Queen Camilla Believes 'Divisive' Meghan Markle 'Brainwashed' Prince Harry, New Book Claims

Queen Camilla privately told a friend that Meghan Markle had 'brainwashed' Prince Harry before the Duke and Duchess of Sussex quit royal life in January 2020, according to forthcoming book Betrayal: Power, Deceit and the Fight for the Future of the Royal Family by Tom Bower, with excerpts serialised in The Times this week ahead of its official release on March 26.

Harry and Meghan's departure from the royal family, labelled 'Megxit' in the press, marked one of the most turbulent ruptures in the monarchy's recent history. The couple stepped back from their senior working roles in a decision announced without the palace's blessing, and subsequently settled in Montecito, California, where they have built new lives around Netflix partnerships, Meghan's lifestyle brand As Ever, and their Archewell Foundation. Bower, who is 79, covered much of this ground in his 2022 bestseller Revenge: Meghan, Harry and the War Between the Windsors and now claims, in Betrayal, to be returning with material that goes considerably further.

How Meghan Markle Allegedly Changed Prince Harry

According to the excerpts, the shift in Harry's behaviour was stark and, by Bower's account, progressive. 'Meghan had become a divisive agent,' Bower writes. 'To please her, Harry was ignoring his old friends. He even changed his telephone number without telling his family.' One might chalk that sort of social withdrawal up to the ordinary demands of a new marriage, but Bower's framing leaves precious little room for that reading. 'The jovial lad about town became possessed by seeking revenge,' he continues. 'Increasingly, his character mirrored Meghan's. Emotionally, he veered towards extremes. Simple dislikes became passionate hatred.'

These observations rest on anonymous sourcing throughout. Bower does not name the individuals who reportedly witnessed this change, and none of the claims can be independently verified. What they represent, at the very least, is a portrait of how certain people within the royal household apparently interpreted what was unfolding before them. 'Meghan's brainwashed Harry,' Camilla allegedly told a friend, a line Bower renders without apparent qualification or caveat.

Prince William and the Princess of Wales were, according to the book, equally alarmed. Bower writes that both 'evidently saw Meghan as a threat rather than an ally' and that William and Kate 'lamented Harry's unlikely chances of one day being king, just as Camilla regretted the possibility that she would never be the Queen.' That last clause sits somewhat awkwardly, given that Camilla is now Queen, which raises questions about the precise moment in the timeline Bower is actually describing.​

The Sussexes Push Back Against Bower's Betrayal

The couple's spokesperson issued a pointed rebuttal on Saturday. 'Mr Bower's commentary has long crossed the line from criticism into fixation,' the statement read. The response also cited a remark Bower reportedly made publicly, that 'the monarchy in fact depends on actually obliterating the Sussexes from our state of life,' presenting it as a candid window into the author's frame of mind rather than any claim to journalistic neutrality.

'He has made a career out of constructing ever more elaborate theories about people he does not know and has never met,' the statement continued. 'Those interested in facts will look elsewhere; those seeking deranged conspiracy and melodrama know exactly where to find him.'

Whether the rebuke will change anything is debatable. Bower's previous book on the Sussexes reached a substantial audience, and public appetite for this kind of royal drama appears, if anything, stubbornly undiminished.

Betrayal also reportedly describes Harry's Invictus Games, which he founded for wounded and ill military personnel and veterans, as 'the Meghan Games,' a reference to the duchess's prominent visibility at the 2025 event that Bower frames as an encroachment on what was once solely Harry's enterprise. The Sussexes have not addressed that particular claim separately.​