The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family, News and Events 7: Oct. 2022 - Apr. 2023

[Hallo girl]

Denville, the problem with this is Charles is letting things be dictated by [the Sussexes]. They should be treated like the Duke of Windsor by having no say in anything. The fact that this story came out the day before Edwards birthday is a sign that the palace still has a mole and are being forced to compete with the Duo.

I am not sure why you can say a mole was behind anything. Edwards birthday is not a secret , even on here there was speculation that Edward would be made Duke of Edinburgh on that day.
I do not know if the Sussex family tried to outshine Edward ,I do not really care and I do not think they do either. The couple have been quiet for a number of weeks , so they are back on the scene.

Once the coronation is over with lets hope everything can calm down, no more speculation just let everybody get on with their own lives.

 

[Alison H]

It's basic good manners to answer an invitation when you receive one. If Harry and Meghan had any courtesy, they would let the Palace know whether they would be attending or not.

As for the children, I would think we'll see George, Charlotte, Savannah, Isla and Mia there, and possibly Louis and Lena at a pinch, but certainly none of the younger ones.

 

[Denville]

Denville, the problem with this is Charles is letting things be dictated by [the Sussexes]. They should be treated like the Duke of Windsor by having no say in anything. The fact that this story came out the day before Edwards birthday is a sign that the palace still has a mole and are being forced to compete with the Duo.

dont really know what you are saying.

 

[Biri]

As for the children, I would think we'll see George, Charlotte, Savannah, Isla and Mia there, and possibly Louis and Lena at a pinch, but certainly none of the younger ones.

And Archie, if he comes.

But no August, Lucas, Lilibet or Sienna - they are too young to understand what this ceremony is all about.

 

[Denville]

Treason is not a reason to remove someone from the line of succession e.g. those men who fought against Britain in WWI and had their titles put in abeyance remained in the line of succession as do their descendants today.

Surely the most treasonous was the Kaiser who led his nation to war with Britain but even he remained in the line of succession as do his descendants today.

because there was no chance that he would ever get close to the throne.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

Replied here to the succession discussion, apologies for not moving it earlier.

https://www.theroyalforums.com/foru...-the-british-throne-44513-17.html#post2537029

 

[Mbruno]

It's basic good manners to answer an invitation when you receive one. If Harry and Meghan had any courtesy, they would let the Palace know whether they would be attending or not.

As for the children, I would think we'll see George, Charlotte, Savannah, Isla and Mia there, and possibly Louis and Lena at a pinch, but certainly none of the younger ones.

I don't think any children will be invited to the coronation, except George and Charlotte. It is not a family event and there is no reason to include children other than the heir's.

 

[Heavs]

BINGO!!

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-f...rys-children-have-not-yet-invited-coronation/

https://archive.is/mtDF1#selection-1325.0-1341.31

The children of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet, are not currently invited to the Coronation, The Telegraph understands.

Prince Harry and Meghan were invited in recent weeks, but it is understood that correspondence from Buckingham Palace did not mention Archie or Lilibet.

The couple have had no information about whether the children, who are aged three and one, have been included in the plans.

The Sussexes have not yet confirmed whether or not they will attend the ceremony crowning King Charles III at Westminster Abbey on May 6.



I don't know why they would expect their infant children to attend the service and then their claims of wanting privacy would surely discount any attendance at a worldwide broadcast concert or similar event? As ever with these two though its a case of say one thing do another.

So the planners are supposed to offer roles to a 3 year old and a 1 year old for parents who are not working royals and have not yet RSVPd? It remains to be seen exactly who of the working royals will have a "role" there.

Wouldn't this count as being put on parade and used for their parents popularity, something that Harry has complained about for both himself and his niece and nephews?

They *could* have brought the kids to some of the Jubilee events they were invited to like the rest of the family did but they'd already left by then.

I mean I know they want photos of Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet attending their grandfather THE KING'S coronation but the article even admits they haven't even confirmed if they are going yet! (Which is rude and probably means they want to negotiate something. Do they want an offer from Charles to have the congregation sing Happy Birthday to Archie with an Arch meets Archbishop presenting him with a birthday cake photo op?

 

[Sunnystar]

I don't think any children will be invited to the coronation, except George and Charlotte. It is not a family event and there is no reason to include children other than the heir's.

I think that Savannah, Isla and Mia are all old enough to warrant an invitation and I'd be a bit surprised if we don't see them (along with James, Louise, and Wolfie for that matter). Louis, Lena and Archie are all a bit on the young side, though if the service is reduced to 90 minutes, they might appear for a portion of it. We'll have to wait and see, but I haven't seen anything to indicate that Charles would exclude anyone but the youngest of his grandchildren and his siblings' grandchildren from such an historic event.

 

[Mbruno]

I think that Savannah, Isla and Mia are all old enough to warrant an invitation and I'd be a bit surprised if we don't see them (along with James, Louise, and Wolfie for that matter). Louis, Lena and Archie are all a bit on the young side, though if the service is reduced to 90 minutes, they might appear for a portion of it. We'll have to wait and see, but I haven't seen anything to indicate that Charles would exclude anyone but the youngest of his grandchildren and his siblings' grandchildren from such an historic event.

I don't think it is a matter of being old enough although being old enough is a necessary condition to attend the service, which is why Louis will be excluded.

Savannah, Isla and Mia in particular are grandnieces of the King who are respectively 18th, 19th and 21st in line to the throne. Both in terms of proximity to the monarch and their place in the line of succession, I don't see any reason that would warrant their being present at the coronation. There is limited space in the Abbey and I believe there are other priorities that trump inviting distant relatives, especially children.

Of course I may be wrong, but it will be a surprise to me if any of the children other than George and Charlotte are invited.

EDIT: It has been reported that the Queen Consort's grandsons might serve as pages, which would make sense.

 

[angieuk]

Allegedly,Harry and Meghan will not be invited to take part in the official balcony appearance and many members of the family have no wish to socialise with the couple. A friend of the family said: 'They will be given the cold shoulder by very many relatives. One said to me, "I hope they'll be seated in Iceland." 'Many of the family just want nothing more to do with them. If they have to see them at the Coronation then so be it, but they do not want to socialise with them.' The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been invited and are expected to be at the event on May 6, but many family members are privately telling friends that they will give them the 'cold shoulder'.

Full story on the Daily Mail Website.

I have no idea how long they will stay over for; but I think this will be the last time they return to the UK for a long time. Like the Duke and Duchess of Windsor used to come over to the UK from time to time; but rarely to visit family members.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I wouldn't trust that article as it has several mistakes in it. Such as Eugenie;s husband being James and showing a photo of the supposed couple but is actually Edo and Eugenie. Probably an Australian gossip site.

That isn't an 'Australian gossip site' but Sky News Australia which is an offshoot of Sky News UK a major news network in the UK (and one that provides some of the best coverage of royal events ... I watched all of the Queen's Jubilee and funeral events on Sky News UK).

This site would be picking this up from Sky News UK.

All news outlets make minor mistakes at times such as names but that doesn't make them 'gossip' sites or unreliable - just badly edited.

It is stated in the article that the source for the story is OK! magazine. I have now posted the link to that original article in Prince Andrew's current events thread, where it was first discussed.

https://www.theroyalforums.com/foru...s-7-february-2015-a-38188-76.html#post2536795

It has been interesting listening to the various show discuss this topic. Seems you not the only one with this view point. There is no love loss with the media and the Sussexes, we all know that. But it would seem they don't like that Charles have made himself look vindictive. Richard Palmer from the Express is very pro Charles and even he sounded disappointed.

I have followed his excellent reporting on and off for a long time and there is no basis to label him as very pro any particular member of the royal family, as is vividly illustrated by the behavior of certain people responding to his tweets of items of news or analysis which they perceive as unfavorable to the King, the Sussexes, the Waleses, etc.

Regarding the Frogmore story, his one tweet dealt with the story's possible effect on public views of the King's feelings toward his son:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1630931981612589057

This is an extraordinary story. Prince Andrew will fight tooth and nail to stay at Royal Lodge but the Sussexes’ eviction is a surprise, given the amount of effort the King’s advisers have put into stressing how Harry remains a much-loved son.

 

[Denville]

Allegedly,Harry and Meghan will not be invited to take part in the official balcony appearance and many members of the family have no wish to socialise with the couple. A friend of the family said: 'They will be given the cold shoulder by very many relatives. One said to me, "I hope they'll be seated in Iceland." 'Many of the family just want nothing more to do with them. If they have to see them at the Coronation then so be it, but they do not want to socialise with them.' The Duke and Duchess of Sussex have been invited and are expected to be at the event on May 6, but many family members are privately telling friends that they will give them the 'cold shoulder'.

Full story on the Daily Mail Website.

I have no idea how long they will stay over for; but I think this will be the last time they return to the UK for a long time. Like the Duke and Duchess of Windsor used to come over to the UK from time to time; but rarely to visit family members.

Do you think that Charles will not want to see his son, no matter how difficult it is for him?

 

[ACO]

I think the media are trying to fill slots and a slew of all kinds of stories will be written, many that even contradict the next. I agree with most upthread. If we see anyone it will likely be George and probably Charlotte. That is about it.

Also what is wrong with Iceland? I went a few years ago. Beautiful place.

 

[Toledo]

If the link below opens in default Spanish language, just mouse over the article, right click and select Translate, I noticed the auto translate does not pick up the gender correctly and changed the Spanish pronouns les or le to 'el' or he when describing details:


A small footnote: The article below describes what is typical in the USA when the upper class businesspersons wear when attending charity events. The Hollwood people, which is like a whole different species of the USA celebrity royalty, often flaunt less when they show up to support the events they sponsor. Often casual with emphasis on sport shoes for men. But minimum glam. The time to flaunt is when charities hold galas expecting donations.


The look of more than 10,000 euros with which Meghan Markle reappears after the new title of her children

Excerpt:
The Duchess reappeared on Women's Day[/B] visiting a home for pregnant women without resources...

...Meghan came on behalf of the foundation she created with Prince Harry on Women's Day to chat with these women who barely have the means to get their children ahead and did so with a look of more than 10,000 euros...

on this set (she) wore a cashmere coat, the Lilia model, from the Max Mara firm, whose price is around 4,800 euros...Valentino mules. A design that costs about 725 euros to change...a new Chanel bag, a design of the 2021 season in black and white whose price is 6,000 euro...Valentino sunglasses that we already knew him and whose price is 200 euros...engagement ring, valued at more than 300,000 euros. A fortune in jewelry to which she added large earrings that seem to be pearls...


I'll give her a pass on the 300K Euros engagement ring. That's a gift from Harry's funds. But the rest reminds me she mentioned somewhere her love for casual clothes (ripped jeans?) is now long gone. That aside, she looks really good and knows how to step out of the door in style. ?

 

[Archduchess Zelia]

Denville, the problem with this is Charles is letting things be dictated by [the Sussexes]. They should be treated like the Duke of Windsor by having no say in anything. The fact that this story came out the day before Edwards birthday is a sign that the palace still has a mole and are being forced to compete with the Duo.

What has Charles let the Sussexes have a say in?

 

[Tatiana Maria]

What has Charles let the Sussexes have a say in?

The use of the Prince and Princess titles for their children. The briefings from the palace sources and the briefings from the Sussex sources (both posted earlier in this thread) concur that it was the ducal couple's decision.

Why would you want them only for life? Isn't one of the big factors that they stay in the family for generations?

As a historian I disagree. It's a hereditary system that connects the past and present. If noble titles aren't inherited why should the title of King? But this Convo shouldn't be discussed in this thread.

True, it is not really related to the Sussex family. See here for my reply:

Royal Dukes, Royal Duchies and Royal Ducal Titles

 

[Toledo]

I have to say that despite the shenanigans, TV appearances and array of negativity that follows the Dukes of Sussex, if this was a TV series in the 1980's it would be a match for Dynasty.

When I step aside and take a glimpse on Meghan's behavior, often reactions to anything she deems inappropriate or a challenge to her all I see is Joan Collins' Alexis Carrington come to mind. Even the article above itemizing her clothes is a statement from her she won't take a back seat on anyone any day.

Yes, their conduct is a disappointment that is now a steady parody in the USA, but I'll give this to her, she is doing amazing as a live version of Alexis Carrington-Colby-Dexter-Rowan for the 21st century and I have to confess her shenanigans/reactions are out of a TV soap opera.

The Duchess is a walking, talking Betty Davis quote, too:
“You should know me well enough by now to know I don't ask for things I don't think I can get.” ― Bette Davis

 

[Alison H]

Alexis made a great success of the business which she inherited from her second husband, Cecil Colby. She also stuck up for herself instead of constantly whining about how hard done by she was. I think she'd make mincemeat of Meghan!

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

I am not sure why you can say a mole was behind anything. Edwards birthday is not a secret , even on here there was speculation that Edward would be made Duke of Edinburgh on that day.
I do not know if the Sussex family tried to outshine Edward ,I do not really care and I do not think they do either. The couple have been quiet for a number of weeks , so they are back on the scene.

Once the coronation is over with lets hope everything can calm down, no more speculation just let everybody get on with their own lives.

Harry's book was released around Kate's birthday, multiple announcements from the Sussexes have coincidentally occurred around official palace events I don't have the time to list them all. At this point it has counted to at least 5 instances.

As for the family not wanting anything to do with them, I don't know if I believe that. Twitter is freaking out over Eugenie and that she supports Harry. But no one can explain where these stories are coming from.

 

[Denville]

so why isn't EUgenie being dubbed the mole?

 

[Athena41]

The Children are too young to attend the Coronation they won't be able to keep still for that long. Meghan is obviously hoping for a Balcony Appearance and an official photo with the King that would make headlines around the world.

 

[tihkon2]

The Children are too young to attend the Coronation they won't be able to keep still for that long. Meghan is obviously hoping for a Balcony Appearance and an official photo with the King that would make headlines around the world.

As has been mentioned many times, the current King, Charles , spent a short time at his mother's coronation just to see part of the historic occasion. So they could do the same thing with the little ones this time around.

 

[Denville]

There was a reason for Charles to be there, he was only a kid but he and Anne were the heir and spare at the time. But Archie is not all that close to the throne and is far too young IMO to be tehre.

 

[Toledo]

The smaller kids can watch the Coronation on TV in a room at the Palace, all cousins gathered together under supervision and security. They need to meet at some point, and this would be a good occasion. I'm sure the Sussex travel with a reliable nanny that stays behind with the kids when the attend an event.

The older ones could attend and be allowed to leave early, or take mini breaks in another room if the ceremony is exhausting to them. This is just like being at a wedding or a grown up gathering, you don't bring small children with you. They get tired and / or other adults end up keeping an eye on them and not enjoying anything that is happening around.

 

[Moran]

It's a state ceremony, not a play party. No reason for anyone's child but George to be there. The King isn't there to amuse his grandchildren or give them a family moment.

There was this journalist who salivated over the possibility of Charles, in full regalia, raising his biracial grandson up. Ridiculous. Even more so when we know that this isn't a baby we're talking about. It's a four year old. Not sure SHE knew, though.

George and perhaps Charlotte if it helps him not be overwhelmed. No one else. A TV is a lovely invention.

 

[Toledo]

I know, but we are in different times from 1953, zoom meetings, color TVs and even cell phones with no antennas.

King Charles seems to crave seeing his full direct family be there with him on this important moment. The small children won't even know what's happening but one day, as adults, they will be proud their grandfather gathered them all to share this moment with them, too.

And I said above the kids don't even need to be in the place of assembly but wait for them to return to the palace for the traditional family photos.

Re that journalist you mentioned, his opinion is worthless if all that comes out of it is race issues.

 

[OwlBranch]

Harry's book was released around Kate's birthday, multiple announcements from the Sussexes have coincidentally occurred around official palace events I don't have the time to list them all. At this point it has counted to at least 5 instances.

I think the tabloid is looking for any reason to generate drama. People are looking for conflict when there is none.

When Harry and Meghan left, their calendar is no longer dictated by the Palace. They are under no obligation to coordinate anything with the Palace. This is a foreseeable situation. If the courtiers did not negotiate this point during that summit, then they have failed in their duty and they have only themselves to blame.

Charles picked his coronation date on Archie's birthday. If Harry and Meghan stayed as working royals, maybe he wouldn't have chosen that date, but since they are not working royals, that was obviously not a consideration. (Also, who cares about a 4 yr old's birthday? Even the kid won't remember it.)

If you don't want Harry to write a tell-all book, then keep him in the fold. In hindsight, I think people should realize that keeping Harry in the family would have been better. Whatever price he asked for is worth it considering the fall out from Oprah's interview, the book, etc.

 

[FigTree]

I think the tabloid is looking for any reason to generate drama. People are looking for conflict when there is none.

When Harry and Meghan left, their calendar is no longer dictated by the Palace. They are under no obligation to coordinate anything with the Palace. This is a foreseeable situation. If the courtiers did not negotiate this point during that summit, then they have failed in their duty and they have only themselves to blame.

Charles picked his coronation date on Archie's birthday. If Harry and Meghan stayed as working royals, maybe he wouldn't have chosen that date, but since they are not working royals, that was obviously not a consideration. (Also, who cares about a 4 yr old's birthday? Even the kid won't remember it.)

If you don't want Harry to write a tell-all book, then keep him in the fold. In hindsight, I think people should realize that keeping Harry in the family would have been better. Whatever price he asked for is worth it considering the fall out from Oprah's interview, the book, etc.

He didn’t pick the date. That would have been a decision made very high up because it works for country as a whole.

They may have gave them another offer: money, a role whatever and that may have offset this. But fundamentally what the Sussexes wanted just wasn’t workable. It’s not like they just said that Meghan was returning to acting and Harry was going to devote himself to Invictus. That for the family would have been fine. A few engagements on the side. Live abroad. Whatever. But they wanted to make money. It couldn’t work. I personally feel if the Sussexes didn’t get what they wanted they would always be like this. Think is I don’t think the know what they want.

 

[Moran]

We never pay anyone Dane-geld, no matter how trifling the cost...

If Harry wants to keep the money and honours going, then he should have behaved decently and he and Meghan should have kept their mouths shut about who owned the world royal, and also many other things.

I wonder about Charles actually wanting his full direct family against judging the optics. His son very publicly attacked him, his other son and his wife and used his granddaughter in a bid to make her mother look worse and his own wife as the wronged innocent maiden. He isn't this stupid to believe that they would want to be there for him, instead of getting material for their next bid for relevance and finding other reasons to be envious of William and Catherine. But whatever.

Children don't belong in the very place of the ceremony for the simple reason that they aren't old enough to be trusted not to behave in a way that might disturb the ceremony. Louis just last year, anyone? I remember how even some members here were quick to cast Catherine as a bad mother. I have no doubt that if Archie and Lilibet get caught on camera disturbing the procedure, it would be explained away as cute and Meghan would be just so amazing for letting her children be children. But such things are not proper for a ceremony. George and Charlotte are the only ones old enough to be trusted in this way and I'm not even sure that she belongs there, let alone the Beatrice and Eugenie of our day.