In July 2019, an intimate ceremony took place at Windsor Castle’s private chapel, but it was shrouded in secrecy that raised eyebrows across the nation.
The christening of baby Archie was not just notable for its exclusivity; it also spotlighted the glaring absence of Princess Diana’s sisters, Lady Jane Fellows and Lady Sarah McCorkadale.
These two women had long been vital pillars of support for Prince Harry, especially after the untimely passing of their sister.
Their omission from the carefully curated guest list of only twenty-five attendees sparked curiosity and concern.
Royal Correspondent Helena Worthington pointed out that this exclusion speaks volumes about the choices made by the Sussexes, particularly Meghan Markle.
The christening could have served as a heartfelt tribute to Harry’s maternal lineage, reinforcing family ties.
Instead, it felt more like a Hollywood production prioritizing privacy over cherished family traditions.
Sources close to the palace, who wished to remain anonymous, revealed that Meghan took the reins of the guest list, a departure from royal norms where such decisions are typically made by senior aides in consultation with family.
The control exerted over the event was evident, with one insider revealing that Meghan had a distinct vision for the christening, leaving little room for compromise.
This decision becomes even more significant when considering that Lady Jane was among the first to meet baby Archie, even before some senior royals.
Her absence from the ceremony raised eyebrows about a developing trend of selective family involvement that would characterize the Sussexes’ approach to royal life.
Dr. Malcolm Pearce, a royal historian, argued that this incident marks a systematic distancing from the Spencer family connections.
Despite Meghan and Harry often invoking Princess Diana’s memory to suit their narrative, their actions during the christening tell a contradictory story.
Unlike the christenings of Prince William’s children, where Diana’s sisters were present and featured prominently, Archie’s official portraits glaringly lacked their presence, highlighting the growing rift between the two branches of the royal family.
Adding fuel to the fire, the announcement of the christening’s private nature coincided with the revelation that renovation costs for Frogmore Cottage, the Sussexes’ home, had amounted to £2.4 million, funded by taxpayers.
This timing led to accusations that the couple wanted to enjoy royal privileges while simultaneously excluding the public who supported them.
The guest list appeared to favor Meghan’s close friends, primarily from her American circle, while traditional royal allies were notably absent.
Royal expert Catherine Meyer noted that this event set a precedent for future behavior, suggesting that Meghan was establishing her own separate royal court, distinct from the established support system.
The way the christening was organized foreshadowed many of the issues that would later emerge as sources of contention, including demands for privacy and family tensions.
The absence of Diana’s sisters seemed less like an oversight and more like a calculated choice in the Sussexes’ broader strategy of selective family engagement.
Former royal photographer James Herbert, who has covered numerous royal events, remarked that there was something distinctly different about this occasion.
The level of secrecy and meticulous management felt more akin to a celebrity event than a royal christening.
The lack of key family members like Diana’s sisters only reinforced this impression, making it clear that this was not a typical royal gathering.
Following the ceremony, tensions escalated.
Meghan, seemingly emboldened by the absence of her in-laws, began to unveil hidden details about her experiences within the royal family.
She spoke candidly about the growing rift between Prince Harry and Prince William, claiming that the relationship had soured under the pressure of media scrutiny and the expectations of a perfect public image.
Meghan’s revelations painted a picture of isolation, claiming she had been ostracized by certain family members and excluded from important decisions.
The absence of Diana’s sisters at the christening, she suggested, was a deliberate snub, reflecting underlying resentments.
Her words hung heavy in the air, casting a shadow over what should have been a joyous occasion.
The fallout from Meghan’s comments was immediate and intense.
The media seized on her revelations, turning them into sensational headlines that dominated news cycles.
The royal family, accustomed to maintaining a stoic public facade, found itself embroiled in a public relations crisis.
Official statements were hastily issued to deny allegations and emphasize family unity, but the damage was already done.
Critics quickly labeled Meghan as the villain, accusing her of creating discord within the royal family.
They pointed to her past as an actress, suggesting her revelations were merely a performance aimed at garnering sympathy.
Conversely, her supporters viewed her as a voice of honesty and authenticity, breathing new life into an institution often seen as stifling and traditional.
As the royal family continues to navigate its evolving landscape, the christening of Archie stands as a pivotal moment.
It serves as a stark reminder of how personal choices can ripple through family dynamics and impact long-standing traditions.
The absence of Diana’s sisters raises ongoing questions about balancing respect for family heritage with the desire to forge new paths.
What remains to be seen is whether these changes will ultimately strengthen or weaken the monarchy’s future.