‘As evidenced by their work over the past year, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex remain committed to their duty and service to the UK and around the world, and have offered their continued support to the organisations they have represented regardless of official role,’ the statement added.
Harry, who at that stage was sixth in line to the throne, would no longer hold an active royal role and his military titles and patronages would also be removed.
‘Meghan too had zero constitutional importance,’ explained royal author Robert Jobson, while Meghan’s Duchess of Sussex title would now be rendered ‘purely symbolic’.
The couple volunteered to forgo all access to the Sovereign Grant and public cash and would also repay the £2.4million of taxpayer funds used to renovate their Windsor home, Frogmore Cottage.
While the pair would retain their HRH titles, they were now unable to use them ‘as they are no longer working members of the Royal Family’.
Allowing the pair to keep their titles was, the Daily Mail’s renowned royal expert Richard Kay believed, due to the repercussions of the Queen’s ruthless decision to strip Princess Diana of her HRH title after her divorce from now-King Charles in 1996.
As a result of the onslaught of public backlash, the royal expert deemed it unlikely that the same step could ever be taken for Harry and Meghan.
For members of the Royal Family, the Sandringham summit was a ‘defining moment’ that served as a clear reminder of ‘the personal cost of stepping away,’ added Mr Jobson in his book, The Windsor Legacy.
Five days after Harry and Meghan’s unprecedented ‘Megxit’ announcement, Her Majesty gathered then-Prince Charles, Prince William and Prince Harry for notorious peacekeeping talks at Sandringham House (pictured), soon dubbed the ‘Sandringham Summit’ by the media
But for Harry, the notorious summit was a ‘hard lesson’ – with the prince ultimately ‘forced to concede far more ground than he anticipated, in exchange for his and Meghan’s ‘freedom’.
However, while the Queen’s unprecedented decision to strip her grandson of his military titles and patronages would no doubt have ‘stung’, Harry ‘felt he had no choice but to leave’.
Adding insult to injury, Her Majesty then ruled several weeks later that Harry and Meghan would also be barred from using Sussex Royal as the brand name to market their merchandise in the US.
When the Palace announced on January 19 that the initial terms of ‘Megxit’ had been agreed by the Queen, a strong sentiment of the monarch’s sadness towards her grandson’s exit was littered throughout the statement.
‘Although we would have preferred them to remain full-time working members of the Royal Family, we respect and understand their wish to live a more independent life as a family while remaining a valued part of my family,’ Her Majesty said.
At the time of the announcement, Mr Kay wrote: ‘Not since 1997 in the aftermath of the death of Diana has the Queen issued such a personal bulletin.’
However, while Her Majesty acknowledged the need to take a firm approach towards the Sussexes’ royal exit, her fond feelings for her grandson never wavered, even in the final few years of her life.
According to royal author Robert Hardman, despite the Sussexes’ estrangement from the Royal Family, the Queen ‘adored Harry right to the end and Harry adored her’.
Speaking to PEOPLE Magazine, the acclaimed royal expert added: ‘I think she was one of the conduits between Windsor and California, and it would have been one of her dearest wishes that [the family] patch things up.’
