In the glittering yet treacherous world of royalty, where every gesture is scrutinized and every word dissected, Meghan Markle, the Duchess of Sussex, finds herself at the center of yet another storm. The former actress, known for her role as Rachel Zane in the legal drama Suits, has ignited a firestorm of controversy with her claim that Sarah Ferguson, the Duchess of York, hastily taught her the art of curtsying before her first meeting with Queen Elizabeth II in 2016. This anecdote, shared in both her Netflix docuseries Harry & Meghan and Prince Harry’s memoir Spare, paints a picture of a naive newcomer thrust into the arcane traditions of the British monarchy. However, a recently resurfaced clip from Suits has cast doubt on her story, leading critics to brand her a “fraud” and accuse her of weaving a narrative to suit her image. As the debate rages, questions arise: Did Meghan mislead the public, or is this another case of her detractors seizing any opportunity to tarnish her reputation?

The saga began with Meghan’s vivid recounting of her introduction to royal protocol. She described a whirlwind moment at Royal Lodge, the Windsor residence of Sarah Ferguson and Prince Andrew, where she was unexpectedly informed that the Queen would be joining them for lunch. According to Meghan, Prince Harry asked if she knew how to curtsy, to which she responded with bemusement, likening the royal custom to a scene from a medieval dinner theater. In her telling, Sarah Ferguson, affectionately known as Fergie, stepped in to offer a quick lesson, guiding the American actress through the formal gesture just moments before meeting the monarch. Meghan’s retelling, complete with a dramatic reenactment in the Netflix series, portrayed her as an outsider grappling with the peculiarities of royal life, a narrative that resonated with many of her supporters who see her as a modern woman navigating an antiquated institution.

Yet, this charming anecdote has been met with skepticism, thanks to a scene from Suits that has set social media ablaze. In the clip, filmed years before Meghan met Prince Harry, her character Rachel Zane performs a curtsy with apparent ease, suggesting she was already familiar with the gesture. Critics pounced, arguing that this undermines her claim of needing a last-minute tutorial from Fergie. Online commentators have been merciless, with some labeling her “a fraud” and others sarcastically noting that she must have “forgotten” her prior experience. The backlash has reignited debates about Meghan’s credibility, with detractors accusing her of crafting a persona of innocence to garner sympathy, while her defenders argue that the curtsy in Suits was a scripted act, not evidence of real-life expertise.

To understand the weight of this controversy, one must delve into the cultural significance of the curtsy within the British royal family. The gesture, a subtle dip of the knees, is more than a polite formality; it is a symbol of respect and hierarchy, deeply embedded in the monarchy’s traditions. For an American like Meghan, raised in the egalitarian ethos of Los Angeles, the expectation to curtsy to her future husband’s grandmother—albeit the Queen of England—might indeed have felt surreal. Her lighthearted comparison to a “Medieval Times dinner and tournament” in the Netflix series was meant to convey this cultural disconnect, but it has drawn ire from those who view it as disrespectful to the late Queen’s legacy. The resurfaced Suits clip has only fueled their indignation, as it suggests Meghan was not as unfamiliar with the gesture as she claimed.

Sarah Ferguson’s role in this narrative adds another layer of intrigue. Fergie, a colorful figure in the royal orbit, has her own complex history with the monarchy. Once married to Prince Andrew, she faced intense media scrutiny and scandal, yet remained a beloved figure to some for her resilience and warmth. Meghan’s claim that Fergie taught her to curtsy positioned the Duchess of York as a supportive ally, a detail corroborated by Prince Harry in Spare, where he described Fergie demonstrating the gesture outside Royal Lodge. However, Fergie herself has cast doubt on this narrative, stating in a 2023 interview that she “doesn’t really know” Meghan and “hasn’t really met her,” despite their paths crossing at events like the Queen’s funeral in 2022. This contradiction has left royal watchers puzzled: Was Fergie distancing herself from Meghan’s story, or simply downplaying their acquaintance to avoid further controversy?

The public’s reaction has been polarized, reflecting the broader divide over Meghan’s place in the royal narrative. Her critics argue that this incident is part of a pattern, accusing her of deflecting blame and shaping stories to fit her image as a victim of an unforgiving institution. One detractor’s scathing remark—“Meghan is the kind of person who always finds someone else to blame for her own mistakes”—captures the sentiment of those who see her as manipulative. They point to other controversies, such as her use of the “Duchess of Sussex” title on social media without the traditional “The,” which some interpreted as a breach of protocol, or the timing of her wine brand launch on Princess Diana’s birthday, which sparked outrage among Diana’s supporters. Each misstep, real or perceived, adds fuel to the narrative that Meghan is out of touch with royal expectations.

On the other hand, Meghan’s supporters argue that the curtsy controversy is much ado about nothing, a manufactured scandal designed to discredit her. They contend that performing a curtsy as an actress in a scripted scene does not equate to understanding its significance in a royal context. Acting requires mimicking gestures, not mastering their cultural nuances, and Meghan’s surprise at the royal protocol could still be genuine. Her defenders also highlight the double standards she faces: other royals, including Fergie, have weathered scandals without enduring the same level of vitriol. They see the criticism as part of a broader campaign to vilify Meghan, driven by those uncomfortable with her American background, her biracial identity, and her decision to step back from royal duties in 2020.

The Suits connection is particularly fascinating, as it underscores Meghan’s life before royalty. As Rachel Zane, she played a confident paralegal-turned-attorney, a role that earned her acclaim and a substantial paycheck—estimated at $50,000 per episode. Her time on the show, filmed in Toronto, gave her a taste of the spotlight, but nothing could have prepared her for the global scrutiny of royal life. The resurfaced clip, while damaging to her narrative in the eyes of critics, also serves as a reminder of her successful acting career, which she left behind to marry Prince Harry in 2018. Her transition from Hollywood to Windsor was fraught with challenges, from navigating media intrusion to grappling with allegations of racism within the royal family, as revealed in her 2021 Oprah Winfrey interview. The curtsy anecdote, while seemingly trivial, has become a lightning rod for these larger tensions.

Fergie’s own history with the monarchy offers a parallel to Meghan’s struggles. Like Meghan, she faced intense media scrutiny during and after her marriage to Prince Andrew, from financial scandals to tabloid exposés. Yet, Fergie has maintained a cordial relationship with the royal family, even after her divorce, and her daughters, Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie, remain close to Harry and Meghan. This connection makes Fergie’s apparent dismissal of Meghan’s curtsy claim all the more intriguing. Was she protecting her own reputation, or simply clarifying a misunderstanding? Her public comments praising Meghan’s beauty and her happiness with Harry suggest a lack of personal animosity, yet the discrepancy in their stories has fueled speculation of a rift.

As the controversy unfolds, it highlights the precarious balance Meghan navigates as a public figure. Her every action, from launching a lifestyle brand to posting on Instagram, is dissected for hidden meanings or breaches of protocol. The curtsy debate, while rooted in a specific moment, reflects broader questions about authenticity, privilege, and the expectations placed on those who marry into the royal family. For Meghan, the stakes are high: each perceived misstep risks alienating her supporters and emboldening her critics. Yet, her resilience—evident in her charitable work with the Archewell Foundation and her return to public life after stepping back from royal duties—suggests she is determined to carve her own path, curtsy or no curtsy.

In the end, the truth of the curtsy incident may lie in the gray area between memory and perception. Did Meghan exaggerate her naivety to make her story more relatable, or was the Suits curtsy a mere coincidence, irrelevant to her royal experience? The answer may never satisfy everyone, but the controversy underscores the enduring fascination with Meghan Markle—a woman who continues to challenge the monarchy’s traditions, whether by design or by default. As the debate rages on, one thing is clear: in the court of public opinion, Meghan remains both a lightning rod and a trailblazer, her every move a spark in the royal tinderbox.