Meghan Markle vs. The Monarchy: How “Screw Your Traditions” Sparked a Royal Storm

For centuries, the British monarchy has thrived on ritual, protocol, and unspoken rules that governed everything from the length of a wedding veil to whether a smile should be subdued or warm. Queen Elizabeth II, who spent her life embodying this continuity, treated tradition as sacred scripture. Her reign was about preservation, not personality. The crown always came first.

Then came Meghan Markle.

An American actress, biracial, divorced, outspoken, and fiercely independent, Meghan embodied everything the monarchy wasn’t. She wasn’t molded by courtiers, palace aides, or centuries of ritual. She was shaped by Hollywood, activism, and a culture that prizes authenticity over conformity. For Meghan, rules were negotiable, protocols outdated, and tradition something to rewrite rather than revere.

And it was that quiet defiance—sometimes unintentional, often deliberate—that left the Queen more furious than the public ever knew.

Two Women, Two Worlds

To understand the storm Meghan triggered, one must first understand what Queen Elizabeth represented. She was the monarchy personified: silent obedience, stiff upper lips, and centuries-old ritual. She didn’t seek to be the star of the show; she was the custodian of the show itself.

Meghan, however, was the opposite. She was magnetic, camera-ready, and unapologetically herself. She hugged people in receiving lines, showed emotion, and refused to tone herself down to fit into Buckingham Palace’s mold. Where Elizabeth operated in whispers and nods, Meghan spoke in bold gestures, fashion choices, and unfiltered authenticity.

This wasn’t just a symbolic clash. It was seismic.

Early Warning Signs

Even in the early days of her courtship with Prince Harry, palace aides whispered about Meghan’s unwillingness to conform. She reportedly asked too many questions, challenged outdated customs, and even sought changes to traditions that most royal brides wouldn’t dare touch.

To Meghan, this was simply being engaged and involved. To the Queen, it was unsettling.

Royal insiders described Meghan as “too opinionated” and “unwilling to be managed.” One aide even remarked that she seemed to expect the monarchy to adapt to her, not the other way around. In a family where modesty and restraint were the currency of respect, Meghan’s Hollywood-style confidence felt like a threat.

The Wedding Veil That Spoke Volumes

If there was one moment that summed up Meghan’s defiance, it was her wedding to Prince Harry in 2018.

Royal tradition dictates that long veils—those dramatic, sweeping trains—are reserved for first-time brides. Camilla, when marrying the future king, respected this custom by avoiding such embellishment. Even Princess Eugenie, at her first wedding, opted for modesty.

But Meghan arrived in a 16-foot-long veil embroidered with all 53 flowers of the Commonwealth. It wasn’t just an accessory. It was a statement.

“To the public, it looked like fashion,” one royal commentator observed. “Inside the palace, it was war.”

The veil carried a message: Meghan wasn’t merely marrying Harry—she was symbolically claiming a role far larger, one tied to the global reach of the monarchy. To Elizabeth and her aides, it looked less like reverence and more like arrogance.

Fashion as Rebellion

If clothes spoke volumes in the Queen’s world, Meghan’s wardrobe screamed rebellion.

Her engagement photos showed her in a sheer, body-hugging Ralph & Russo gown worth over $75,000—glamorous, yes, but deeply inappropriate for the modesty expected of royal brides. Critics accused her of trying to turn a royal moment into a Hollywood red carpet.

At her first official appearance with Harry, Meghan wore ripped jeans and a casual white shirt—something no royal woman before her would have dared. What looked like brunch attire to the public was interpreted by palace staff as a “warning shot.” She wasn’t here to play by the rules.

Bare legs instead of pantyhose at her engagement announcement. A sleek black mini dress at a Hamilton charity event. Wrinkled trousers at Wimbledon. Each outfit carried the same subtext: I do things my way.

And each choice rattled a monarchy where women had spent decades—if not centuries—dressing to blend in, never to upstage.

Barefoot on Bondi Beach

Perhaps the most infamous example came during Harry and Meghan’s royal tour of Australia. Standing on Bondi Beach, cameras flashing, Meghan kicked off her heels and went barefoot.

It looked warm, spontaneous, and relatable to fans. But to the palace, it was a violation of poise. Diana, Kate, and even the Queen had walked beaches before—but always in shoes. That subtle distance, even on sand, symbolized control and dignity.

For Meghan, it was freedom. For Elizabeth, it was chaos. One insider called it “a barefoot revolution,” a symbolic stripping away of the monarchy’s carefully cultivated illusion.

Public Displays of Affection

If Meghan’s wardrobe stirred scandal, her behavior with Harry lit a bonfire.

Royal protocol all but forbids public displays of affection while on duty. Royals may exchange glances, perhaps a discreet touch, but never overt intimacy. Harry and Meghan, however, clung to each other at every turn—holding hands, whispering, brushing arms, even walking down the aisle at solemn services with fingers tightly laced.

To fans, it was sweet, authentic, and modern. To palace insiders, it was cringe-worthy. “You’re not at Coachella,” one commentator snapped. “You’re at a service commemorating the Queen.”

Once again, Meghan had refused to blend into the stiff-upper-lip mold. She wasn’t just breaking protocol; she was rewriting what it meant to be royal—one handhold at a time.

The Queen’s Silent Fury

Behind palace doors, Elizabeth was deeply uncomfortable with Meghan’s disregard for norms. Contrary to popular belief, this disapproval didn’t begin with the Oprah interview or the “Megxit” fallout. It started much earlier—long before the wedding itself.

Every breach of protocol, every fashion statement, every handhold was seen as another crack in the centuries-old foundation. To the Queen, it wasn’t just about clothes or behavior. It was about loyalty to an institution bigger than oneself.

For Meghan, individuality was non-negotiable. For Elizabeth, individuality was dangerous.

A Clash That Couldn’t Be Contained

What made this clash so combustible wasn’t just the personalities involved—it was what they represented.

Elizabeth symbolized tradition, duty, and continuity. Meghan symbolized modernity, authenticity, and disruption. One lived by silence; the other thrived on expression.

Theirs was not merely a generational gap. It was an ideological gulf. And when those two forces collided, the monarchy found itself shaken in ways it hadn’t been for decades.

The Legacy of Defiance

Looking back, Meghan’s every step—whether in Dior gowns, ripped jeans, or barefoot in the sand—was more than fashion. It was rebellion stitched into fabric, protocol challenged in public, tradition tossed aside for individuality.

She didn’t just wear a veil. She wore a message.
She didn’t just go barefoot. She stripped away the illusion.
She didn’t just hold Harry’s hand. She held onto her autonomy.

For the Queen, it was infuriating. For the monarchy, destabilizing. For Meghan, it was survival.

In the end, Meghan Markle’s quiet defiance wasn’t about dresses, veils, or handholds. It was about refusing to be molded into someone else’s vision of royalty. And in doing so, she triggered a royal storm that no amount of smiles, photo ops, or carefully worded palace statements could contain.

The monarchy was built on stillness. Meghan walked in like a storm.

Full video: