Princess Anne raised concerns over ‘decent-sized hat’ that blocked Prince Harry’s view at King’s Coronation but was told to wear it by organisers, new book reveals

The Princess Royal had raised concerns to Coronation organisers that a feather on her headpiece made for ‘quite a decent-sized hat’ but was told to wear it anyway, according to a new royal book.

The hat in question turned out to be one of the major talking points on social media during the historic occasion 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 during the King’s Coronation, where he sat between Jack Brooksbank, the husband of Princess Eugenie, and the late Queen Elizabeth II‘s cousin Princess Alexandra.

Many online were quick to speculate whether the positioning of Anne’s huge feather directly in front of her nephew was a deliberate move to ‘punish’ Harry, who has been outspoken in his criticism of the Royal Family in his Netflix series and memoir Spare.

But in Robert Hardman’s new book, Charles III: New King. New Court. The Inside Story, the Princess defends herself, explaining she had changed seats at the last minute in the hopes of a ‘speedy exit’.

The Princess Royal had raised concerns to Coronation organisers that a feather on her headpiece made for ‘quite a decent-sized hat’ but was told to wear it anyway, according to a new royal book. Pictured, Prince Harry and Princess Anne at the historic event

The author writes: ‘At the Coronation itself, Prince Harry was seated in the third row of the royal section, immediately behind Princess Anne, who was wearing a striking red-plumed bicorn hat that remained on her head throughout. 

‘Social media snipers instantly concluded that Harry had been deliberately placed behind his aunt’s tall hat to obscure his view.

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

‘The hat was an interesting question,’ the Princess recalled later. ‘I said: “Are you sure you want me to keep the hat on? Because it’s quite a decent-sized hat.” And the answer was yes. There you go. Not my choice.’

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

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

One member of her staff says the late monarch was ‘as angry as I’d ever seen her’ after the Duke and Duchess of Sussex publicly stated they would not have used her private family nickname if she had not been ‘supportive’.

The couple even ordered their firm of lawyers, Schillings, to write to news broadcasters and publishers – most notably the BBC – saying claims she was not asked for permission were false and defamatory and should not be repeated.

The hat in question turned out to be one of the major talking points on social media during the historic occasion in May – after it blocked the view of Prince Harry, who was seated behind Princess Anne (pictured) in Westminster Abbey

But when the Sussexes attempted to ‘co-opt’ Buckingham Palace into ‘propping up’ their version of events, they were ‘rebuffed’.

Speaking to members of the Royal Family, friends and palace staff both past and present, Mr Hardman’s insight into Harry’s relations with family members is captivating.

In 2021, his and Meghan’s decision to call their new daughter Lilibet, who was born in California and has only once briefly been to the UK, raised eyebrows.

Lilibet was the affectionate childhood nickname of the late Queen, said to have come about because as a child Princess Elizabeth could never pronounce her name properly.

It was only ever used by her parents, King George VI, the Queen Mother, and her sister, Princess Margaret, as well as her husband, Prince Philip, and a handful of close friends.

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

At the time, the BBC reported it had been told by a palace source that the Queen was not asked by the duke and duchess as to whether they could use it.

Other sources told media, including the Mail, that while the Queen was called by her grandson and his wife, she felt she wasn’t in a position to say no.

But the Sussexes’ spokesman insisted the couple would not have used the name had the Queen not been ‘supportive’. 

They said at the time: ‘The duke spoke with his family in advance of the announcement – in fact his grandmother was the first family member he called.

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

Strongly worded legal letters were then sent out.

Mr Hardman writes that some of the late monarch’s household were particularly ‘interested’ that amidst a wealth of private family information and criticism of staff members, Harry mysteriously ‘omitted’ the entire incident from his memoir.

The author says: ‘One privately recalled that Elizabeth II had been ‘as angry as I’d ever seen her’ in 2021 after the Sussexes announced that she had given them her blessing to call their baby daughter ‘Lilibet’, the Queen’s childhood nickname.

‘The couple subsequently fired off warnings of legal action against anyone who dared to suggest otherwise, as the BBC had done. However, when the Sussexes tried to co-opt the Palace into propping up their version of events, they were rebuffed.

‘Once again, it was a case of “recollections may vary” – the late Queen’s reaction to the Oprah Winfrey interview – as far as Her Majesty was concerned.

‘Those noisy threats of legal action duly evaporated and the libel actions against the BBC never materialised.’

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