The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #6101  
Old 05-29-2017, 06:14 PM
xenobia's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Near the artic circle, Sweden
Posts: 696
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
No but the queen and the powers that be will have a say, and they are not IMO going to allow a marriage to someone of a different culture, without there being soeme trial of the relationship in a more "real life" situation. Its hard ot say what marriages will work, but the more a couple have in common and the longer they have known each other in day to day life, the better chance they have. HM and Charles wont want to OK a marriage till the couple have had a longer period of knowing each other, and problaby living together discreetly.
So are you saying that they should be dating for something like five years, like William and Kate? If so, she would be 40 by the time they got married.

These two are older than W&K were when they begun dating. They have been around the block, and back. If you also take into consideration that at least one of them (Harry) said that he wants kids, they will probably get married next year or go separate ways very soon.
__________________

  #6102  
Old 05-29-2017, 06:19 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Torrance, United States
Posts: 3,227
Quote:
These two are older than W&K were when they begun dating. They have been around the block, and back. If you also take into consideration that at least one of them (Harry) said that he wants kids, they will probably get married next year or go separate ways very soon.
Excellent point. These are two adults in their thirties not college students.
__________________

  #6103  
Old 05-29-2017, 06:38 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 5,687
Don't know if this was posted

Quote:
The couple spent just four hours at the black tie bash at Bucklebury Manor, the Middletons’ Berkshire home, before quietly slipping away to London.

A wedding insider said “It was very much a case of an early night for Harry and Meghan. While other guests revelled until 4am, they left at midnight.

“Meghan is a really lovely girl. I was quite surprised how shy and softly spoken she was. They look really sweet together – really comfortable in each other’s company and very happy.”
Read more: Meghan Markle and Prince Harry left Pippa Middleton's wedding early to be together | Royal | News | Express.co.uk
  #6104  
Old 05-29-2017, 06:48 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 3,708
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolph View Post

Midnight is considered an early night?

If they really had to drive back to London, with Meghan due to fly home the following day, it seems like they stayed quite a while.
  #6105  
Old 05-29-2017, 07:22 PM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,326
Midnight is early compared to the other guests, who stayed until 4. It's all relative.
  #6106  
Old 05-29-2017, 07:43 PM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 319
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rudolph View Post
Yes indeed it was posted here a few pages ago. And I already commented how if Meghan seemed 'shy,' it was probably due to her feeling all eyes on her and thus behaving a bit reserved, as would be normal. Meghan Markle is not a shy person at all, from what I can detect. Do people pay any attention to linked videos, clips, interviews, etc?

Does Meghan's confidence and articulateness in the below videos strike anyone as coming from a person who is somehow shy? I doubt it! Meghan is on the other hand, IMO, very sweet, kind, feminine, down-to-earth, soft-spoken, positive, full of energy, and fun-loving:




"... I am proud to be a woman and a feminist..."

  #6107  
Old 05-29-2017, 09:20 PM
hel hel is offline
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Kitchener, Canada
Posts: 326
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I just had a scathingly, brilliant idea that would really, really make Meghan look like the perfect bride for Harry. Just have TV channels keep rerunning all the old, past episodes of the show that was on not too long back ago called "I Want To Marry Harry". The show was so stupid it was hilarious. All these women competing to win over "Prince Harry" and none of them had a clue whatsoever what the "real" Harry looked like.

Lo and behold! The episodes are on YouTube if you really need a good laugh.

Ha! Seeing that prompted me to look it up on Wikipedia... it was filmed at Englefield House.
  #6108  
Old 05-29-2017, 09:57 PM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 319
^^ Yes, I'd heard that about the series having been filmed at Englefield House, and it was mentioned in some of the articles about Pippa's wedding, I believe. A lot of silly girls on that silly show, but somewhat fun to watch I suppose. I've only seen a few clips and promos.

Getting back to Meghan and Harry, a lot of people wonder how Meghan will be styled upon possible marriage to Prince Harry. Of course, she would automatically become Princess Henry of Wales. If the Sussex dukedom is bestowed upon Harry, perhaps Meghan will be officially known as Rachel Meghan, Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Sussex. But informally she will likely be referred to as Duchess Meghan, and called 'Meghan' by close family and friends, as always.

She might subsequently sign her name as: Rachel Meghan Sussex, or Rachel Meghan Wales, or perhaps simply Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor. Of course an engagement would have to come first.

I'm basing the above suppositions on this article about Duchess Kate's designations:
Why It's Not Princess Catherine - What to Call Kate Middleton, the Duchess of Cambridge
  #6109  
Old 05-29-2017, 10:20 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 4,462
I actually watched this series. Yes, it was silly but amusing! The girls were flown over to England and told they were going to meet a VIP of some sort. When they saw 'Harry' they knew who he was.

After a couple of episodes scepticism kicked in with several and they started questioning his identity. I remember one girl looking at Matthew's nose from the side. He lacked Prince Harry's 'ski-run' effect in profile and she remarked on it. It certainly didn't come as any surprise to the winner that Matthew wasn't a Prince, but they met several times afterwards apparently. I think most of the contestants got the picture after a little while and just played along.

After all, if you have any common sense you'd know that an extremely eligible prince wouldn't need to go on a dating show to find a bride. It was just a bit of fun though.
  #6110  
Old 05-29-2017, 10:24 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 5,914
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel View Post
Rumors are that Harry and Meghan want a house in Norfolk, not far from the Cambridges.

Two potential choices are:

Prince Harry house hunting in Norfolk for loveliest for him and Meghan | Daily Star


I prefer Twyford Hall, it is more attractive.
I posted this last page. I included a link to the real estate information to both, and a few others in the area

The lure of the East - Country Life

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
^^ Yes, I'd heard that about the series having been filmed at Englefield House, and it was mentioned in some of the articles about Pippa's wedding, I believe. A lot of silly girls on that silly show, but somewhat fun to watch I suppose. I've only seen a few clips and promos.

Getting back to Meghan and Harry, a lot of people wonder how Meghan will be styled upon possible marriage to Prince Harry. Of course, she would automatically become Princess Henry of Wales. If the Sussex dukedom is bestowed upon Harry, perhaps Meghan will be officially known as Rachel Meghan, Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Sussex. But informally she will likely be referred to as Duchess Meghan, and called 'Meghan' by close family and friends, as always.

She might subsequently sign her name as: Rachel Meghan Sussex, or Rachel Meghan Wales, or perhaps simply Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor. Of course an engagement would have to come first.

I'm basing the above suppositions on this article about Duchess Kate's designations:
Why It's Not Princess Catherine - What to Call Kate Middleton, the Duchess of Cambridge



It's obvious now why Kate is called by her given name, Catherine. Since there have been other British queens named Catherine, upon William's accession to the throne, Kate will be known as Her Majesty Queen Consort Catherine VI of Great Britain. There are no past British queens named Rachel, but it is an ancient, biblical name that is found in some aristocratic families.
She won't officially be known as Rachel Meghan.....Not unless they get divorced. She will be Hrh Duchess of X. Like Kate. What the media calls her is another matter. She won't be Rachel again unless 1 they divorce 2 she is widowed and the monarch allows her to go by Princess Rachel when her possible son marries.

Nor could she sign it Rachel Wales. As soon as Harry is made a Duke, he will no longer be of Wales. Like William is now William Cambridge.

Catherine will have no number. Nor have the word consort in her title. She will simply be Queen Catherine. Only reigning monarchs have a numerical. The queen mother was not Queen consort Elizabeth III (possibly IV as two English Woodville and York, one Scottish ) she was simply queen Elizabeth.
  #6111  
Old 05-29-2017, 10:42 PM
hel hel is offline
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Location: Kitchener, Canada
Posts: 326
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
Oh the media..they've had Harry house hunting for over a year at least.


LaRae
To be fair, I'm 95% sure that the "Harry's looking at a house" stories are based on press "leaks" (is it really a leak if it's made up?) from the estate agents who are selling the houses in question.

Basically, it's a way to get high-value homes free international advertising.

Regarding the Sandringham Estate and the housing stock therein, their website states:
Quote:
There are over 150 residential, commercial and agricultural properties on The Sandringham Estate. We frequently have properties available for rental across 11 villages, from Wolferton across to Bircham. These are let to tenants on Assured Shorthold Tenancies.
https://www.sandringhamestate.co.uk/...te/properties/
I can't help noticing the anti-feline prejudice.
  #6112  
Old 05-29-2017, 11:12 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 4,927
However as already pointed out why would he need to buy a house? He has access to several from the way it sounds on the property already owned by the BRF...as William did.


LaRae
  #6113  
Old 05-29-2017, 11:26 PM
Lady Nimue's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Location: Pacific Palisades, United States
Posts: 2,729
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
[...] if Meghan seemed 'shy,' it was probably due to her feeling all eyes on her and thus behaving a bit reserved, as would be normal. Meghan Markle is not a shy person at all, from what I can detect.
Agree. She's an actress. She is not shy. But she knows how to modulate her behavior to the circumstances. She was a guest at a stranger's wedding. She was there because these folks are important to her boyfriend (and might be to her if she marries him). She adjusted accordingly. She was not the hostess. The comments (if true, and one supposes they likely are) say a lot about who Meghan is. She does not always have to be center stage, to be 'on'. She has a private self.
__________________
Russian National Anthem: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bGoNaLjQrV8
O Magnum Mysterium: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWU7dyey6yo
  #6114  
Old 05-29-2017, 11:50 PM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 5,914
Agreed. I'd be put off more if she was said to be out spoken and centre of attention. She is a guest and barely that, a plus one. She won't know most of them. This isn't Harrys social circle, other than Tom abd maybe Eugenie, she is not likely to have met them. It's natural she'd be bit more low key. Among Harrys friends, as she grows more comfortable, she will likely open up more. But she seems comfortable enough in her own skin, she doesn't need to steal focus.
  #6115  
Old 05-29-2017, 11:59 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 4,927
Even for famous people it has to be a bit daunting to go somewhere and realize almost everyone is looking at you even if they are trying to pretend they aren't!

Takes some adjustment.

Reminds me of my son (not a famous person), he and his wife recently moved to Germany...something he's had to get used to is that where they are, the locals look at you...it's not meant to be rude but they just look you over a lot...almost like staring. For Americans this takes some getting used to...I can't imagine having to deal with the famous bit.


LaRae
  #6116  
Old 05-30-2017, 12:02 AM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 319
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
She won't officially be known as Rachel Meghan.....Not unless they get divorced. She will be Hrh Duchess of X. Like Kate. What the media calls her is another matter. She won't be Rachel again unless 1 they divorce 2 she is widowed and the monarch allows her to go by Princess Rachel when her possible son marries.

Nor could she sign it Rachel Wales. As soon as Harry is made a Duke, he will no longer be of Wales. Like William is now William Cambridge.

Catherine will have no number. Nor have the word consort in her title. She will simply be Queen Catherine. Only reigning monarchs have a numerical. The queen mother was not Queen consort Elizabeth III (possibly IV as two English Woodville and York, one Scottish ) she was simply queen Elizabeth.
Yeah sure, I think there will certainly be informal differences vs formal designation and official designation. That's mainly what the article is referencing, despite its inaccuracies. Of course, Kate will be known as Queen Catherine, just as Camilla is likely to be known as Queen Camilla rather than Camilla, Princess Consort.

But officially, Kate will be a Queen Consort, and apparently the sixth British queen named Catherine, although of course it's not done to call her Catherine VI, since she herself will not be a reigning monarch. Her name is certainly steeped in British royal history.

This site https://www.royal.uk/royal-family-name states the following:
For the most part, members of the Royal Family who are entitled to the style and dignity of HRH Prince or Princess do not need a surname, but if at any time any of them do need a surname (such as upon marriage), that surname is Mountbatten-Windsor... Unless The Prince of Wales chooses to alter the present decisions when he becomes king, he will continue to be of the House of Windsor and his grandchildren will use the surname Mountbatten-Windsor.

I don't know why you are suggesting that Meghan won't be 'Rachel Meghan' again unless divorced? She would still have her same first and middle names, no matter what her official title becomes. The question some people have is whether she would formally use Rachel or Meghan? At a wedding ceremony, she would be called 'Rachel Meghan' during recitation of the vows. And of course, her official title would be HRH The Duchess of Sussex, or HRH Princess Henry of Wales if there's no dukedom given.

None of this negates the fact that Meghan would still use a formal first name. The Duchess of Cambridge's formal first name is Catherine, despite being called Kate informally by close friends and family, and Duchess Kate by the media, etc.
  #6117  
Old 05-30-2017, 12:25 AM
Ish's Avatar
Ish Ish is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 3,326



Kate being the sixth woman to have the name Catherine and be Queen consort is irrelevant. Consorts don't have regnal numbers as they aren't the reigning monarch; you'll find that the consorts in history to be given numbers are also ones who reigned themselves.

If Meghan and Harry marry she will become HRH Princess Henry of Wales unless Harry is given a dukedom of his own, in which case he will cease to be "of Wales", but rather HRH Prince Henry, Duke of Wherever, and Meghan will be HRH Princess Henry, Duchess of Wherever.

She'll likely just sign her name as "Meghan" - the only person in the family who signs with anything more than their given name is the Queen, who signs as Elizabeth R. Charles, William, Harry, etc, all sign with just the one name, no last name.

It's not common, but she wouldn't be the first British royal to go by a middle name instead of her first name. Kate publicly using Catherine likely more has to do with not wanting to officially use a nickname - other than Harry himself, no other royal uses a nickname publicly. But a second name... Queen Mary did it, as did her daughter Princess Mary. So did Queen Victoria.
  #6118  
Old 05-30-2017, 12:50 AM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 319
Yep @Ish, I already conceded that the article was inaccurate in referring to Catherine as Catherine VI, as you can see in my previous post.

Most of what you are stating, I already indicated in my post to which you are responding. The title of Queen Consort may be 'irrelevant,' or maybe you mean 'beside-the-point,' but Kate will still officially be Queen Consort, though not referred to by that antiquated designation.

I think there is discussion about Meghan's first name, Rachel, because it is more formal and traditional than Meghan. But I agree that Meghan is used to being called by her middle name and will therefore probably continue to use her middle name informally, and perhaps formally as well.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lady Nimue View Post
Agree. She's an actress. She is not shy. But she knows how to modulate her behavior to the circumstances. She was a guest at a stranger's wedding. She was there because these folks are important to her boyfriend (and might be to her if she marries him). She adjusted accordingly. She was not the hostess. The comments (if true, and one supposes they likely are) say a lot about who Meghan is. She does not always have to be center stage, to be 'on'. She has a private self.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Countessmeout View Post
Agreed. I'd be put off more if she was said to be out spoken and centre of attention. She is a guest and barely that, a plus one. She won't know most of them. This isn't Harrys social circle, other than Tom abd maybe Eugenie, she is not likely to have met them. It's natural she'd be bit more low key. Among Harrys friends, as she grows more comfortable, she will likely open up more. But she seems comfortable enough in her own skin, she doesn't need to steal focus.
I totally agree with your post @Lady Nimue.

While I agree with you too @Countessmeout, I don't think soft-spoken is the opposite of outspoken. :) I think Meghan is both depending upon the circumstances obviously.

It's possible to be soft-spoken and still outgoing, confident and articulate, as Meghan is. Outspoken refers more to being frank, direct, candid and straightforward, which Meghan clearly is in the videos I posted. Soft-spoken means having a soft and gentle speaking voice, which Meghan does have.

Of course, there was no need for Meghan to be 'outspoken' at the wedding after-party of Prince Harry's sister-in-law's sister whom it's unclear whether Meghan ever had the opportunity to meet prior to that evening. Outspoken does not mean loud or aggressive or showy. I don't think anyone should have a need to be 'outspoken' at a wedding after-party in any case, where merriment and family celebration is uppermost in people's minds.

On the other hand, the pictures we've seen of the Inskip wedding in Jamaica, clearly show that Meghan is already quite comfortable in social situations with Harry's close circle of friends. It was reported that she'd already met prior to the Inskip wedding, most of Harry's friends either for dinner or get-togethers at Nott Cott or other outings, such as at Soho House, where it's said that Harry and Meghan frequent. Or possibly at the residences of some of Harry's friends.

So of course Meghan is soft-spoken, and she was apparently quiet and reserved at the after-party, which is understandabe. None of that means she's 'shy,' although it's not unreasonable for someone who'd never met her to gain that impression at that occasion.

Meghan is soft-spoken as well as outspoken, and certainly not shy in the below video which I hadn't seen before, and I find really interesting because of the family information she reveals:

  #6119  
Old 05-30-2017, 01:39 AM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 5,914
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
Yeah sure, I think there will certainly be informal differences vs formal designation and official designation. That's mainly what the article is referencing, despite its inaccuracies. Of course, Kate will be known as Queen Catherine, just as Camilla is likely to be known as Queen Camilla rather than Camilla, Princess Consort.

But officially, Kate will be a Queen Consort, and apparently the sixth British queen named Catherine, although of course it's not done to call her Catherine VI, since she herself will not be a reigning monarch. Her name is certainly steeped in British royal history.

This site https://www.royal.uk/royal-family-name states the following:
For the most part, members of the Royal Family who are entitled to the style and dignity of HRH Prince or Princess do not need a surname, but if at any time any of them do need a surname (such as upon marriage), that surname is Mountbatten-Windsor... Unless The Prince of Wales chooses to alter the present decisions when he becomes king, he will continue to be of the House of Windsor and his grandchildren will use the surname Mountbatten-Windsor.

I don't know why you are suggesting that Meghan won't be 'Rachel Meghan' again unless divorced? She would still have her same first and middle names, no matter what her official title becomes. The question some people have is whether she would formally use Rachel or Meghan? At a wedding ceremony, she would be called 'Rachel Meghan' during recitation of the vows. And of course, her official title would be HRH The Duchess of Sussex, or HRH Princess Henry of Wales if there's no dukedom given.

None of this negates the fact that Meghan would still use a formal first name. The Duchess of Cambridge's formal first name is Catherine, despite being called Kate informally by close friends and family, and Duchess Kate by the media, etc.
In private she could be called whatever. Rachel, Meghan, Meggy. Whatever.

In public, no she will never be Rachel again once she marries. Her legal name will be Princess Henry. If she is called Meghan, Duchess of X, it will be becayse they are divorced. What the press calls them is another matter. Kate is not Kate and only will be again when her husband is king.

Calling her any first name at all after marriage other than Henry, is wrong. Think Princess Michael of Kent.
  #6120  
Old 05-30-2017, 05:41 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 54
Thanks for sharing!

After seeing so many rumors concerning this couple who knows what to believe! I do think that any conversations that Harry has had with his grandmother would remain private between them until the time he was ready to announce it. It seems unlikely that the Queen would go blabbing to her staffers way before then. William & Kate were dogged for years about an engagement & every time it was reported the Queen had given her blessing. We now know none of this turned out to be true. I think Harry will handle his engagement similar to his bro William & no one will know when it is coming until the time.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
A poster on a certain other forum who knows a great deal about the comings and goings of the BRF and has been a source of some useful information in the past due to some contacts in BP itself, came online a little while ago and said that Harry went to BP to have a chat with his grandmother nearly a month ago. He stated that there are rumours all over BP that Harry proposed a while ago, Meghan accepted, and the Queen has already given her permission, presumably after consulting the Privy Council. There's further rumours that he was prepared to marry with or without permission, but who knows.

The poster stated that the announcement has been delayed until September because of Harry's engagements in Australasia, Spanish State Visit, Charles and Camilla's tour of Canada, then the anniversary of Diana's death and the Queen's holiday at Balmoral etc. The poster emphasised that it may all be groundless, but he has heard the same thing for some time. September will allow Meghan to be officially 'unveiled' as Harry's fiancée before the Queen and Duke's 70th wedding anniversary and she could perhaps accompany him to events after that announcement. I'm sorry I can't provide links to this post, but it will be exciting if it is true!
__________________

Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Popular Tags
albania best outfit birthday carl gustaf chris o'neill crown princess mary crown princess mary fashion crown princess victoria current events denmark fashion poll general news hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume infanta cristina infanta leonor infanta sofia iñaki urdangarín king felipe king felipe vi king philippe letizia monarchy news november 2016 october 2016 picture of the week prince alexander prince carl philip prince charles prince daniel prince felix prince gabriel prince nicholas prince oscar princess claire of luxembourg princess estelle princess leonore princess madeleine princess mary princess mary eveningwear princess mary fashion princess of asturias princess sofia princess victoria queen elizabeth ii queen letizia queen letizia casual outfits queen letizia daytime fashion queen letizia fashion queen mathilde queen mathilde daytime fashion queen mathilde fashion queen maxima queen maxima casual wear queen maxima daytime fashion queen maxima fashion queen maxima hats queen maxima style queen rania queen silvia state visit stephanie sweden swedish royal family the duchess of cambridge casual wear the duchess of cambridge daytime fashion the duchess of cambridge fashion the duchess of cambridge hats victoria


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002- Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 10:45 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017
Jelsoft Enterprises