Relationships between Members of the British Royal Family


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
:previous: Exactly!

Who would have thought that Charles was close to Zara or any of his other nieces and/or nephew. But than you saw the picture of Charles hugging Zara at the races. The BRF is simply different in how they express their emotions and how they interact with each other in public.
 
I think context is very important here. The Swedish royals are much more open with the relationship between the extended family in public than the BRF. How much exposure do people get to Estelle and Oscar versus the Cambridge kids? The BRF just acts differently in public with other people's children. We've all heard the story about when the Obamas visited Cambridges and Harry. George was asking why Uncle Harry was being so different. What was later explained was there Harry is usually all over the place playing with his nephew when he's visiting. But when have we ever seen that in public? Never pretty much. Yet it doesn't mean it's not happening. It's just the way BRF acts at formal engagements like TTC.

That's all very true but I don't think I'm alone in admitting that I very much enjoy the few glimpses we've had of these types of relationships in the British RF such as the Queen speaking to George at Charlotte's baptism, Diana inviting all of the other cousins over to see the baby at one of the boys' christenings, the Queen grabbing onto William (I believe it was a young William) as Andrew and Sarah left their wedding, Charles holding Camilla's granddaughter on the balcony, etc. It's very true that context is important and we don't often get to see these glimpses but it's so nice when we do. I guess I just wish we'd get a picture every now and then of Harry or even Harry and Meghan interacting with the children. I was hoping we might get one additional picture showing that interaction in the lovely series released for Charles' birthday but no dice.
 
I agree with a lot of what you said especially "I don't honestly believe that William and Harry are anywhere near as close as many people would like to believe they are." I have long argued that point (way before Meghan came on the scene), so no, I don't blame the wives for that.

I do think this expectation is laughable that Catherine and Meghan should be best friends and if not, something sinister is at play. Nobody expects Camilla and Sophie to be two peas in a pod, and attached to the hip, though they're married to brothers too. I don't see anyone whining that William and James Matthews aren't best friends even though they're married to sisters. It's just an unrealistic expectation that's being used to bash two women, by a media that wanted any farfetched excuse to bash them.

I agree with you. I never believed that Harry and William were all that close and this was long before Meghan was a blip on their radar. Harry played the third wheel because it was required. He had little choice so he smiled and went along with it. Now he no longer has to and seems to very happy about it. Who can blame him? He has his own family now. He can attend things with his own wife instead of tagging along with the Cambridges.

That is not to say there is this over the top drama the press are trying to play up. These are grown people with their own lives. It is only natural. They will come together for work and family events like most people do. Nothing wrong with that. It doesn't have to be more than that.
 
And, while we're on the subject, not that I think they should routinely use the children for PR purposes but I do think that a few well placed/timed pictures of Uncle Harry and Aunt Meg having fun with the Cambridge kids would go an awfully long way toward putting to bed the persistent rumors of a rift. We all know that the British RF is adept at PR moves, sometimes with more success than others, but persistent rift rumors is certainly something that, depending on how long they persist, the RF would likely wish to do away with. In that case it certainly might be beneficial to catch a few images of Harry and Meghan being the fun uncle and aunt. And we royal watchers might also enjoy them simply for the cuteness factor. :flowers:
 
I guess I am confused how William and Harry are supposed to show how close they are in public? Especially when William married Kate and than Harry married Meghan?

When they are public they speak to each other, when they married they choose each other as best men, they both shared a smile when they other's brides entered the church, they speak about how the loss of their mother affected them both, they both say how Charles was there for them when Diana died, they joke about the other when they are around each other and when they are not (i.e. Harry making fun of William's baldness, William thinking that Harry getting married means they he won't be eating out of William's fridge, etc.). What exactly are they supposed to do?

The simple fact is that when you marry and start your own family...you spend less time with your siblings because you are concentrating on your own immediate family. That's human nature. And if you are not, your family (including your children) will be short changed.

So again, how are William and Harry supposed to satisfy the public that they are close? Maybe they are not exceedingly close but they seem no more closer than Beatrice/Eugenie and Peter/Zara.

Someone help me out here :)
 
Last edited:
And, while we're on the subject, not that I think they should routinely use the children for PR purposes but I do think that a few well placed/timed pictures of Uncle Harry and Aunt Meg having fun with the Cambridge kids would go an awfully long way toward putting to bed the persistent rumors of a rift. We all know that the British RF is adept at PR moves, sometimes with more success than others, but persistent rift rumors is certainly something that, depending on how long they persist, the RF would likely wish to do away with. In that case it certainly might be beneficial to catch a few images of Harry and Meghan being the fun uncle and aunt. And we royal watchers might also enjoy them simply for the cuteness factor. :flowers:

People would just accuse Meghan of staging a photo op. Nothing Meghan does will endear her to the UK media, so they might as well keep the status quo. ??
 
As much as the media would've liked; I doubt that the move caused any major negative tension or even a minor argument. Of course, it probably took the Cambridges by surprise since William and Harry have always seemed very close (many siblings become closer in adulthood and later teenage years but IIRC William and Harry have been close since childhood), and there might have been some minor initiative "shock" from William however he doesn't strike me as the sort of person to cause a rift between him and Harry, nor does Harry seem like the sort of person who would move away out of spite.

The reality is that both brothers are married now and have families of their own (or are soon to have families of their own in Harry's case) and will naturally drift apart more than they both would probably like. I'm sure they'll arrange trips and days out together beyond joint engagements and family events.
 
I think I've said this in the William & Harry thread, but I haven't seen anything to indicate to me any sort of disconnect or impersonal relationship between the two brothers. Their relationship (what we see of it) reminds me of my brothers, who are 14 months apart in age. It doesn't matter that my brothers live a good day's drive apart, or that my youngest brother's son is a good 8-9 years younger than my other brother's kids - they still have their entire childhood and teenage years of shared memories and experiences that bond them. I suspect that the same is true for Will & Harry. What unites them is far stronger than whatever might divide them.
 
There is a difference between Commonwealth Realms and Commonwealth of Nations. The leadership role in Commonwealth is different than being the monarch of some of the Commonwealth Realms. There are other implications here than holding on to being Queen of other countries.

That was precisely my point actually, Charles will automatically become king of the Commonwealth realms under current law when he succeeds his mother. However, there is no automatic legal requirement that he has to succeed her as Head of the Commonwealth, which is an organization consisting mostly of republics. The fact that the Queen lobbied to have Charles as her successor suggests she is as interested in retaining the family’s status and influence jas the “ earlier kings and queens” did ,
 
I guess I am confused how William and Harry are supposed to show how close they are in public? Especially when William married Kate and than Harry married Meghan?

When they are public they speak to each other, when they married they choose each other as best men, they both shared a smile when they other's brides entered the church, they speak about how the loss of their mother affected them both, they both say how Charles was there for them when Diana died, they joke about the other when they are around each other and when they are not (i.e. Harry making fun of William's baldness, William thinking that Harry getting married means they he won't be eating out of William's fridge, etc.). What exactly are they supposed to do?

The simple fact is that when you marry and start your own family...you spend less time with your siblings because you are concentrating on your own immediate family. That's human nature. And if you are not, your family (including your children) will be short changed.

So again, how are William and Harry supposed to satisfy the public that they are close? Maybe they are not exceedingly close but they seem no more closer than Beatrice/Eugenie and Peter/Zara.

Someone help me out here :)

They shouldn't. Putting on a public spectacle to pretend they are close is silly. There have been plenty of articles that say there is some tension between Charles and Andrew, but C&A haven't staged photo-ops together to reassure the public that they are thick as thieves. Those kind of disingenuous displays would actually add more credence to the rumors, imo. Best to just carry on as normal, so going forward whether the brothers are on good terms or not, public theatrics don't enter the equation. You take the high road and don't acknowledge the tabloids, nothing good comes from taking their bait.
 
They shouldn't. Putting on a public spectacle to pretend they are close is silly. There have been plenty of articles that say there is some tension between Charles and Andrew, but C&A haven't staged photo-ops together to reassure the public that they are thick as thieves. Those kind of disingenuous displays would actually add more credence to the rumors, imo. Best to just carry on as normal, so going forward whether the brothers are on good terms or not, public theatrics don't enter the equation. You take the high road and don't acknowledge the tabloids, nothing good comes from taking their bait.


Incidentally, Andrew was also Charles’ best man, wasn’t he ? I submit then that it means nothing in itself other than tradition.

Having said that, I am pretty sure William and Harry are closer than Charles and Andrew.
 
Incidentally, Andrew was also Charles’ best man, wasn’t he ? I submit then that it means nothing in itself other than tradition.

Having said that, I am pretty sure William and Harry are closer than Charles and Andrew.

Well, Andrew is Harry's godfather too. Though I agree with the best man position being more tradition than anything.
 
That's all very true but I don't think I'm alone in admitting that I very much enjoy the few glimpses we've had of these types of relationships in the British RF such as the Queen speaking to George at Charlotte's baptism, Diana inviting all of the other cousins over to see the baby at one of the boys' christenings, the Queen grabbing onto William (I believe it was a young William) as Andrew and Sarah left their wedding, Charles holding Camilla's granddaughter on the balcony, etc. It's very true that context is important and we don't often get to see these glimpses but it's so nice when we do. I guess I just wish we'd get a picture every now and then of Harry or even Harry and Meghan interacting with the children. I was hoping we might get one additional picture showing that interaction in the lovely series released for Charles' birthday but no dice.

I'm not arguing with that. Of course it'd be nice. My point was that just because we don't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. Or that they don't get along or that they are best friends. They are individual people with their own lives. The don't have to be seen to do these things in order for people to assume they get along. And circling back to what brought this up this time, it doesn't mean Sussexes have to live next door to Cambridges or Meghan is causing all kinds of rift between Harry and his family because somehow she doesn't care about family relationships. It's odd to think that given that she's starting her own family. Clearly it is important to her.

And, while we're on the subject, not that I think they should routinely use the children for PR purposes but I do think that a few well placed/timed pictures of Uncle Harry and Aunt Meg having fun with the Cambridge kids would go an awfully long way toward putting to bed the persistent rumors of a rift. We all know that the British RF is adept at PR moves, sometimes with more success than others, but persistent rift rumors is certainly something that, depending on how long they persist, the RF would likely wish to do away with. In that case it certainly might be beneficial to catch a few images of Harry and Meghan being the fun uncle and aunt. And we royal watchers might also enjoy them simply for the cuteness factor. :flowers:

Why would they need to prove anything with other people's children? I'm personally against using children for any purpose, but this goes beyond anything I would find tolerable. They are about to have their own child, and that's where their focus should be. Not some unsubstantiated rumor about Meghan supposedly causing a rift between brothers just because they don't want to live right next to each other, which could very well be due to a logistical reasons and nothing personal.

Well, Andrew is Harry's godfather too. Though I agree with the best man position being more tradition than anything.

I don't think it's about tradition. Given that the Sussexes wedding had more than a few traditions changed. :lol: Especially given that Meghan didn't have a Maid of Honor/Matron of Honor, it'd been easier had Harry just not have a Best Man either. But he wanted his brother to be his Best Man.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Why are all these wretched articles behind paywalls, and who is leaking among the Palace staff (I presume it's BP staff?)
 
Well we have this lovely article by Camilla Tominey

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...meghan-royal-sisterhood-really-breaking-point

So according to her -- Meghan made Kate cry. The Queen likes Meghan but had to put her in her place. Palace staff think the Sussexes won't last 5 years. Charles is extremely fond of Meghan and is not close at all to William.

That is a lot of information there.

"Palace staff" think ... (or is it more like hope) - Nobody can predict the future, not even the palace staff.
Instead of wishing the newly weds well, they're hoping it doesn't last. What a bunch of gossipy, hateful staff.
 
Why are all these wretched articles behind paywalls, and who is leaking among the Palace staff (I presume it's BP staff?)

A lot of this was put into motion by Jobson's book, so maybe CH staff.
 
Well we have this lovely article by Camilla Tominey

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...meghan-royal-sisterhood-really-breaking-point

So according to her -- Meghan made Kate cry. The Queen likes Meghan but had to put her in her place. Palace staff think the Sussexes won't last 5 years. Charles is extremely fond of Meghan and is not close at all to William.

That is a lot of information there.

Its this kind of information (or, for a better word, misinformation) that gives credence to just why the Sussexes and the Cambridges go out of their way to keep anything that isn't "official" or "public" duty and engagements to themselves.

Personally, I'd feel intruded upon should things that are strictly my family things be in all the papers the next day and the papers doing their best to put a negative slant on things. I don't need to see Harry and Meghan interacting with the Cambridge kids. I've watched Harry for years with kids and recently, Harry and Meghan with kids and I don't need an overactive imagination to picture how they'd interact with Will's kids.

I know in my heart that the press and "sources" aren't to be believed when they give the low down on familial relationships within the House of Windsor. They may get a glimpse here and there just as we do sometimes but they'll never, ever see the whole picture.
 
A lot of this was put into motion by Jobson's book, so maybe CH staff.

It's interesting that what he recently said on Royal Rota. His one line about Harry led to all the drama about tiara. However, he said he's never heard from his sources about the tiara drama and had no idea what the quote was said in reference to. Something smells bad here...

That Telegraph article is behind a paywall. Can someone just give me a quick recap?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well we have this lovely article by Camilla Tominey

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...meghan-royal-sisterhood-really-breaking-point

So according to her -- Meghan made Kate cry. The Queen likes Meghan but had to put her in her place. Palace staff think the Sussexes won't last 5 years. Charles is extremely fond of Meghan and is not close at all to William.

That is a lot of information there.

It iis probably nothing more than rumor, but, again, rumor spreads only when it matches people’s perceptions of what they expect to be true. And, in that case, much of what Camilla Tominey is saying, whether it is true or not, meets popular perception, especially when it comes to William not being close to Charles or the Palace staff betting that the Sussexes won’’t last.
 
Its this kind of information (or, for a better word, misinformation) that gives credence to just why the Sussexes and the Cambridges go out of their way to keep anything that isn't "official" or "public" duty and engagements to themselves.

Personally, I'd feel intruded upon should things that are strictly my family things be in all the papers the next day and the papers doing their best to put a negative slant on things. I don't need to see Harry and Meghan interacting with the Cambridge kids. I've watched Harry for years with kids and recently, Harry and Meghan with kids and I don't need an overactive imagination to picture how they'd interact with Will's kids.

I know in my heart that the press and "sources" aren't to be believed when they give the low down on familial relationships within the House of Windsor. They may get a glimpse here and there just as we do sometimes but they'll never, ever see the whole picture.

I agree with all of this. A sibling squabble overheard by staff becomes a rift; Harry and Meghan moving to a larger house in an area they love is because Meghan and Catherine can't get along; Meghan writing emails early in the morning becomes a story about how demanding she is, etc. Outsiders looking in never have the full picture about relationships in any family, never mind a family as private as the Windsors, but that apparently doesn't stop them from making some money off of sharing their opinions. Even someone like Wendy Barry who wrote about her time as the housekeeper at Highgrove was able to come up with very, very little that was shocking, and that was someone who actually had fairly intimate access to Charles, Diana, Sarah, Andrew, Harry and William, and so on.

So most of this gossip gets a big shrug from me. Time will tell if any of it has any validity, but I've been watching the royals long enough to know that roughly 10% of the gossip that is printed later turns out to have some truth in it, but when it does (such as Charles and Diana's troubles) it's big and hard to hide.

We'll see, but for now, I'm putting all these bits and pieces on the back burner, waiting for more information to validate it or debunk it.
 
Well we have this lovely article by Camilla Tominey

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...meghan-royal-sisterhood-really-breaking-point

So according to her -- Meghan made Kate cry. The Queen likes Meghan but had to put her in her place. Palace staff think the Sussexes won't last 5 years. Charles is extremely fond of Meghan and is not close at all to William.

That is a lot of information there.


Having read the article as well, I can say that according to article the alleged incident between Meghan and Catherine took place in the weeks prior to the Sussex wedding at a fitting for Charlotte's bridesmaid dress. Meghan was understandably under some strain regarding wedding details including her father's attendance. Meanwhile Catherine had just given birth to Louis which is not the easiest time in any new mother's life. To be honest, I believe that this is just a tiff that happened during a stressful period for both women. I'm just sorry for both that this is now in the papers.
 
Last edited:
It's interesting that what he recently said on Royal Rota. His one line about Harry led to all the drama about tiara. However, he said he's never heard from his sources about the tiara drama and had no idea what the quote was said in reference to. Something smells bad here...

That Telegraph article is behind a paywall. Can someone just give me a quick recap?

What I posted about summed it up. Also mention that Eugenie was upset the Sussexes didn't attend her big party after the wedding. Said Charles and Harry have grown closer. Meghan is a demanding boss who doesn't understand what works in Hollywood doesn't work at Buckingham Palace. It basically hit every rumor that has been swirling.
 
What I posted about summed it up. Also mention that Eugenie was upset the Sussexes didn't attend her big party after the wedding. Said Charles and Harry have grown closer. Meghan is a demanding boss who doesn't understand what works in Hollywood doesn't work at Buckingham Palace. It basically hit every rumor that has been swirling.

I see. As for Eugenie being upset, I find that funny. Any reasonable adult might be disappointed they can’t come to everything, but would certainly understand given she’s pregnant and about to start a major tour that would grueling on anyone. So I’m finding it hard to believe that Eugenie would be upset.

What I don’t understand about this demanding boss business is that A) is BP or KP or whoever they are talking to used to a much slower pace than Hollywood? And B) who are those people that are supposedly upset at this? Because Meghan’s closest aide since engagement has been Amy Pickerill, and she’s often looked pretty happy except when she has to step in when someone crosses a line. And what I want to know is if their sources are general palace staff or Sussex staff. Because why does it matter to anyone else how demanding Meghan is? What we know so far is that there hasn’t been any loss of staff that’s been confirmed. There is supposedly someone name Melissa that is so pivotal that we never heard of. And of course they try to blame ELF leaving and Samantha Cohen’s potential leave on Meghan even though those were in the works earlier and had nothing to do with Meghan. And Sam Cohen was announced as interim. Who know what will happen with that.
 
Last edited:
What I posted about summed it up. Also mention that Eugenie was upset the Sussexes didn't attend her big party after the wedding. Said Charles and Harry have grown closer. Meghan is a demanding boss who doesn't understand what works in Hollywood doesn't work at Buckingham Palace. It basically hit every rumor that has been swirling.
:previous: Yes this summed up everything that I read as well in addition to the "incident" between Meghan and Catherine.


Personally, I'd feel intruded upon should things that are strictly my family things be in all the papers the next day and the papers doing their best to put a negative slant on things


Yes I am regretting having clicked on the article in the first place. Every family has its less than happy moments when there is tension and stress. The Windsors and all of the families who have married into the BRF are no exception.
 
Last edited:
I would hope that Eugenie would have been a bit more understanding about the couple attending her party considering that Harry/Meghan had to fly off for a major tour within hours on the other side of the world.

Eugenie has always been close to Harry and strikes me as being a very easy-going person, so that story doesn't really ring true for me. Anyway, wasn't she supposed to be distraught that the baby news was disclosed at her wedding, according to tabloid rumour? Wouldn't have thought she would want them there in that case! Honestly!

Actually, I did read somewhere at the time (not in an anti-Meghan Twitter) that the parents of one bridesmaid at the May wedding were panicky beforehand because the little girl's dress had been sent late by the designers and was about two sizes too big. They had to rush a dressmaker in to re-fit it. So I can understand fraught nerves if the same thing happened with Charlotte.

There was a person who was on the support Communications staff at KP with the first name of Melissa, who left earlier this year. She may have been taken on as extra staff in the run-up to the May wedding.
 
Last edited:
:previous: Honestly, the only person I can tolerate crying in that situation would be Meghan. Anyone else would get a side eye for it. However, given that she didn’t see her own veil until either the day before or the day of, I doubt it. I think it was Zallie Warren if I remembered correctly.
 
Last edited:
I would hope that Eugenie would have been a bit more understanding about the couple attending her party considering that Harry/Meghan had to fly off for a major tour within hours on the other side of the world.

Eugenie has always been close to Harry and strikes me as being a very easy-going person, so that story doesn't really ring true for me. Anyway, wasn't she supposed to be distraught that the baby news was disclosed at her wedding, according to tabloid rumour? Wouldn't have thought she would want them there in that case! Honestly!

Actually, I did read somewhere at the time (not in an anti-Meghan Twitter) that the parents of one bridesmaid at the May wedding were panicky beforehand because the little girl's dress had been sent late by the designers and was about two sizes too big. They had to rush a dressmaker in to re-fit it. So I can understand fraught nerves if the same thing happened with Charlotte.

There was a person who was on the support Communications staff at KP with the first name of Melissa, who left earlier this year. She may have been taken on as extra staff in the run-up to the May wedding.


:previous: Hmmm...two stressed brides-to-be who would be facing the cameras for their televised royal weddings. Throw into the mix one new mother. Yes I believe that there would be a couple of "incidents" even if these were among private citizens and not the Windsors.
 
Last edited:
There are some (people, press, etc.) who like to create issues when there are none. Remember Diana vs. Anne, Catherine vs. Beatrice & Eugenie, etc. I am sure there are those who have been around before and can say at one point there might have been a Margaret vs someone (Brigitte, Katherine, Princess Michael of Kent).

I am not saying that everyone is besties but it is NOT necessary to say that one hates the other one. Let's face it, it doesn't' matter who Harry married...at some point there was going to be a Catherine vs Meghan/Cressida/Chelsy etc.

Drama = Click Bait.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom