A Potential Wife for Prince Harry

[Zonk]

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie

He can marry a Catholic. It would just mean that if the situation arose and he was to be King he would be treated as dead - but that it all. He could still do all the duties to support the family etc.

Considering that he would lose his place in the line of succession if he married a Catholic, and as you mentioned that if he was to be King he would be treated as dead, just goes to show that he pretty much just can't marry anyone. Which was the question I answered. And its up for discussion on whether or not Harry not being in Line of Succession would open a can of worms of what support entails. Would the British public want to support (via security detail as Harry is financially supported by his own means) a Prince who is not in Line of Succession?

[Daphoenyx]

Originally Posted by Zonk

Would the British public want to support (via security detail as Harry is financially supported by his own means) a Prince who is not in Line of Succession?

That is something I never thought about...

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by Zonk

Considering that he would lose his place in the line of succession if he married a Catholic, and as you mentioned that if he was to be King he would be treated as dead, just goes to show that he pretty much just can't marry anyone. Which was the question I answered. And its up for discussion on whether or not Harry not being in Line of Succession would open a can of worms of what support entails. Would the British public want to support (via security detail as Harry is financially supported by his own means) a Prince who is not in Line of Succession?

As the line of succession isn't actually anything official as such but rather an indication of where someone is it isn't relevant. Harry can marry anyone and as long as he was seen as doing the work expected of the second son I don't think the British people would worry about his security.

When The Duchess of Kent appears at in an official capacity - very rare I know - she has security and she is Roman Catholic.

If security is only going to be given to people in the line of succession then there shouldn't be any security given to the spouses who aren't ever going to be the monarch.

Security is given based on perceived need - regardless of royal status. If the police believed that you needed it you would get it and the public would have no say in that matter.

[Zonk]

We are veering off topic with the security as I can get into greater detail on why comparing the security for the low key Duchess of Kent with Prince Harry (succession or not) or the security for a well known member of the Royal Family with anyone who needs security is like apples with oranges.

With that in mind, I stand by my original post that Harry can't just marry anyone least of all a Catholic. You are entitled to your opinion and I am entitled to mine.

[Blackadder]

Originally Posted by cd_1

St Andrews is not as expensive as people think it is, i mean, i know many ordinary people who went there. As for their knowing the same friends, that was in St Andrews where they first met and talked to each other because they lived in the same dorm. Nothing more to it. I don't think its daydreaming at all, it has already happened with Kate and William. And no matter how much money the Middletons have, they are middleclass. In England class has very little to do with money and more to do with the right bloodlines.
If your going to dismiss examples that illustrate my point by saying "who really cares for them", then we really can't have a discussion. He is the Queen's grandson as is William. He may be 11th in line to the throne, but trust me, he was very sought after in the English circles!
This has nothing to do with Kate's money, are you serious?? They would still end up together, and she would still probably go to St Andrews even if her parents had been cabin crew/ pilot of BA.


:)) thank you Osipi and iluvbertie:)

1. And I too know people who went to St. Andrews. I also know people who went to Eton, Oxford etc etc. Miss Middleton became part of Williams world in St. Andrews, she would mix with his circles sooner or later, she came from a good family (I presume so in view of her behaviour, even if pictures of her brother may speak another language, but that's neither her fault nor on topic). All this lightens the situation. You don't think Harry will take a girl from a small village in Scotland, unemployed, without education and manners, do you? I loved the Susan Boyle story (for the word twisters: and I love her in general, I'm not saying that lovely Susan has no manners ), but royal circles are a bit different from TV shows.

2. I know the English class system exactly and I appreciate it. Isn't it the case that upper class people have a slightly problem with parvenus? And didn't some of William's friends mock Miss Middleton because her mother was "only" a little stewardess? You see, it's not always that easy and that's why I can't imagine that they would be keen on a working class girl. This may be snobby, but snobbery is people's sport in those circles. I could tell you stories about this certain hobby that wouldn't please you. I'm not saying that Harry and William are snobs, but oh well!

3. I don't dismiss your examples, I just tell you my opinion on them, is that okay? To me personally it was clear from the beginning that Peter and Zara Philips would never lead a royal life. And that's good for them, their choice in partners just didn't surprise me at all.

4. Would William have been together with Miss Middleton for so long and announced an engagement if she was poor as a church mouse? I don't think so. Not because he was searching for a wealthy woman, no. Just because the young British princes simply don't mix with poor people that much. We may have Mette Marit, Letizia, Mary and that's all fine, but for the British royal family, I simply can't imagine such a story. YET.

Thanks.

[Sister Morphine]

Originally Posted by Osipi

(blushes a warming shade of beet read as she leans into cd_1 and whispers "listen to Bertie... she knows these things")

Yeps.. I meant Peter Phillips. The prince Philip in cd's post got me comfuzzled.. yeps that's the ticket.

Anne also requested at the time of her children's birth that they'd not have any titles correct? Similar to what happened when Edward and Sophie had children?

Anne's husband, Cpt. Mark Philips, declined the Queen's offer of an earldom when he married Anne, which meant his children would carry no titles.

When Edward and Sophie had children, they requested they be styled as the children of an earl (as Edward is the Earl of Wessex), rather than the children of a prince (which they legally are anyway). They wanted to lessen the burdens on them that come with a royal title, such as their cousins the Wales' and Yorks'. They are still legally HRH Princess Louise of Wessex and HRH Prince James of Wessex and when they're 18, if they choose to revert to their legal title, they can. Or they can continue to remain as they are. It's up to them at that point.

[Nathalie Cox]

^I didn't know that, thanks Sister Morphine!
It would have been nice to see the Philips siblings styled as royals...

[Wisteria]

Nothing can change the fact that the Philips are the grandchildren of the Sovereign and they have their place in order of precedence even if they do not have the HRH title, which is only natural as their father is not a royal. He could have been an earl but refused, but that would not have made any difference to the status of his two children by The Princess Royal.
Titles seem very important to people who do not have them, but it might surprise many to know how many people have titles and choose not to use them.
On the contrary it is said that when it was suggested that Prince Andrew´s two girls should not be known as HRH he is said to have, to put it mildly, "hit the roof".

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by Sister Morphine

Anne's husband, Cpt. Mark Philips, declined the Queen's offer of an earldom when he married Anne, which meant his children would carry no titles.

When Edward and Sophie had children, they requested they be styled as the children of an earl (as Edward is the Earl of Wessex), rather than the children of a prince (which they legally are anyway). They wanted to lessen the burdens on them that come with a royal title, such as their cousins the Wales' and Yorks'. They are still legally HRH Princess Louise of Wessex and HRH Prince James of Wessex and when they're 18, if they choose to revert to their legal title, they can. Or they can continue to remain as they are. It's up to them at that point.

Knew I'd be set right down along the line.

So as it stands right now, as grandchildren of the monarch through the female line, they carry no titles as Anne's husband at the time declined an earldom (which would have had titles coming with it similar to the Earl of Wessex) They at no point whenever can claim a title.

With Edward's children, it is the parent's wishes that they have titles that go from his own title, The Earl of Wessex. As grandchildren of the male line descent of the monarch, they are legally Princess and Prince but are styled after their father. When they reach adulthood, they can claim the title should they choose to.

Aha.. I think I've got it. For some reason I thought that it was Anne that decided to not have her children have titles at all. Perhaps the two of them (Anne and Mark) at the time decided jointly.

Thanks so much for clarifying this.

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by Wisteria

Nothing can change the fact that the Philips are the grandchildren of the Sovereign and they have their place in order of precedence even if they do not have the HRH title, which is only natural as their father is not a royal. He could have been an earl but refused, but that would not have made any difference to the status of his two children by The Princess Royal.
Titles seem very important to people who do not have them, but it might surprise many to know how many people have titles and choose not to use them.
On the contrary it is said that when it was suggested that Prince Andrew´s two girls should not be known as HRH he is said to have, to put it mildly, "hit the roof".

What has confused me the most I think in this conversation is the LLLLLS.
Prince Philip.. Mark Phillips. Prince Phillip.. My dear uncle at one time stated that he would really have liked to name his son Phillip for one reason. The day would come when the boy would work a gas pump and he'd pull in and say "fill up Phillip". Ok.. my uncle was weird.

Andrew is correct in his going ballistic at Beatrice and Eugenie NOT being HRH for the simple reason that they were from birth. They are princesses of the royal blood and that will never change and both parents wanted the titles for their daughters. Then again, should Beatrice marry Dave Clark, that would NOT make him a prince. If she married him, she'd still be a princess of royal blood, but on marriage would take her husband's title and style likewise. She'd be Mrs. Dave Clark as he doesn't hold a peerage.
Upon her marriage though, the Queen being the font of honor, could bestow Dave with the title of the Duke of Nowhereland should she choose to. Then as styles, and the aka is David, The Duke of Nowhereland and Beatrice could use HRH The Duchess of Nowhereland?

I'm learning.. trust me I am.

[Zonk]

Let's get back to the topic of this thread...a Wife for Harry.

[lyndaW]

Well their is always Princess Madeleine who is free at this moment...she is very interested in charity work, beautiful-blond, abnd already use to Royal Courts, as well as fun loving and loves her horses................Wonder if they have ever met ?? She would be an asset

[Helen Anna]

Originally Posted by lyndaW

Well their is always Princess Madeleine who is free at this moment...she is very interested in charity work, beautiful-blond, abnd already use to Royal Courts, as well as fun loving and loves her horses................Wonder if they have ever met ?? She would be an asset

Yes,they would definitely make a gorgeous couple!
It's a pity though he broke up with Chelsy..I used to love them together.

[Frideswide]

Originally Posted by lyndaW

Well their is always Princess Madeleine

They should invite her to the wedding .....

[qui mal y pense]

That's the last thing the Windsor's need. The daughter of a scandal ridden royal house. They've had their fill.

[brighteyedgirl]

I was just thinking about how we've all speculated about certain ladies being right for Harry, and I was wondering if (had they not dated for years) Chelsy would even measure up to the standards we all set for Harry's future bride. Or would she just be written off for "partying too much" or not being classy enough, wealthy enough, pretty enough, blue blooded enough, etc.

He obviously loved her (and possibly still does) so really anything is possible. Yes she comes from money, but I don't know that that truly factored into their relationship other than her being able to fly back and forth from SA. And even that didn't make their relationship work.

[4Pam]

^ It just all depends on the couple. Maybe she & Harry agreed on taking a break so they can both focus on their chosen careers or maybe they've broken up for good this time. We'll never know.

[cd_1]

I think I once read somewhere that Queen Silvia has stated she would never let P Madeleine become a member of the Windsors, because she was against them and didn't think they were good people... something along those lines. Can anyone confirm this? or am i just imagining things?:S

[Mapleleaf134]

I say Harry should follow his heart like William did.

[brighteyedgirl]

Originally Posted by Mapleleaf134

I say Harry should follow his heart like William did.

I think so too, but the question still remains: where will his heart lead him?