The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 1: September-December 2020

[Curryong]

Originally Posted by Denville

Far as I understand when Will took out a lawsuit in France, he used the name Mountbatten WIndsor... and Anne signed her marriage register with that name.

French legal documents do not recognise foreign titles, so William couldn't use Cambridge, and as Anne was marrying and was not yet the Princess Royal she signed as a Mountbatten Windsor, no doubt a compliment to her parents. Senior Royals just do not have surnames as such.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Curryong

French legal documents do not recognise foreign titles, so William couldn't use Cambridge, and as Anne was marrying and was not yet the Princess Royal she signed as a Mountbatten Windsor, no doubt a compliment to her parents. Senior Royals just do not have surnames as such.

And if Harry were taking out a lawsuit in the USA, he would have to produce a surname as well. His legal surname is Mountbatten Windsor.....
As for Anne, as I recall some thought it was odd that she used Mountbatten Windsor when she got married.. but presumably she regarded it as her surname...

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Curryong

Did you not read the quote from the article?

As you asked Denville "Did you not read the quote from the article?", I think it is fair to ask whether you read the quotes from the links in my response, which confirmed what Denville stated.

ETA: The article to which you linked actually states quite directly that Mountbatten-Windsor is a surname. See the thread on surnames.

[ACO]

Originally Posted by Claire

Sentabale was already ready to go when he was asked to join. It really should have gone to William, it was offered to him first.
The Invictus games as well - there are a number world wide such programmes and yes - many people. Harry is just the figure head. And personally I feel that this will be the first patronage to leave Harry in the future.

Where you getting that Sentabale was offered to William? Pretty sure that is not the case and was very much created by Harry and Prince Seeiso. But please provide a source to that information.

Also Invictus Games can't be taken away from Harry. Harry and the Invictus Board made it a completely separate entity from the royal foundation years ago.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

As you asked Denville "Did you not read the quote from the article?", I think it is fair to ask whether you read the quotes from the links in my response, which confirmed what Denville stated.

Sorry Tatiana.. I dont think I saw your response.. is it a few pages back? I sometiems miss posts.....

[MaiaMia_53]

LOL, how could Sentebale be "offered to William first," when it was created by Prince Harry and Prince Seeiso to aid the poor and needy children of Lesotho, and as a tribute to both of their dead mothers?! Relying on facts over fiction is the best option.

https://sentebale.org/who-we-are/

"Sentebale is a charity founded by [Prince Harry] The Duke of Sussex and Prince Seeiso in 2006, following Prince Harry's gap year to Lesotho in 2004. We help the most vulnerable children in Lesotho, Botswana, and Malawi get the support they need to live healthy, productive lives..."


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentebale

"Prince Harry met Prince Seeiso on his gap year in Lesotho and was moved to help vulnerable children and young people..."


More facts:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invictus_Games

"The Invictus Games is an international adaptive multi-sport event, created by Prince Harry, The Duke of Sussex..."

https://invictusgamesfoundation.org/

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Denville

Sorry Tatiana.. I dont think I saw your response.. is it a few pages back? I sometiems miss posts.....

My question was directed at Curryong, not at you. Apologies for the miscommunication.

You did read my response to Curryong, and you replied to it here.

The post in which I linked to my response is here.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

My question was directed at Curryong, not at you. Apologies for the miscommunication.

You did read my response to Curryong, and you replied to it here.

The post in which I linked to my response is here.

Oh sorry I rmember it now.. Brain not so good these days.. old age.....

[caethi]

From https://www.royal.uk/royal-family-name






However, in 1960, The Queen and The Duke of Edinburgh decided that they would like their own direct descendants to be distinguished from the rest of the Royal Family (without changing the name of the Royal House), as Windsor is the surname used by all the male and unmarried female descendants of George V.


It was therefore declared in the Privy Council that The Queen's descendants, other than those with the style of Royal Highness and the title of Prince/Princess, or female descendants who marry, would carry the name of Mountbatten-Windsor.
. . .



The effect of the declaration was that all The Queen's children, on occasions when they needed a surname, would have the surname Mountbatten-Windsor.


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.


The surname Mountbatten-Windsor first appeared on an official document on 14 November 1973, in the marriage register at Westminster Abbey for the marriage of Princess Anne and Captain Mark Phillips.


A proclamation on the Royal Family name by the reigning monarch is not statutory; unlike an Act of Parliament, it does not pass into the law of the land. Such a proclamation is not binding on succeeding reigning sovereigns, nor does it set a precedent which must be followed by reigning sovereigns who come after.


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.

[RandyDrx]

I knew after their podcast that they would find themselves in hot water.


https://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbi...musicians.html

How can Spotify give Meghan and Harry millions when it pays singers £200? Sandie Shaw blasts streaming service for handing out a fortune to former royals for podcast while paying only small amount in royalties to musicians

[Durham]

Originally Posted by Elenath

They simply have jobs and everyone accepts they got that job in part because of who they are and who they know. Just like plenty of other people out there. My father being one of them or some people at work. They still need to prove their worth when on the job.


Same for the Sussexes. They may have gotten this chance because of who they are, they still need to prove they are worth it.

Yes but I said their voice is amplified immeasurably. Which it is. And they know that, as do the organisations they they work with. And they're happy to play on that.

The "call me Harry" guff is for the birds.

[Durham]

Originally Posted by Kataryn

All male offspring in direct line gets a title when they marry. Not the minor Royals, not the ladies, but the males do. Has always be done that way and is not connected to being "working Royals". Edward, AFAIK, was not considered to be a future "Working Royal" and still got his titles.

You are correct but I'm sceptical that HM would have given a dukedom in this day & age if she'd known that Harry had doubts about working for the monarchy. This is not the 1930's or even 1980's for that matter. Public opinion around peerages is very different these days.

[angieuk]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...ittle-kid.html

2 very different personalities; nothing in common.

[Durham]

Working class Mancunian background. What he says makes perfect sense from his perspective.

Too many middle class types on twitter with zero awareness who would brand his words "hate".

[Alison H]

I'm also a Mancunian. And I once spent all evening stood out in the rain watching Oasis do an outdoor concert. However, I wouldn't take too much notice of what Noel Gallagher says: most people get past the idea that swearing every three seconds makes you look cool when they're about 14. You could class someone who runs a food bank as a "do-gooder" - is he going to have a go at them too? Burnage (where the Gallaghers are from) is a very underprivileged area, but I don't see the Gallaghers doing anything to help there, and I'm sure it'd be much appreciated.

[Durham]

Originally Posted by Alison H

I'm also a Mancunian. And I once spent all evening stood out in the rain watching Oasis do an outdoor concert. However, I wouldn't take too much notice of what Noel Gallagher says: most people get past the idea that swearing every three seconds makes you look cool when they're about 14. You could class someone who runs a food bank as a "do-gooder" - is he going to have a go at them too? Burnage (where the Gallaghers are from) is a very underprivileged area, but I don't see the Gallaghers doing anything to help there, and I'm sure it'd be much appreciated.

I know Burnage well. Next door to Didsbury & the Heatons! It is as you say.

I don't know his views on dogooders in general but his attitude about royalty doesn't surprise me given his upbringing (Irish working class Mancunian). It will be a point of view shared by others.

[Somebody]

Originally Posted by Durham

You are correct but I'm sceptical that HM would have given a dukedom in this day & age if she'd known that Harry had doubts about working for the monarchy. This is not the 1930's or even 1980's for that matter. Public opinion around peerages is very different these days.

And even previously, the expectation was that any royal duke would work for the firm. Which is why the current duke of Gloucester had to give up his career in architecture when he unexpectedly became the heir to his father's ducal title because of his brother's untimely death. So, that responsibility didn't end with the children of the monarch but included the royal dukes of the next generation. Only when the ducal titles ceased to be royal, there was no longer any expectation of dedicating your life to service to the crown.

[Duchess_Watcher]

All of a sudden, there are articles "Harry would have left the Royal family w/o Meghan" what a load of crock? I mean he never looked unhappy before! Why would he had left? It's sad, his life will now be behind a boring podcast.

He has left his friends, his family and the only home he ever known for a woman he hasn't even know for 5 years. Didn't they meet in 2016, married in 2018? Very sad.

[acdc1]

Originally Posted by Durham

You are correct but I'm sceptical that HM would have given a dukedom in this day & age if she'd known that Harry had doubts about working for the monarchy. This is not the 1930's or even 1980's for that matter. Public opinion around peerages is very different these days.

I have a theory that Harry and Meghan’s unhappiness being working royals and ultimate leave from the family really threw “the powers that be” for a loop. There’s just such a sense of duty within the family, and I can’t think of a time since the Abdication when someone has voluntarily stepped away from the Firm... maybe the Duchess of Kent (not counting Andrew because it’s a totally different situation entirely) I look at someone like the Duke of Gloucester, who was unexpectedly put in the position when his brother died and gave up his whole private career to work for the Firm. I get the sense that they truly do think “This is your duty and your birthright to work for the good of the country and its people.” I would assume that not everyone has been particularly happy in the role, but for the most part they’ve stuck it out. I think they may have also been surprised because H&M seemed so gung-ho in their engagement interview, and I truly do think that their intention at that time was to be working royals, but that Meghan soon became unhappy as a working and living in the UK. I’m still not convinced that Harry had been unhappy prior to the marriage (I personally think that if Meghan had wanted to continue working he would have been more than fine doing so), but I think any feelings of insecurity that he has bloomed and that their unhappiness fed each other’s.

[Durham]

You may well be right. Who knows? Your guess is as good as anyone else's. I haven't got a clue.

There is a feeling that by continuing to use their titles they (well he really) are not "playing the game" as it were. Maybe it's more of a British concern I don't know. I do wonder if there's not a lot of cultural misunderstanding at times.