Prince Charles' biographer Tom Bower today branded Meghan Markle "spiteful" and accused her of trying to "commercialise the royal family" with zero thought for the Queen.
The royal expert described her and Prince Harry's recent statement as a "threat" that risked "destroying the 93-year-old sovereign of this wonderful country".
He also said Meghan had "no status outside the royal family" in a furious Good Morning Britain debate about the use of her Sussex Royal branding.
Bower, 73, said the Sussexes' choice of words were "rude to the Queen" and Meghan, 38, is looking to "commercialise the royal family" with no regard for the monarch.
He said: "That statement was spiteful fury by Meghan. Meghan gets what Meghan wants".
Bower appeared alongside fellow journalist Afua Adom on Good Morning Britain today who hit back saying the Duchess was a successful actress in her own right before the royal wedding.
It came after the Duke and Duchess of Sussex made an extraordinary online "swipe" at the Queen and other royals on Friday night as they announced they will stop using their Sussex Royal brand when they step down as senior royals on March 31.
The couple then posted a 1114-word "update" on their personal website and claimed the Queen had no "jurisdiction" over the word "Royal" overseas and said the monarch and the Government would have been powerless to stop them had they continued to use the word while abroad.
Bower told the programme: "It was rude to the Queen. What is spiteful is, she married into the royal family not that long ago and she bailed out. But she wants to bail out on her terms.
"What is most important for this country is to protect the reputation of the royal family."
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle walk through the corridors of the Palace of Holyroodhouse. (Photo / Getty)
Adom said it was spiteful of Bower to assume the couple will continue to use "Sussex Royal" even though they have promised not to.
But Bower responded: "What you've really got is this couple being led by Meghan that want to commercialise the royal family."
Adom asked how he could possibly know Harry is being "led by Meghan", to which he replied: "It's the truth.
"She has a whole life, a whole career of commercial exploitation of herself. She has absolutely no status apart from being attached to the royal family."
Adom and host Susanna Reid interrupted to point out that Meghan had a successful career as an actress on the TV show Suits before she met Harry.
She was also involved in charity work and ran her own blog.
But Bower insisted: 'If she wasn't married into the royal family she couldn't have set up a charity, she couldn't start marketing Meghan's footwear and all the rest of it.'
Adom lashed out at Bower again saying: "Before Meghan Markle married Harry she was a successful actress in her own right.
"She was known for doing a heck of a lot of charity work. It's completely disingenuous to say without Harry she would have no status.
"And it's spiteful for you to say that they're going to continue to use it."
Bower said they had agreed "reluctantly" not to use their Instagram-savvy Sussex Royal branding.
He also claimed Meghan's acting career had "come to an end" by the time she became involved with the prince.
He added: "They're trying to make money out of the royal family."
Pressed on why the media's coverage of the couple has been negative at times, he said: "Because of the hypocrisy. At the beginning, she threw herself in it. She started campaigning for the environment and then she took all these private jets.
"When she didn't tell the truth about Archie's birth when she tried to deliberately confuse people about the time of the birth.'
But Adom retorted: "When it comes to Harry and Meghan there seems to be no ability to see that it's right for them.
"It's not all about Meghan, it's about Meghan and Harry and Archie and what's best for them."
But Bower said "it's not about what's best for them" but what's best for the Queen instead.
Prince Harry and Meghan Markle in Cardiff Castle. (Photo / Getty)
He added: "If they do anything to damage the 93-year-old sovereign of this wonderful country, they have got to start questioning themselves.
"It's selfish, victim-like approach to the world."
The Sussex brand
The Daily Mail first reported that the Queen had asked Harry and Meghan not to employ the "Sussex Royal" name when they are no longer working royals.
It is a significant blow for the couple, who have spent tens of thousands of pounds building the Sussex Royal-branded website and creating a hugely popular Instagram feed.
In an unprecedented legal move, the queen has drafted in top lawyers in a bid to enforce the ban.
A string of trademark applications, covering items from clothing and books to stationery and bandanas, were withdrawn.
It comes after MailOnline yesterday revealed that Meghan has told friends there is nothing "legally stopping her and Harry from using their Sussex Royal name".
The Duke and Duchess will stop using their Sussex Royal brand when they step down as senior royals on March 31. (Photo / Getty)
Meghan complained to her inner circle that using the name "shouldn't even be an issue in the first place and it's not like they want to be in the business of selling T-shirts and pencils," the insider said.
They added: "Meghan said she's done with the drama and has no room in her life for naysayers, and the same goes for Harry."
The friend added: "Meghan said the global projects they are working on speak for themselves and they chose that name to protect the royal name, not profit off of it."
But, the insider added: "Meghan has told her inner circle that their success is inevitable with or without their current brand name.
"She said regardless of the name, Harry and Archie have royal blood and no one can take that away. And that as a family, they will always be considered royalty."
Harry and Meghan imply that they are being treated differently to other members of the royal family who can "seek employment outside of the institution".
They say the guidelines are different for them as a 12-month review period has been put in place.
They do insist, however, that it is their "preference" to "continue to represent and support Her Majesty The Queen albeit in a more limited capacity, while not drawing on the Sovereign Grant".
The couple also insisted that security "to protect them and their son" is required amid controversy surrounding protection costs.
Protection for Meghan and Harry is estimated to cost taxpayers in Canada and the UK between $6 million and $12m a year, as staff work round the clock two weeks at a time.
The statement read: "It is agreed that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will continue to require effective security to protect them and their son.
"This is based on the Duke's public profile by virtue of being born into the Royal Family, his military service, the Duchess' own independent profile, and the shared threat and risk level documented specifically over the last few years.
"No further details can be shared as this is classified information for safety reasons."
The couple boldly insists that security is necessary, putting a swift and sudden stop to the naysayers.
Harry and Meghan with their son Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor. (Photo / Getty)
Remaining financially independent has been a key Megxit focal point.
The couple plan to relaunch their careers – potentially earning millions of pounds a year - in a bid to "become financially independent".
This will allow them to give up funding from the Sovereign Grant – the money taxpayers give to the Queen every year – and launch themselves onto the international celebrity circuit.
Earlier this year they said they had "made the choice" to "no longer receive funding" from the Sovereign Grant, adding: "Their Royal Highnesses prefer to release this financial tie."
Harry and Meghan's first post-Megxit appearance earlier this month was at an event held by US banking giant JP Morgan in Miami - an organisation which has been embroiled in a succession of controversies.
The line of succession
The statement spells out the fact that Harry is still sixth in line to the throne.
The line of the succession to the monarchy is: Prince of Wales followed by Prince William, then Prince George, Princess Charlotte, Prince Louis finally followed by Prince Harry.
The statement reads: "As the grandson of Her Majesty and second son of The Prince of Wales, Prince Harry, the Duke of Sussex remains sixth in line to the throne of the British Monarchy and the Order of Precedence is unchanged."
The statement states that the couple will be allowed to keep their patronages even though they won't be allowed to carry out "official duties" for the Queen.
By using the word "allowed" they put the onus on the Queen, who the couple make clear has given her express permission.
Prince William and Catherine, Prince Harry and Meghan. (Photo / Getty)
The statement makes it clear that Harry will maintain military titles including the rank of Major, and honorary ranks of Lieutenant Commander, and Squadron Leader.
It was earlier revealed that Harry is being stripped of a number of military roles including Captain General of the Royal Marines, the ceremonial head of the Corps.
He will also lose Honorary Air Commandant of Royal Air Force Base Honington, and Honorary Commodore-in-Chief of Small Ships and Diving, Royal Naval Command.
Harry will also be barred from wearing his military uniform after stepping back from Armed Forces appointments, although he can still wear his medals at engagements.
Over the weekend, Harry and Meghan faced widespread criticism for their statement.
Ingrid Seward, editor-in-chief of Majesty magazine, said: "It appears to be a gratuitous and ungracious swipe at the Queen. It is kind of saying, "By the way we know we can use royal if we want to".
"The Queen is doing everything she can to keep the peace, but the Sussexes believe the Royal Family is against them. The more you read it, the nastier it appears."
Harry and Meghan's statement on their website in full
AS AGREED AND SET OUT IN JANUARY 2020:
• It is agreed that the commencement of the revised role of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will take effect Spring 2020 and undergo a 12 month review.
• The Royal Family respect and understand the wish of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex to live a more independent life as a family, by removing the supposed 'public interest' justification for media intrusion into their lives. They remain a valued part of Her Majesty's family.
• The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will become privately funded members of The Royal Family with permission to earn their own income and the ability to pursue their own private charitable interests.
• The preference of The Duke and Duchess of Sussex was to continue to represent and support Her Majesty The Queen albeit in a more limited capacity, while not drawing on the Sovereign Grant.
• While there is precedent for other titled members of the Royal Family to seek employment outside of the institution, for The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, a 12-month review period has been put in place.
• Per the agreement The Duke and Duchess of Sussex understand that they are required to step back from Royal duties and not undertake representative duties on behalf of Her Majesty The Queen.
• As agreed and set out in January, The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will retain their "HRH" prefix, thereby formally remaining known as His Royal Highness The Duke of Sussex and Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Sussex. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will no longer actively use their HRH titles as they will no longer be working members of the family as of Spring 2020.
• As the grandson of Her Majesty and second son of The Prince of Wales, Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex remains sixth in line to the throne of The British Monarchy and the Order of Precedence is unchanged.
• It was agreed that The Duke and Duchess will no longer be able to formally carry out 'official duties' for The Queen or represent The Commonwealth, but they will, however, be allowed to maintain their patronages (including those that are classified as 'royal' patronages).
• It is agreed that The Duke and Duchess of Sussex will continue to require effective security to protect them and their son. This is based on The Duke's public profile by virtue of being born into The Royal Family, his military service, the Duchess' own independent profile, and the shared threat and risk level documented specifically over the last few years. No further details can be shared as this is classified information for safety reasons.
• In relation to the military, The Duke of Sussex will retain the rank of Major, and honorary ranks of Lieutenant Commander, and Squadron Leader. During this 12-month period of review, The Duke's official military appointments will not be used as they are in the gift of the Sovereign. No new appointments will be made to fill these roles before the 12-month review of the new arrangements is completed.
• While per the agreement, The Duke will not perform any official duties associated with these roles, given his dedication to the military community and ten years of service he will of course continue his unwavering support to the military community in a non-official capacity. As founder of the Invictus Games, The Duke will proudly continue supporting the military community around the world through the Invictus Games Foundation and The Endeavour Fund.
• Based on the Duke and Duchess of Sussex's desire to have a reduced role as members of The Royal Family, it was decided in January that their Institutional Office would have to be closed, given the primary funding mechanism for this official office at Buckingham Palace is from HRH The Prince of Wales. The Duke and Duchess shared this news with their team personally in January once they knew of the decision, and have worked closely with their staff to ensure a smooth transition for each of them.
• Over the last month and a half, The Duke and Duchess have remained actively involved in this process, which has understandably been saddening for The Duke and Duchess and their loyal staff, given the closeness of Their Royal Highnesses and their dedicated team.
• As The Duke and Duchess will no longer be considered full-time working Members of The Royal Family, it was agreed that use of the word 'Royal' would need to be reviewed as it pertains to organisations associated with them in this new regard. More details on this below.