The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #401  
Old 03-08-2021, 12:18 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Somewhere, United States
Posts: 2,134
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kellydofc View Post
Put like that it all seems even more entitled.


That’s been the tone they’ve adopted IMO since at least the website: Entitled.
__________________

  #402  
Old 03-08-2021, 12:20 AM
Sunnystar's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Oregon, United States
Posts: 628
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria View Post
An eldest son who uses a courtesy peerage title is styled by his title alone, without using his name, so James is known as "Viscount Severn".

https://www.royal.uk/succession

Likewise, Archie would have been known simply as "the Earl of Dumbarton" if he had used the customary courtesy title.


The 1917 and 2012 Letters Patent may be read here:

https://www.heraldica.org/topics/bri...hness_docs.htm
Sorry - I thought I'd seen James referred to as James, Viscount Severn in the media, but clearly the media might have gotten that wrong.

Still, the point remains. If Harry & Meghan were concerned about a "title" for their son, they could have given him the one he can use as the son of the Duke of Sussex, Earl of Dumbarton, Baron Kilkeel.
__________________

  #403  
Old 03-08-2021, 12:20 AM
Claire's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,606
Quote:
Originally Posted by CrownPrincessJava View Post
Do Lady Louise and Viscount Sevren have protection whilst minors? Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie certainly did....

Edit: as of 2011, the Earl and Countess of Wessex lost their RPOs. From my research, it may be funded privately too
No never - and Edward and Sophie lost theirs as well . They only have security when on duty. Bagshot security is privately funded.
  #404  
Old 03-08-2021, 12:24 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jan 2020
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 111
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sunnystar View Post
Sorry - I thought I'd seen James referred to as James, Viscount Severn in the media, but clearly the media might have gotten that wrong.
It's the title of his Wikipedia page, so it's definitely something that is being used, incorrect or not
  #405  
Old 03-08-2021, 12:25 AM
tihkon2's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Stafford, United States
Posts: 452
Regarding the Earl of Dumbarton title...I seem to recall the rumor or speculation that the couple didn't like the title because it had "Dumb" in it and thought Archie would get made fun of if using it. That's just my recollection....
  #406  
Old 03-08-2021, 12:29 AM
Prinsara's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2020
Location: A place to grow, Canada
Posts: 1,502
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
What are you saying? The security concern was not made up. Didn't you listen to what Harry said? His and his family's RPO security was pulled in Canada at a time when they did not have any plans in place. They had hoped initially to be able to live part-time in Canada, and still represent the Crown in some fashion. None of that worked out. Why are you saying that the security concern was made up? There were definite threats to their security, including death threats they had faced since the time of their marriage.
Partly because neither of them had legal status to permanently reside in Canada, a minor detail which neither of them seem to have considered.

I don't believe they ever meant to head anywhere but LA, or they are ridiculously disorganized and shortsighted for a couple with Harry's resources and Meghan's brains. Possibly both.
  #407  
Old 03-08-2021, 12:33 AM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,918
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kellydofc View Post
It's possible that was done because William is the future king. Which once again gives credence to the long floated rumor that Meghan wanted her and Harry to be equal to William and Kate. That was never going to happen because of where they are in the order of succession.
It would probably be Harry more than Meghan who was put off by this, since the Queen had stepped in to do the LP for Charlotte and Louis. I think Harry expected to be treated with equal respect as the second son who was being relied upon to serve and to take on the burdens of royal life.

Plus, Harry's mother raised him in a way so that he would feel good about himself, and not inferior to anyone. Diana even said that she wanted Harry & William to be treated equally as brothers and human beings, even though she knew William would be the heir. If they wanted Harry to pull so much weight serving the crown, especially when Charles became King, why was Harry told that Archie would not receive the titles he was entitled to as Harry's son?

The other part of this is that Harry supposedly wanted to leave when he was younger, possibly to make a career in the military where he felt comfortable and productive. His family and the firm told him it was best that he retire and come back to help out the firm with his grandparents getting older. Harry was not happy about that but he obliged. Seemingly, from his comments during this interview, Harry never really saw a way out as a single man, especially once the military option was denied to him. It was reported that he had not left the royal fold when he was younger due to his love and respect for his grandmother. He talked very lovingly of the Queen, as did Meghan. I believe M&H both felt they would have the opportunity within the firm to play a major role with the Commonwealth. That would definitely have benefited the firm too, so the royal handlers were very shortsighted. Plus, there was too much press attention on M&H. And the success of the South Pacific tour and the way the crowds greeted them (and even some of the good press they received) was frowned upon by some factions in the firm.

There's all of the built-in strictures and rules of the system and pressure from the people running it, which does not appear to be any of the main principals like the Queen or Charles. It appears that QE-II and Charles more or less listen to advice and act based on the regulations of the system, along with fear of the press molding popular opinion.
  #408  
Old 03-08-2021, 12:34 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,382
However, Sophie, Edward, Beatrice, Eugenie etc did not got to war twice against insurgents. I remember when he came back the threats received must have been extreme as Harry had as many as six RPOs around him at one time.

You could say ‘Oh but that was years ago!’ and yes it was, but it wasn’t that long ago (certainly after Harry’s marriage) that a man was jailed in Britain for issuing threats against him.


Add to that the fact that threats of various sorts have been made online in social media regarding Harry, Meghan and their child, right up to now, and there is a question mark over not providing security for a man who fought for his country in a war zone and his family. I remember at the time the family moved to Canada various ex RPOs and spokesmen for security firms believed that there could well be an ongoing risk of harm coming to him and Meghan.
  #409  
Old 03-08-2021, 12:39 AM
Claire's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,606
I honestly dont see the fuss about this interview. I actually expected more.
I feel that Harry and Meghan are having an fist fight over who gets to champion mental health in the world and M& H are going with the we are the victims stance of it. I do not buy the I wasnt allowed to get help story. All royals have regular checkup with their GP - it could have been discussed there and considering Meghan had her own doctors not the BP ones she surely could have hired one. Also she could have phone the hotlines that her husband promotes - there are many NHS and non profit mental health hotlines in the UK.

I do believe that the titles issue and the size of the royal family was discussed at Archie's birth. However it a new law was passed - this forum would have know about it. It concerns me that the royals appear very ill informed or confused about how their own title system works. But I believe that Meghan and Harry were anger that Archie would not be give the HRH Prince on birth, so threw their toys at the cot and said that then they wont accept anything. As Archie will get the exact styling when Charles is made king - does it make a difference to a 2 year old?
3. I do not think that they are broke - just that they are cash poor. Harry's money was tied away in bonds ect. But I do think they are making a lot of this to provide a reason for their money making endeavors. So that when people go - they shouldn't have done Netflix and Spotify - they can say but we had to eat and feed out children. The royals cut us off. I do not feel sorry for them - it was there decision to walk away from the family without making proper plans and yes that includes security. They seem to be under the impression that they need full time VIP security. Maybe they have received threats that we are unaware of. However as they no longer fulfil any roles as UK royals they should pay for it themselves. It was all their decision to live in a expensive area, in an expensive country and then live a luxurious lifestyle.
  #410  
Old 03-08-2021, 12:40 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: St Thomas, U.S. Minor Outlying Islands
Posts: 3,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sionevar View Post
It's the title of his Wikipedia page, so it's definitely something that is being used, incorrect or not
Wikipedia pages follow their own practices, which often do not match with the protocol for royal or noble titles. I believe the title of HRH The Duchess of Sussex's Wikipedia page is Meghan, Duchess of Sussex.
  #411  
Old 03-08-2021, 12:42 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Jakarta, Indonesia
Posts: 205
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
However, Sophie, Edward, Beatrice, Eugenie etc did not got to war twice against insurgents. I remember when he came back the threats received must have been extreme as Harry had as many as six RPOs around him at one time.

You could say ‘Oh but that was years ago!’ and yes it was, but it wasn’t that long ago (certainly after Harry’s marriage) that a man was jailed in Britain for issuing threats against him.


Add to that the fact that threats of various sorts have been made online in social media regarding Harry, Meghan and their child, right up to now, and there is a question mark over not providing security for a man who fought for his country in a war zone and his family. I remember at the time the family moved to Canada various ex RPOs and spokesmen for security firms believed that there could well be an ongoing risk of harm coming to him and Meghan.
Prince George is just a child and he already got death threats a few years ago. Members of the BRF getting death threats isn't something new and it definitely isn't exclusive to Harry and Meghan, no matter how much they like to play the victim.
  #412  
Old 03-08-2021, 12:53 AM
adjovie's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: New Jersey, United States
Posts: 34
The color of their child’s skin!

There were concerns about their child/children’s skin tone

…still waiting for that to sink (SINK) in
  #413  
Old 03-08-2021, 12:59 AM
tihkon2's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Stafford, United States
Posts: 452
Quote:
Originally Posted by adjovie View Post
There were concerns about their child/children’s skin tone

…still waiting for that to sink (SINK) in
So they say. One can believe them or not.
  #414  
Old 03-08-2021, 01:02 AM
Kervjacque's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: New York City, United States
Posts: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fem View Post
And there will be more tomorrow. Here I was thinking they already did enough damage.
That's actually pretty nerve wrecking. When MM told Oprah about the child and them talking about the colour of there child(before being born) was greatly damaging.

I'm curious myself what else she aims to say but wow! when she said that! what a shot.
  #415  
Old 03-08-2021, 01:06 AM
Estel's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Somewhere, India
Posts: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by tihkon2 View Post
So they say. One can believe them or not.
I don't believe it. Neither was I surprised coz I expected her to play the race card to the maximum. This woman is so predictable.
  #416  
Old 03-08-2021, 01:08 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: st. paul, United States
Posts: 1,854
Quote:
Originally Posted by tihkon2 View Post
So they say. One can believe them or not.
Yes, it was a little confusing. Meghan thinks the comment happened during her pregnancy but Harry thinks the moment happened before they married. So they're not sure when it happened?
  #417  
Old 03-08-2021, 01:08 AM
Claire's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,606
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kervjacque View Post
That's actually pretty nerve wrecking. When MM told Oprah about the child and them talking about the colour of there child(before being born) was greatly damaging.

I'm curious myself what else she aims to say but wow! when she said that! what a shot.
It does sound pretty off asking a bi racial woman what colour the children will be - as it is pretty obvious. I dont think this happened it was done for effect. Add to the drama. But it will ask fuel to the argument about the circumstances surrounding Archie's birth -so Meghan has simply added to that s--- storm.
  #418  
Old 03-08-2021, 01:09 AM
adjovie's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: New Jersey, United States
Posts: 34
I doubt Harry would have made it up

The skin tone of their children came from Harry (Meghan relayed it…Harry corroborated it)!!!!!

I doubt Harry would make that up
  #419  
Old 03-08-2021, 01:13 AM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 12,817
You learn so much. I read the comments on here before I ever watched the interview. To see the actual interview after reading all the comments on here, are two totally different experiences. I am not sure why I am shocked.


Meghan claimed that she thought she was just meeting his grandma didnt realize it was the queen?

-No she said she didn't realize everything was so formal. That curtseys were required even at a private lunch at the family home. That bowing and such was reserved for ceremony and for public, not sitting with the queen for tea.

That Meghan thought Archie not having a title at birth was due to race.....

-She made it evident that she knew about the rules about him getting a title when Charles was king. Though technically William's kids should not have had a title either, if the LP had not been issued for them. The reason his kids had a title could have been explained to Meghan but it wasn't.

And yes being told 'well we are going to change the laws about titles when Charles becomes king, so that Archie can't be a prince' would be a shock. Many people might feel 'why is my son not worthy of a title? Why are the York girls and Wessex kids entitled to titles, but my son gets the shaft?'


That she was slandering/attacking Kate when she couldn't defend herself.

-She was very kind to Kate. She made a point of saying she would not go into any detail. And that Kate had apologized.

She had every right to defend herself. Two years in she is still having that thrown in her face. That the evil Meghan had made Saint Catherine cry. So yes she had every right to set it straight, that she was not the villain portrayed.


The whole security issue Harry has a point. The security has never been about how close to throne, or not completely. It was also based on the level of danger that there may be for the people. Edward and Sophie it was thought that there was no high risk worry for them, and security at events was enough. Harry and Meghan certainly have a much higher risk concern then the Wessexes did.


And them staying with Perry makes so much more sense. Everyone was so 'cashing in on friends'. Perry didn't just offer a home he offered security to them. Harry and Meghan suddenly had no security, and cut off from much of their funds. Most people would jump at an offer from a friend to not only a home but to security to protect them, so they could make choices.


As for saying William and his dad are stuck as well. He would know. He lived in the same world. He knows the same restrictions. And he also knows and speaks to them. Its not like they are strangers. And he is right, being a prince is some what being in a cage. Look what happened when they wanted to get a job and step back a bit, they got kicked out. Its an either 'you are all in or you get lost and we don't want you around any more'. They have been treated worse then Andrew who has not been stripped of anything, despite his scandals.


I love that we got a little video of Archie and some stories, but they still let him be private. The anecdotes about him talking is so cute. And him on the beach. I loved the little sign on the chicken hutch.


Sadly some people are so blinded by hatred of Meghan they will never actually listen to what they said.


Harry and Meghan are no saints. They have many faults. But this need to paint them as totally evil, self seeking, money grabbing...... its tired.
  #420  
Old 03-08-2021, 01:13 AM
Estel's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2021
Location: Somewhere, India
Posts: 140
Quote:
Originally Posted by miss whirley View Post
Yes, it was a little confusing. Meghan thinks the comment happened during her pregnancy but Harry thinks the moment happened before they married. So they're not sure when it happened?
N we will not name them coz it's damaging, so let everyone be the suspect, from Prince Phillip to Prince Louis.
__________________

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


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Duke & Duchess of Sussex with Oprah III - Post-Interview, March 9th 2021 - Marengo The Electronic Domain 746 03-12-2021 05:30 AM




Popular Tags
american archie mountbatten-windsor asia baby names biography birth britain britannia british royal family buckingham palace camilla camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles china china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing chinese clarence house colorblindness commonwealth countries coronation daisy doge of venice dresses duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex edward vii family life gemstones george vi hello! henry viii hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume highgrove history hochberg hypothetical monarchs jack brooksbank japan jewellery kensington palace książ castle lili mountbatten-windsor list of rulers medical meghan markle monarchy mongolia mountbatten names nara period plantinum jubilee pless politics portugal prince charles of luxembourg prince harry princess eugenie queen louise royalty of taiwan solomon j solomon spanish royal family speech sussex suthida taiwan thai royal family united states wales


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:46 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×