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


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Status
Not open for further replies.
Well they can tell them not to use any of their titles like they did with their style hrh.
 
Sun Lion said:
Although this link is to the Daily Mail, the original source is "The Sunday Times".

Royal aides have spoken to "The Sunday Times" about the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and their promises to The Queen.

Her Majesty was keeping Prince Harry's positions in the UK open for him in case he returned.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...olated-terms-deal-Queen-say-senior-aides.html
Click to expand...


It is odd that Harry allegedly wants to retain his military appointments such as captain general of the Royal Marines while living in California and literally giving up on the UK. In fact, it is rather pretentious on his part to feel that he is entitled to that position.


Since Harry believes he must now get involved in US politics, the natural evolution would be for him to become a US citizen , which in turn would require renouncing his allegiance to the Queen and giving up his titles. One more reason for him to lose his UK and Commonwealth appointments as soon as possible.



https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-8763589/Prince-Harry-leaves-door-open-citizenship.html
 
Last edited:
Even if they started calling themselves Mr and Mrs Windsor-Markle, Harry would still be the Queen's grandson, and it would still be embarrassing if he got involved in the politics of another country, especially if that involved criticising that country's elected leader, with whom the British government has to work. It's very awkward.
 
Alison H said:
Even if they started calling themselves Mr and Mrs Windsor-Markle, Harry would still be the Queen's grandson, and it would still be embarrassing if he got involved in the politics of another country, especially if that involved criticising that country's elected leader, with whom the British government has to work. It's very awkward.
Click to expand...

I am going to quote Somebody, who has posted some hypothetical, but reasonable situations in the old Sussex thread (Post #643 from General News about the Sussex Family, Part Three: August-September 2020). These two (Mike Tindall and Autumn Kelly's cases) are brilliant examples that show the complexity of "independent life" and "freedom" despite not being working royals and having no titles. The Duchess of Gloucester is a working royal, who worked previously at the Danish Embassy in London. She was born and raised in Denmark until late teens or early adulthood. By going into politics, there is always the risk "dragging the royal family". Thank you Somebody for your post. You explained it much better than I could ?

"While I agree that it would be much better for Harry and Meghan not to use their British titles, I am not sure that I agree that they could do and say 'whatever they want' without a title. For example, let's imagine Mike Tindall (no title) becoming extremely active as a member of the Lib-Dems or UKIP. I don't think that would go over well; he might be a private person, he is also still a member of the BRF. Or, what if Autumn while still married to Peter would have campaigned for the Conservative Party calling people to vote 'for change' (so against the Liberals led by Trudeau); would that be totally fine? Or could the Duchess of Gloucester meddle in Danish politics as long as she is not using her title?"​
 
Last edited:
:previous:

The system relies on the goodwill of members of the royal family. Once someone breaks ranks it’s near impossible to get that geni back in the bottle.

What the long term implications on attitudes towards the royal family as an institution will be I’m not sure. I suspect there will be an increasing cynicism from the British public.

Hopefully the duke (& the other duke) will do the honest & honourable thing & unilaterally abjure his noble & princely status. Preferably without rancour or point scoring. That would go some way to salvaging something from this sorry situation. Lessons need to be learnt for the next generation. Maybe that is a discussion for another thread.
 
Madame Verseau said:
What irritates the most for me is the undertones of some articles (like a recent one from Hugo Vickers in the Telegraph) wants Harry to abandon Meghan and Archie and come back to the UK.
Click to expand...

I agree. What a contemptible thing for Vickers to write (if that is really what he did imply). Shameful really.

Edit - comment in brackets added after reading the below since I have not read the article.
 
Last edited:
Since the article is behind a paywall, perhaps someone could share what exactly was said by Vickers?
 
Harry needs to grow up and start thinking for himself, On one side he wants all the perks and status of Royalty on the other side of the coin he don't want to work for it. He must like the Celebrity status, it will hit hard when no one wants to listen to him and Meghan anymore. Duke and Dss sounds way more IMPORTANT than plain Harry and Meghan WHO?. Title alone means nothing if you refuse to live up to the Responsibility of it. BTW I am old enough to THINK for myself, I don't need them or any has beens to tell me what to think feel or act. American people are way smarter then that,to fall for this nonsense.
 
I really think the article spells out a very realistic truth that Prince Harry finds himself in. His position and here read money and privilege - allowing him many options in life and the ability to change his mind.
If he wants to return to England, with or without Meghan, with or without Archie - what would be his options - the Queen has left the door open for this return, will he be accepted by the military and the British public in the same way. This will be slightly different if Meghan is part of the equation.
But admitting this failure , his pride will be severally hurt.
But if he now has doubts about anything - marriage, LA, Netflix any of it . It is best to move backwards before you dig a deeper hole then you are already in.
I am sure as with any divorce they can arrange dual custody with regard to Archie.
 
Durham said:
:previous:

The system relies on the goodwill of members of the royal family. Once someone breaks ranks it’s near impossible to get that geni back in the bottle.

What the long term implications on attitudes towards the royal family as an institution will be I’m not sure. I suspect there will be an increasing cynicism from the British public.

Hopefully the duke (& the other duke) will do the honest & honourable thing & unilaterally abjure his noble & princely status. Preferably without rancour or point scoring. That would go some way to salvaging something from this sorry situation. Lessons need to be learnt for the next generation. Maybe that is a discussion for another thread.
Click to expand...
This is a really important point! In the end there is little even the Sovereign can do if one of the (senior) members of the family breaks rank. It all depends on them caring about the responsibility that was entrusted to their family.

Unfortunately, it seems that (breaking rank) is exactly the path Harry and Meghan are on. They are out for themselves and I see little commitment to 'uphold the values of the Queen' in everything they do. If it works for them, fine, if it doesn't, there is little holding them back from 'interpreting' them in a way that is favorable to their personal mission.
 
Somebody said:
This is a really important point! In the end there is little even the Sovereign can do if one of the (senior) members of the family breaks rank. It all depends on them caring about the responsibility that was entrusted to their family.

Unfortunately, it seems that (breaking rank) is exactly the path Harry and Meghan are on. They are out for themselves and I see little commitment to 'uphold the values of the Queen' in everything they do. If it works for them, fine, if it doesn't, there is little holding them back from 'interpreting' them in a way that is favorable to their personal mission.
Click to expand...

If Harry crosses a line the BRF deems unacceptable they sever any remaining connections he has to official British royal life - anything that’s left with The Commonwealth and the military, for example - and rule out any future appearances at things like Trooping the Colour. They plug any gaps they can and make it clear Harry and Meghan do not represent The Queen or the British government and that the possibility of doing so in the future has been taken away. They don’t comment on anything Harry does except to reiterate that Harry is no longer a working member of the royal family and his activities are private matters.

The only leverage Harry had with the BRF was the threat of leaving. He wasted that trump card with an impulsive, disorderly exit that angered the British public and left him in a weaker position than he would have been if he’d thought more strategically.
He won’t like it if the BRF is forced to cut him off completely? What’s he going to do about it? All the “threats” I’ve seen people mention on this thread - tell all interviews and the like - will only damage his reputation further and make the distinction between him and the “real” royal family crystal clear.
 
"For a while the Sussexes were a golden, rather modern couple. At the Commonwealth Day service in March 2018, they were laughing, their eyes flashed about, they were completely in tune together. A year later at the same service, I remember thinking he looked like a man who had bitten off more than he could cope with.

Of course he should cut his losses and come home, before it is too late. The tide is somewhat turning against him, but there is still time."

—Hugo Vickers

There is no mention of "with or without Meghan and Archie". Vickers clearly disapproves of Meghan and especially the current Sussex activities, but I couldn't find suggestion of abandonment in the article.
 
Of course Mr Vickers means 'Harry, return alone' before it's too late!' The whole tenor of his article is that Harry is miserable and lost in California. If he had meant that Meghan should also return, with their son, then he would have written 'they should cut their losses' as 'the tide has turned against them' instead of just references to Harry alone.

There is no evidence at all that Harry is unhappy in California, miserable with his wife or with his new life. If there was then believe me, the tabloids would have leaped on it and gleefully reported quarrels, discord etc since they married. There has not been one report in the mainstream media, only on social media.

Harry has a mind of his own, contrary to what these writers and journalists constantly infer. If he wanted to return, then he and his family would have done so after their stay in Canada. It's obvious he does not.

There is no leverage the BRF possesses now everything is paid for, to persuade/order him to return. We don't know what the view of the family is.

However, it's clear that British writers/journalists and commenters are convinced that he is miserable, lost, under his wife's thumb in California, and believe that one day he will have a Eureka moment, repent and crawl back to Britain. Without his wife of course, a contemptible viewpoint, but presumably born out of frustration that this man can't be 'punished' any more in the way they want.
 
Sun Lion said:
"The Sun" is reporting that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have agreed to be followed and filmed for three months for one of the documentaries they intend to produce.

Meghan wants people to see the "real" her.

I want to see more of their mansion. :lol:

https://www.the-sun.com/news/1543091/prince-harry-meghan-markle-netflix-reality-series/
Click to expand...
Oh but I thought cameras trigger Henry. This is hilarious people on twitter use to joke that Meghan and Harry next move will be reality tv and be the next kardashians. Everyone joked but if this is true my goodness Henry what a fall from Grace. I would be so embarrassed.
 
From what I have read, and I really do not believe 99% of what the tabloids print, about the Sussexes or anything else, it will be concentrating on the charity work they intend to do, good causes and their investigations in that direction, and not go into their private lives much at all.
 
KellyAtLast said:
Oh but I thought cameras trigger Henry. This is hilarious people on twitter use to joke that Meghan and Harry next move will be reality tv and be the next kardashians. Everyone joked but if this is true my goodness Henry what a fall from Grace. I would be so embarrassed.
Click to expand...


I think it must be true KellyAtLast as editor of "Majesty Magazine" Ingrid Seward has commented on it...and not favourably.
 
Me thinks the Mrs just want to show off the new McMansion and then lecture us on our carbon footprint and voting.
 
I doubt that Ingrid Seward has heard or even read the sole source for this story from the Sun. She was asked to comment on it, and may well have leapt to the conclusion that it is a planned reality show.

I'll be waiting until this show is officially announced and some of the content explained before commenting on it.
We do not know if this tabloid report is truthful, at all accurate or anything else. I well remember all those breathless reports at various times of Doria sitting down with Oprah for a tell all interview.
 
KellyAtLast said:
Me thinks the Mrs just want to show off the new McMansion and then lecture us on our carbon footprint and voting.
Click to expand...


I'll take the lecture if I get to check out the house KellyAtLast! :lol:
 
Prinsara said:
"For a while the Sussexes were a golden, rather modern couple. At the Commonwealth Day service in March 2018, they were laughing, their eyes flashed about, they were completely in tune together. A year later at the same service, I remember thinking he looked like a man who had bitten off more than he could cope with.

Of course he should cut his losses and come home, before it is too late. The tide is somewhat turning against him, but there is still time."

—Hugo Vickers

There is no mention of "with or without Meghan and Archie". Vickers clearly disapproves of Meghan and especially the current Sussex activities, but I couldn't find suggestion of abandonment in the article.
Click to expand...

I read the part of the article above as saying he should return alone if necessary. Otherwise it would make more sense to have written “they should cut their losses and return.”

I think whether Harry has bitten of more than he can chew with his decision to leave the UK is irrelevant now that he’s a father. Archie is living in California because of a decision made by both parents. If Archie is in California then Harry’s place is in California, too, and that’s true even if he does regret his choices in the future. It’s also true whether Harry and Meghan stay together or not. There is no coming home like Vickers suggests. Meghan would never agree to the family returning to the UK, so, if Harry wants to be present in his son’s life, the US is his home now.
 
Going back to Harry and Meghan's video in Times 100, Andrew Rosindell (Conservative MP for Romford) has tweeted out, attached with an Express article. He is described as "Thatcherite", "Eurosceptic" and "flag fanatic and super patriot". I assumed he is a monarchist.

Andrew Rosindell MP @AndrewRosindell
A royal title is a privilege and it comes with responsibility! If you're not willing to accept the responsibility, you should also ditch the privilege!
12:18 PM · Sep 25, 2020 from South West, England·Twitter for iPhone​
https://twitter.com/x/status/1309316352574918657

Unlike Ben Bradley's (Conservative MP for Mansfield) tweet, Mr. Rosindell seem to be quite serious on Harry and Meghan getting involved in US Presidential election. He did not mention removing their titles, but more so removing their "privilege" or luxury. I do wonder if that is "tax-payer funded" security (in UK and foreign countries), patrons of UK charities, Ambassadors for the Queen's Commonwealth trust or is it being included Trooping of the Colour (and in "The fold")? Or even worse, ostracisation from the Royal Family or removal from line of succession (which are both highly unlikely)? Harry and Meghan are technically not reliant on the Sovereign Grant and possibly private income from Duchy of Cornwall, so I did not include "cut-off financially".

I admit some of these actions (including removal of Duke of Sussex title) are very extreme, because it requires Parliament to pass an Act. For the line of succession, it's not just the UK Parliament, but other nation with the Queen as the head of state.

It does make me wonder which elected politicians will follow in publicly stating opinions on Harry and Meghan potential involvement in politics. I do think the next criticism of the couple will come from the right-wing fraction of the Conservative party or UKIP/Brexit party in general. I put publicly in bold, because they may share and hold similar view to Mr. Rosindell in private.
 
Prinsara said:
"For a while the Sussexes were a golden, rather modern couple. At the Commonwealth Day service in March 2018, they were laughing, their eyes flashed about, they were completely in tune together. A year later at the same service, I remember thinking he looked like a man who had bitten off more than he could cope with.

Of course he should cut his losses and come home, before it is too late. The tide is somewhat turning against him, but there is still time."

—Hugo Vickers

There is no mention of "with or without Meghan and Archie". Vickers clearly disapproves of Meghan and especially the current Sussex activities, but I couldn't find suggestion of abandonment in the article.
Click to expand...

I also do wonder if Hugo Vickers meant Harry going back and forth between UK and America. By that I mean, he does royal duties (with possibly reduced amount) in the UK whilst Meghan and Archie lived in America. Harry would hence travel frequently across the Atlantic. This is assuming Meghan does not resume to be a working royal. Of course, due to COVID-19, this is highly unlikely.
 
How does Mr Vickers writing 'he should cut his losses and return' otherwise 'it will be too late' include Meghan, or refer to Harry crossing the Atlantic for Royal engagements? It doesn't read that way to me at all. It reads in fact that he should abandon his wife, baby, home and new career and return to his old place in the Royal Family. I don't see how it can be seen in any other way. He's writing about one individual, Harry.
 
Curryong said:
How does Mr Vickers writing 'he should cut his losses and return' otherwise 'it will be too late' include Meghan, or refer to Harry crossing the Atlantic for Royal engagements? It doesn't read that way to me at all. It reads in fact that he should abandon his wife, baby, home and new career and return to his old place in the Royal Family. I don't see how it can be seen in any other way. He's writing about one individual, Harry.
Click to expand...

Look, I will admit that I have not read the entire article, so I may not have understand the full context or indeed Hugo Vickers' opinions. From just reading the extract:
"For a while the Sussexes were a golden, rather modern couple. At the Commonwealth Day service in March 2018, they were laughing, their eyes flashed about, they were completely in tune together. A year later at the same service, I remember thinking he looked like a man who had bitten off more than he could cope with.

Of course he should cut his losses and come home, before it is too late. The tide is somewhat turning against him, but there is still time."​

I personally think (by just reading these sentences) Hugo Vickers does not suggest that Harry should abandon his family completely in America. My suggestion/interpretation of Harry going back and forth is only one out of other possibilities that I could think of. My other possibility is that Harry came back to the UK to discuss with the Queen or even Palace advisors on his future roles in the Royal Family. This could last for a few months before Harry could return to America to make his decision known to Meghan and Archie.

Again this is my interpretation.
 
For those who would like to read Vickers' article to make up their own minds, the whole thing can be found here. Since he is a respected biographer and not a tabloid journalist, I was skeptical of claims he was advocating for Harry to abandon his wife and child, whatever people wish to infer.
 
I certainly think that Harry will return to the UK, probably alone, at the end of the agreed year of review in March 2021. I doubt very very much that he will be discussing any official return to the Royal family at that time and I certainly don't believe those discussions between himself and his father and grandmother would take months.
We are all speculating here, but IMO Harry is settled in California for the foreseeable future, and will continue to be a non-working member of the Royal Family.
 
Prinsara said:
For those who would like to read Vickers' article to make up their own minds, the whole thing can be found here. Since he is a respected biographer and not a tabloid journalist, I was skeptical of claims he was advocating for Harry to abandon his wife and child, whatever people wish to infer.
Click to expand...

He is a respected biographer. Nevertheless to write an article about Harry as if he was single, unattached and without dependents, including a wife Vickers obviously disapproves of, was clumsily written and capable of several interpretations, to say the least.

That article is one long criticism of Meghan and how she has supposedly 'changed' him, OUR HARRY, as if he had no will of his own. That interpretation is in fact no different to thousands of Twitter and Tumblr comments, whether Vickers is a 'respected biographer' or not.

And has this 'respected biographer' ever even met Harry or Meghan? Or are his impressions of Harry's supposed 'unhappiness' based on brief clips and photos? If they are, as I suspect, then again Vickers is no different to the many journalists who have followed the same narrative.

And that narrative is that Harry is under his wife's thumb, that somehow she has filled his eyes with stardust instead of duty.

Or/And that perhaps, just in case that line is disproved later, that it is (partly) Harry's fault and therefore he is a nasty ungrateful wretch who deserves to have his Dukedom taken away (going double for Meghan as Duchess) as well as every other punishment that can be thought of, just in case, God forbid, he actually is happy and contented in another country with his family.
 
Last edited:
Prinsara said:
For those who would like to read Vickers' article to make up their own minds, the whole thing can be found here. Since he is a respected biographer and not a tabloid journalist, I was skeptical of claims he was advocating for Harry to abandon his wife and child, whatever people wish to infer.
Click to expand...

Thank you Prinsara for the link to the full Telegraph article.

I think Hugo Vickers raised some valid points mainly based on the Times 100 video. Some posters have pointed out that Harry appears to be uncomfortable when he was talking. The "seek for privacy" argument has been raised by other royal reporters, including Camilla Tominey. Angela Levin has also mentioned this, when she was on TalkRadio with Julia Hartley-Brewer, who is a republican/anti-monarchist

talkRADIO @talkRADIO
Julia: "He looks like a hostage in an appeal video. Please pay the ransom."
This week Harry and Meghan have come out against Donald Trump, and it has been revealed the couple's trip to Africa in 2019 cost the taxpayer nearly £246,000.
@JuliaHB1| @angelalevin1
7:13 PM · Sep 25, 2020·Twitter Media Studio - LiveCut​

https://twitter.com/x/status/1309420628039041024

In terms of Harry and Meghan involving in US election. Hugo Vickers did make it clear that "The Royal family must be above party politics, even more so in a country that is not their own.". And I'm happy that he did make a distinction between "party politics" and activism, though these two topics have recently become more converged.
Aside from his duties, his own father has proven through his activism that it is perfectly possible to be a member of the Royal family and use your platform to stand for something and effect change.​

After reading through his article, I think it's reasonable to suggest that Harry is in unfamiliar territory and sometimes overwhelmed (especially in Time 100 video). In terms of the last sentence "Of course he should cut his losses and come home, before it is too late. The tide is somewhat turning against him, but there is still time.", I don't think Mr. Victor suggested (nor has the undertone of) Harry permanently abandoning Meghan and Archie in America. I think it's more like Harry coming back to the UK to discuss his future, which could happen like the Sandringham summit, after a year review. Or if Harry really dislike his current lifestyle in America, he could be returning to the UK to seek advice from the Royal Family or Palace staff, before making his decision and fly back to America to let Meghan and Archie know. Agains these are all interpretation and speculation coming from myself.

I also don't think that Hugo Vickers' reputation is tarnished, given that his article is under the "comment" and offering his opinions (which again, I think are valid and well backed-up).
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Marengo
Iñaki Urdangarín, News and Events 1: Jan. 2024 -
Replies
2
Views
1K
Toledo
Toledo
An Ard Ri
  • Sticky
Infanta Cristina, News and Events 1: Jan, 2024 -
Replies
2
Views
1K
Somebody
Somebody
Marengo
Princess Elisabeth, Duchess of Brabant News and Events 2, Feb 2024 -
2
Replies
30
Views
7K
Prinsara
Prinsara
Marengo
General News for the Wales Family 2: March 2024-
5 6 7
Replies
190
Views
29K
Blog Real
Blog Real
Marengo
Juan Valentín, Pablo, Miguel & Irene Urdangarín, News and Events 3: Jan. 2024 -
Replies
24
Views
3K
Tatiana Maria
T

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom