Prince Harry Is A 'Lonely Sad Man' Who Needs Meghan Markle's 'Royal Label', Royal Expert Claims

Prince Harry has been branded a 'lonely sad man' who still relies on Meghan Markle's 'royal label,' as commentators say the couple are heading down increasingly different paths in Montecito while they approach their eighth wedding anniversary on 19 May, Express UK reports.

The latest round of scrutiny was triggered not by a bombshell interview or a tell‑all book, but by an Instagram horoscope. Earlier this week Meghan, born under the star sign Leo, reshared a video from an astrology account declaring that Taurus, Leo, Scorpio and Aquarius were 'ending the hardest seven years of their lives on April 25.'

She followed it with a lengthy post from another spiritual influencer describing years of tension between 'who you actually are and what the world around you was willing to see' and promising that 'the pressure lifts' after that date.

The timing, as ever with the Sussexes, has not gone unnoticed. Those 'hardest seven years' neatly cover Meghan's transformation from television actress to Duchess, their Windsor wedding watched by almost 30 million people in the UK, the couple's dramatic exit from royal life, their move to California and the launch of a lucrative Sussex brand built on books, television deals and podcasts.

On paper, the life in Montecito looks enviable. Prince Harry and Meghan share a £multi‑million home with their children, Prince Archie, six, and Princess Lilibet, four, and have secured tens of millions of pounds in commercial agreements. Yet several royal watchers argue that behind the glossy surface the pair are moving in sharply different directions.

Prince Harry Between Two Worlds In Montecito

Harry's journey away from the institution he once represented is proving far less straightforward than it first appeared.

The Duke, who gave up his honorary military titles after stepping back as a working royal in 2020 and is no longer entitled to wear military uniform on official occasions, has nevertheless continued to act and speak as if he occupies a quasi‑royal role on the world stage.

That tension was laid bare during his recent trip to Ukraine, which took place just days before King Charles travelled to the United States on a state visit hosted by President Donald Trump.

Harry, who has said he would 'always be part of the royal family' and is 'doing the very thing that I was born to do,' used the Ukraine visit to call on Trump to 'show leadership' in the country's war with Russia, according to royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams.

Fitzwilliams described the visit as 'very deliberately badly timed,' arguing that Harry 'could have gone to Ukraine at any time since the outbreak of the war with Russia but he chose to go days ahead of the King's visit to the US and attack Trump for maximum impact and attention.'

That kind of intervention is unlikely to help Harry's reported hope that his father might open the Invictus Games when they take place in Birmingham next year, an event that could see the Duke bring his whole family back to the UK. For now, his efforts in television and philanthropy have failed to land as powerfully as he had once imagined.

Alexander Larman, author of The Windsors at War, is blunt in his assessment. Harry's decision to quit frontline royal duties 'seemed like a brilliant idea at the time,' he says, appearing to offer a degree of freedom none of 'the Firm' had enjoyed.

'Now his decision is looking a lot less clever than it once was.' From Larman's vantage point, Prince Harry is 'looking lost in Montecito,' cutting 'a pitiable rather than impressive figure' as projects fall short of the couple's initial ambitions.

Meghan Markle, Prince Harry And The Power Of A 'Royal Label'

If Prince Harry is struggling to work out who he is without the institution, Meghan appears to have few such doubts. Her Instagram feed, glossy rebrand and expanding commercial ventures suggest a woman determined to maximise her profile, even if the results have been uneven.

The Duchess has moved into fashion and e‑commerce, most notably by joining clothing platform OneOff as both influencer and investor. The launch, made public during a four‑day private trip to Australia's east coast with Harry, perplexed royal watchers because it fused the language and optics of a royal tour with overt money‑making.

Subscribers to OneOff can buy items Meghan wore on the visit, including a £345 striped Matteau shirt she chose while paying respects at the site of a Bondi Beach terror attack. Lydia Starbuck, associate editor for Royal Central, felt the decision misjudged public sentiment.

'If the attention you're getting is down to a visit that has royal overtones then deciding to promote an online shop for your clothes edit at the same time doesn't seem like a great move,' she says.

Meghan's earlier attempts to carve out a lifestyle empire, including cooking and homeware ranges under the As Ever brand, drew a largely lukewarm response. She will now guest star on the new season of MasterChef Australia, continuing a determined push into mainstream entertainment and consumer culture.

Fitzwilliams is candid about what underpins that strategy. Meghan, he argues, 'is building their brand commercially and while she doesn't seem to be particularly talented and her projects have seen varying degrees of commercial success, she does have that all‑important Sussex name to trade on which she did in Australia, however inappropriately.'

That 'Sussex name' is, of course, another way of saying 'Prince Harry.' And some analysts believe the balance of dependence in the marriage runs only one way.

Royal biographer Tom Bower, speaking on the Daily Expresso podcast, described the Sussex partnership as a 'good business' arrangement. 'I think in the end he needs her and she needs him,' Bower said, before adding that Harry is 'a lonely sad man, and she needs the label.'

The idea that Meghan requires his title more than his company is not universally shared, but few dispute that she is the more dominant figure. Fitzwilliams notes that Harry 'has admitted to a lot of trauma and needing therapy' and that Meghan 'came along at a time in his life when he needed her and he still needs her,' while stressing there is 'no sign this relationship is failing.'

Meghan's astrological musing about surviving a punishing seven‑year stretch hints at a desire to turn the page. Starbuck calls that post 'bizarre to say the least,' given that 'a large part of the past seven years seems to have been focused on them telling their story. And now we've all heard it and moved on.'

What comes next is less clear. Their eighth anniversary on 19 May will inevitably invite comparisons with the more traditional family‑centred image projected by the Prince and Princess of Wales.

Whether Prince Harry and Meghan decide to echo that tone or double down on their separate projects may offer the clearest sign yet of which future they truly see for themselves.