot—having felt constrained, they sought freedom to execute their vision.

Public reaction to their story remains polarized. Some view Meghan as a victim of an inflexible system, while others see her as overstepping her role. Harry’s legal battles, including his 2025 security appeal, and their media ventures indicate a couple determined to define their legacy, even at the cost of family ties.

Tom Quinn’s Yes Ma’am: The Secret Life of Royal Servants paints a vivid picture of Meghan and Harry’s royal journey—a tale of ambition, missteps, and cultural divides. Meghan’s confidence and Harry’s loyalty collided with an institution unprepared for their brand of change. While their time in the palace was turbulent, it revealed the monarchy’s strengths and flaws, sparking a global conversation about tradition versus progress. As the couple builds their future, their story remains a compelling study of what it means to challenge one of the world’s oldest institutions—and the price of trying to reshape it.