Meghan Markle’s Latest Rebrand Sparks Criticism from British Aristocracy
In yet another eyebrow-raising move, Meghan Markle has seemingly rebranded herself—again. The Duchess of Sussex recently announced that she is no longer *Meghan Markle*. Instead, she now prefers to go by *Meghan Sussex*.
However, her bold surname switch didn’t sit well with British aristocracy. Lord Ivar Mountbatten, a second cousin of King Charles and one of the few extended royal family members willing to set the record straight, wasted no time in calling out Meghan’s claim. Speaking to *Town & Country*, he dismissed the name change as “completely incorrect.”
The revelation unfolded during Meghan’s much-talked-about Netflix series, *With Love, Meghan*—a five-hour spectacle that critics argue could have been condensed into a short infomercial on self-pity.
During a conversation with actress Mindy Kaling, Meghan dramatically declared, *“It’s funny you keep saying Meghan Markle. You know, I’m Sussex now.”*
Mindy’s expression—frozen in polite confusion—mirrored what millions were likely thinking.
By *Sussex*, Meghan was referring to the title she received upon marrying into the royal family—the same institution she has spent years both clinging to and condemning. But her justification for the name switch raised even more eyebrows.
She claimed she adopted the surname *Sussex* because, as a mother, she wanted to share a last name with her children.
There’s just one problem—Meghan’s children, Archie and Lilibet, do not have *Sussex* as their legal surname. Their official name is *Mountbatten-Windsor*, the family name given to direct descendants of Queen Elizabeth II.
Lord Ivar, likely exhausted from yet another Meghan-related inquiry, clarified what many already knew:
*"Her family name is not Sussex. Her family name is Mountbatten-Windsor. Her children are called Archie and Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor—they’re not called Archie and Lilibet Sussex because Sussex is a title."*
He further explained that while aristocratic titles may look good on monogrammed towels or secure prime seating at charity galas, they do not function as legal surnames.
"They are the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, but officially, he is Harry Mountbatten-Windsor, and she would be Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor."
This latest controversy raises an intriguing question—what exactly is Meghan’s real name these days?
If she is no longer Meghan Markle and not legally Meghan Sussex, then who is she?
Rachel Ragland? Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor? Or perhaps Meghan Sussex-Ragland?
While it is common for royals to be informally addressed by their titles—such as The Duchess of Sussex—turning a title into a surname is a uniquely Meghan move.
If history has shown us anything, it’s that Meghan treats names, titles, and narratives much like she treats family—discardable when inconvenient.
Will she eventually embrace Mountbatten-Windsor because it sounds posh? Will she reinvent herself yet again as Meghan of Montecito? Or perhaps she’ll follow the path of pop royalty and drop the surname altogether, à la Madonna.
With Meghan, nothing is ever off the table.
In the end, Lord Ivar Mountbatten said what everyone was already thinking—Meghan is simply incorrect.
But when has that ever stopped her before?
