The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #4861  
Old 04-10-2017, 02:16 AM
MARG's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 9,868
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
You seem as if you are doing some pearl-clutching @ Marg. I don't recall the exact wording, but I read about this several years ago in either a book about the British royals or in one of the publications that focus exclusively on reporting about European royalty (and I don't mean Daily Fail!) I did not see it as that big a deal to keep a refer back record of the source.
Since I have no pearls to clutch, I made do with borrowing my great-aunt's smelling salts!

It is good to remember that when you intimate that HM is acting in such an incredibly odd way, such as when you state that HM, Head of the Church of England and well known for her devout practice of her faith, has taken to giving advice to her family that directly contradicts her very raison dÍtre, it is worth taking note of the source.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
As far as "living with each other," semantics, semantics... MM & PH have essentially been spending a lot of days and nights at Kensington Palace together, as well as vacationing together, no? I guess we shall soon find out whether or not Meghan moves to London after Suits wraps, and whether she will reside in a residence other than Harry's old or new living quarters at Kensington.
Well, unless the romance flames out before then, I guess we will.
__________________

__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
  #4862  
Old 04-10-2017, 04:28 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Waterford, United States
Posts: 1,092
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ish View Post
Charles was Harry's age when he married Diana. Not in his 20s.
Since Diana was a member of 'the club' of titles and lineage, no one thought that a long term courtship was needed since she wasn't considered an outsider.
__________________

  #4863  
Old 04-10-2017, 07:51 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,756
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
as I've pointed out, he is not likely to say that he isn't all that keen to settle down and have a family. That is the sort of question he is bound to be asked at interviews, since the Press and public are mainly interested in his lovelife..
And he may like the idea of a family but IMO he's happy enough with a single life. He may - problaby will - get married in a few years, but I don't know if it will be to Meghan. I think the RF/Queen would be very dubious.. and he isn't likely to go against them
I can see where Harry comes across as enjoying the life he has now. He is naturally a person that enjoys where he is in the moment and makes the best out of situations no matter what it is. He hams it up with kids, he gets down to the eye level when talking to a disabled veteran in a wheelchair. He is distinguishably solemn and proper laying one of the final boots at the Vimy Ridge memorial. He's also a very open person and when he says something, he's saying exactly what he means. He's consistent in his interviews about his hopes for the future and what he wants out of his life. As the sources say, he very much does want marriage and family *but* he also says that it also means finding the right woman. That is a big part of it all. He wants the full monty when it comes to commitment.

Whomever the woman that walks down the aisle with him and whenever it happens has yet to be. I cannot think of one really good reason that either HM, The Queen or Harry's family would be "dubious" about accepting Ms. Markle into their family. When it comes to marriage, this is Harry's choice and his bride-to-be's choice and no one else. There are no real obstacles for this couple once they get things sorted out themselves and have set a path into the future. *IF* this is what they choose to do.

We seem to have differing opinions on Meghan Markle and that's OK. Different opinions make for different, interesting slants on things in our discussions. We don't matter though. It all boils down to two people and that is Harry and the person he is involved with and the decisions that they make.

Of course I'd rather have a royal wedding sooner than later but that is being a bit self serving and that's OK too.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #4864  
Old 04-10-2017, 08:10 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,756
Quote:
Originally Posted by MARG View Post
Since I have no pearls to clutch, I made do with borrowing my great-aunt's smelling salts!
I have some beautiful pearls I never wear as I'm not overly fond of pearls and will gladly loan them to you if you share your smelling salts with me.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MARG View Post
It is good to remember that when you intimate that HM is acting in such an incredibly odd way, such as when you state that HM, Head of the Church of England and well known for her devout practice of her faith, has taken to giving advice to her family that directly contradicts her very raison dÍtre, it is worth taking note of the source.
HM reminds me so much of my mother who we dubbed Sister Mary Vaccuum Cleaner and her position was side kick to the Pope. A very staunch believer in her chosen faith and wild horses couldn't get her to go against it. She refused to be my matron of honor at my second wedding because it wasn't in the Church and went against her beliefs. I understand that. She also understood that her faith and how she practiced it was personal and didn't infringe on what other people believed or practiced.

Its very possible that HM's faith dictates her actions and her beliefs but she's seen a lot of changes in the world in her very long life and she also does not impose or infringe her beliefs on those around her. She's learned a lot about how marriages and the way marriages are looked at have changed and that sometimes to assure a long and prosperous marriage between two people, its wise to perhaps experience the day to day "ordinariness" before making a decision to take the vows. She may never have seen that as a way to go for herself but she can understand the necessity of it for someone else. I don't know. I'm not her. Perhaps in situations like personal relationships, she's Grandmother first and Supreme Governor of the Church of England and Queen second? Supportive, always a shoulder to lean on and truly loves her family.

Of course I'm just guessing and seeing it from across the pond and for the most part, have only seen HM, The Queen with her "game face" on in public.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #4865  
Old 04-10-2017, 02:45 PM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 29
Quote:
Originally Posted by sndral View Post
I don't know anything about TV series filming schedules, but from what I've read filming can be pretty intense. The only schedule for Suits filming in 2017, that I found (a schedule of things being filmed in Toronto beginning and end dates) stated that it started filming 4/4 and will finish 11/15. Assuming this is true, then I would not expect much news or couple sightings on the Harry/Meghan front for several months.
When I checked the Suits TV scheduling over the past 6 seasons, its usually June/July - August/September followed by a summer break, and then January to March... which of course is followed by filming from April.

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

MM was on hiatus last year (definitely) around June/July, so unless she has a week/weekend off during filming, then I guess we MAY get a sighting during the summer. Pure speculation here... I don't think "anything" will "happen" while Suits is on air... September is the IG in Toronto, so my humblest of opinion is that if MM does not return to filming Suits in around October, then my biggest guess is that we MAY expect an announcement thereafter, October/November and going out on a limb, I would even say before Christmas 2017. I just can't see them spending another Christmas holiday apart. Just my opinion.
  #4866  
Old 04-10-2017, 07:37 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by BTV19 View Post
When I checked the Suits TV scheduling over the past 6 seasons, its usually June/July - August/September followed by a summer break, and then January to March... which of course is followed by filming from April.

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

MM was on hiatus last year (definitely) around June/July, so unless she has a week/weekend off during filming, then I guess we MAY get a sighting during the summer. Pure speculation here... I don't think "anything" will "happen" while Suits is on air... September is the IG in Toronto, so my humblest of opinion is that if MM does not return to filming Suits in around October, then my biggest guess is that we MAY expect an announcement thereafter, October/November and going out on a limb, I would even say before Christmas 2017. I just can't see them spending another Christmas holiday apart. Just my opinion.
Even if they do get engaged in 2017, they will spend Christmas 2017 apart unless they are married before then, which I highly doubt.
  #4867  
Old 04-10-2017, 08:02 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Posts: 8,396
Yes, but Harry in common with most of the other royals, rarely spends time at Sandringham after Boxing Day is over. The York princesses always do their own thing too, see friends, go skiing etc. it's still holiday time for them. Harry and Meghan could head for the slopes at Verbier for New Years Eve. Who knows.
  #4868  
Old 04-10-2017, 08:29 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,875
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curryong View Post
Yes, but Harry in common with most of the other royals, rarely spends time at Sandringham after Boxing Day is over. The York princesses always do their own thing too, see friends, go skiing etc. it's still holiday time for them. Harry and Meghan could head for the slopes at Verbier for New Years Eve. Who knows.
That's what they basically did this year. Meghan flew to London soon after Christmas and they spent New Year's in Norway.
  #4869  
Old 04-11-2017, 08:14 AM
Alisa's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: , United States
Posts: 3,000
I was thinking....Meghan Markle was born Rachel Meghan Markle.

Does anyone think that IF they were to wed we would see her first name used?

Duchess Rachel of Sussex sounds a lot more regal than a Duchess Meghan of Sussex.

Also, Rachel would be used best as a way to separate and distinguish. Meghan was the actress and Rachel is the princess/duchess.

Any thoughts?
__________________
Those who plot the destruction of others often perish in the attempt. ---Phaedrus
  #4870  
Old 04-11-2017, 08:23 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Pittsburgh, United States
Posts: 7,240
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alisa View Post
I was thinking....Meghan Markle was born Rachel Meghan Markle.

Does anyone think that IF they were to wed we would see her first name used?

Duchess Rachel of Sussex sounds a lot more regal than a Duchess Meghan of Sussex.

Also, Rachel would be used best as a way to separate and distinguish. Meghan was the actress and Rachel is the princess/duchess.

Any thoughts?

The wife of the Duke of Sussex is called the Duchess of Sussex , not "Duchess [name] of Sussex"; the latter style is simply not used in the UK. If married to a prince, let's say Henry, she may be alternatively called "Princess Henry", but she will never be called "Princess Rachel/Meghan" or "Duchess Rachel/Meghan".
  #4871  
Old 04-11-2017, 08:39 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Herefordshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,397
She will only EVER be called 'Meghan, Duchess of Sussex' in the unfortunate eventuality of a Divorce between herself and her husband... As is the case with Sarah, Duchess of York.
  #4872  
Old 04-11-2017, 08:45 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 5,371
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alisa View Post
I was thinking....Meghan Markle was born Rachel Meghan Markle.

Does anyone think that IF they were to wed we would see her first name used?

Duchess Rachel of Sussex sounds a lot more regal than a Duchess Meghan of Sussex.

Also, Rachel would be used best as a way to separate and distinguish. Meghan was the actress and Rachel is the princess/duchess.

Any thoughts?

I think it's hard to switch to using a different name after so many years.
  #4873  
Old 04-11-2017, 08:53 AM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,918
Quote:
Originally Posted by MARG View Post
Since I have no pearls to clutch, I made do with borrowing my great-aunt's smelling salts!


Quote:
Originally Posted by MARG View Post
It is good to remember that when you intimate that HM is acting in such an incredibly odd way, such as when you state that HM, Head of the Church of England and well known for her devout practice of her faith, has taken to giving advice to her family that directly contradicts her very raison dÍtre, it is worth taking note of the source.
You admit you are in need of smelling salts, so yep it might pay for you to remember. For me personally, I think you are making a mountain out of a molehill.

I don't pretend to know exactly what HM the Queen of England thinks about everything under the sun. I am willing to bet however that she's not as uptight about this subject as you appear to be.
  #4874  
Old 04-11-2017, 02:38 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Middlewich, United Kingdom
Posts: 21,388
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
I am willing to bet however that she's not as uptight about this subject as you appear to be.
I'll take that bet.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
  #4875  
Old 04-11-2017, 03:11 PM
lady of hay's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: North Yorkshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 332
Mmmm, I might take that bet too. What odds are you offering ?
  #4876  
Old 04-11-2017, 03:19 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,476
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I talking to a disabled veteran in a wheelchair. He is distinguishably solemn and proper laying one of the final boots at the Vimy Ridge memorial. He's also a very open person and when he says something, he's saying exactly what he means. He's consistent in his interviews about his hopes for the future and what he wants out of his life. As the sources say, he very much does want marriage and family *but* he also says that it also means finding the right woman. That is a big part of it all. He wants the full monty when it comes to commitment.

Whomever the woman that walks down the aisle with him and whenever it happens has yet to be. I cannot think of one really good reason that either HM, The Queen or Harry's family would be "dubious" about accepting Ms. Markle into their family. make.

Of course I'd rather have a royal wedding sooner than later but that is being a bit self serving and that's OK too.
its not just Harry's choice. he has to marry someone that the RF accept as suitable. if he were further down the line, it wouldn't matter so much.. if he were the son of Andrew or Edward.. but he's Charles' son. he's a senior royal now and has givene up his army job to do full time royal duties. so his wife is gong to have to be by his side and doing them too.
And I thin that Meghan has too many issues, being American, different culture, career woman (actress ie tending to try to attract publicity for herself, it si the nature of her work.. and it s not a job she could do after marriage). She's also divorced, and she and H haven't been together all that long. So I think the Queen would be dubious unless she and H had proved their attachment by a close relationship for a few years..and she gave up acting and concentrated on something more low key.
  #4877  
Old 04-11-2017, 03:36 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,756
We'll just have to watch and see how things play out.

I don't think HM would object to an American as Harry's wife at all. If she can approve Charles' choice of Camilla who is also divorced and name her to her Privy Counsel and award her the GCVO, there's no problem with divorce. Culture? She's had Toronto, Canada as her home base for quite a while and we all know HM has quite a fondness for Canada. Acting? I'm sure that Ms. Markle is astute enough to know that taking on the role of being Harry's wife and all it involves and by accepting a proposal from Harry, it would also mean ending a successful acting career and moving onto another stage (literally) by his side.

The only other objection I can possibly think of that you would mean we don't even bother to discuss here and to be honest, I don't think that would, for a moment, cross HM's mind or any of the Royal Family's. Its only the Queen's permission that is needed to marry and to be honest, in Harry's case, I see it as mostly being a formality because that is how things have been done for a very, very long time.

So we wait and we watch and see what happens. Makes for interesting times.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #4878  
Old 04-11-2017, 04:57 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Nov 2016
Location: Woodbridge, United States
Posts: 894
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alisa View Post
I was thinking....Meghan Markle was born Rachel Meghan Markle.

Does anyone think that IF they were to wed we would see her first name used?

Duchess Rachel of Sussex sounds a lot more regal than a Duchess Meghan of Sussex.

Also, Rachel would be used best as a way to separate and distinguish. Meghan was the actress and Rachel is the princess/duchess.

Any thoughts?
How funny is it that Meghan is really Rachel and Harry is actually Henry.
  #4879  
Old 04-11-2017, 05:02 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,756
I believe that if Meghan has most likely opted to use the name Meghan rather than Rachel, it will be what she goes by should she marry Harry. Same thing as Prince Henry of Wales is called Prince Harry.

However, should there be a wedding, I would bet my last Smurf gummie that the vows will contain their full names Henry Charles Albert David and Rachel Meghan Markle.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #4880  
Old 04-11-2017, 05:22 PM
Pranter's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 12,310
I hardly think the fact that Meghan is an actress will be a concern at all. The BRF has had it's own share of actors in the family. If the Queen's children could stick their toe into those waters then I can hardly think that could be held against Meghan. She's not a porn star...just a (before this) little known actress.

LaRae

Quote:
Originally Posted by Osipi View Post
I believe that if Meghan has most likely opted to use the name Meghan rather than Rachel, it will be what she goes by should she marry Harry. Same thing as Prince Henry of Wales is called Prince Harry.

However, should there be a wedding, I would bet my last Smurf gummie that the vows will contain their full names Henry Charles Albert David and Rachel Meghan Markle.

I go by my middle name. The only time you hear my first name is if it's a business matter since they don't know to refer to me by the name I use in everyday life.

I could see during a wedding or some sort of official business Meghan being referred to as Rachel Meghan XYZ ...but past that she'll be Meghan.


LaRae
__________________

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
america american archie mountbatten-windsor asia britain british british royal family buckingham palace camilla's family camilla parker bowles carolin china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing clarence house colorblindness crown jewels daisy doge of venice dresses duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex edward vii family life family tree genetics gradenigo gustaf vi adolf harry and meghan hello! history hochberg house of windsor hypothetical monarchs jack brooksbank japan japan history jewellery kensington palace king edward vii king juan carlos liechtenstein lili mountbatten-windsor list of rulers meghan markle monarchist movements monarchists monarchy names nara period plantinum jubilee pless politics portugal prince harry queen consort queen elizabeth ii queen victoria royal ancestry royalty of taiwan solomon j solomon spanish royal family st edward sussex suthida swedish queen taiwan unfinished portrait united states united states of america welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:27 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

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