The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #881  
Old 01-10-2020, 12:08 AM
Moonmaiden23's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 10,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter View Post
A friend in the U.K. said they were watching the evening news and one of their reporters was outside BP and stated that the Sussexes were informed several weeks ago they would not be part of the slimmed down monarchy.

So if that is true, this announcement yesterday seems to be an extension of that news.


LARae
I am also beginning to wonder if the Sussexes were not irritated/affected by all the gloating in the media pointing out how HMQ had removed their photo from the background of her Christmas speech.

It's a little thing....but i am starting to see the drip drip effect of what they might have considered as rejection.
__________________

__________________
"Be who God intended you to be, and you will set the world on fire" St. Catherine of Siena

"The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice". Martin Luther King Jr. 1929-1968
  #882  
Old 01-10-2020, 12:24 AM
Sunnystar's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Oregon, United States
Posts: 441
Quote:
Originally Posted by suztav View Post
I know that we shouldn’t speculate, but could Meghan be suffering from post-Partnum depression and is just unable to cope?

Once again.... just asking not opining on the topic.
I listened to the Arthur Edwards interview on my drive home from work and the same thought occurred to me as well. He repeatedly pointed out how things really changed after Archie was born. Yes, Harry & Meghan's issues with the press were happening well before the birth but I dunno. That's as far as I'm willing to go in speculating on what ultimately precipitated this break.

The other interesting thought that occurred to me when I was walking in my front door was that Tom Bradby's latest article really does lend some credence to Dan Wootton's assertion yesterday that the pic of HM and the 3 direct heirs was "the final straw." Bradby basically confirms that it had been made clear to the Sussexes that the focus of the BRF was and always would remain most heavily on the direct line of succession. What we already knew - that they were the next generation's Wessexes - perhaps they hadn't really accepted that this was always going to be their destiny and when that pic came out last week, the reality finally sank in. Maybe Harry thought things would be different with Charles only having two kids versus HM's four, because he was one of Diana's boys, or who knows? And, clearly, there are some people in their inner circle who have convinced them that they are bigger stars than the BRF is willing to let them be. I fear Bradby is quite right - things are bound to get a lot worse in this rift before they ever get better.
__________________

  #883  
Old 01-10-2020, 12:27 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: South, Germany
Posts: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pranter
A friend in the U.K. said they were watching the evening news and one of their reporters was outside BP and stated that the Sussexes were informed several weeks ago they would not be part of the slimmed down monarchy.

So if that is true, this announcement yesterday seems to be an extension of that news.
Then the whole story is much more incomprehensible as it alreaday is anyway.
Slimming down the Royal House would be quite a normal process, they just could have bite the bullet and get it done. A few more month and there you go.
Communicated by the Queen, nobody would have cared (be aware of that is what they wished anyway).
  #884  
Old 01-10-2020, 12:27 AM
ACO ACO is offline
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: New York, United States
Posts: 3,288
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23 View Post
I am also beginning to wonder if the Sussexes were not irritated/affected by all the gloating in the media pointing out how HMQ had removed their photo from the background of her Christmas speech.

It's a little thing....but i am starting to see the drip drip effect of what they might have considered as rejection.
Who knows but some correspondents think this was Harry trying to speed up the inevitable. He is the 2nd son. His brother has three kids. People know a slimmed down monarchy was coming. Some claim Harry would have been part if it. Maybe, maybe not. He clearly didn't see it that way.
  #885  
Old 01-10-2020, 12:29 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Peterborough, Canada
Posts: 136
Quote:
Originally Posted by camelot23ca View Post
I’m not defending Meghan but one thing that is unfair to her is the tired “evil, manipulative wife pulling her naive, easily led husband into her wicked scheme story. It’s dispiriting to see how quick people are to put the blame on the wife.



To be clear - I think Meghan’s behaviour surrounding this announcement has been deplorable and, unless it turns out she is suffering from serious mental health issues, I have no pity for her. She rushed into marriage with a man who came with unique responsibilities and once she figured out she wasn’t going to ever have enough power in the BRF to make the changes she thought it needed, she checked out.



BUT it’s not Meghan who was born into the royal family. That’s Harry. When a man cheats on his wife he is the one breaking vows, not the other woman. In the same way, Harry is the one turning his back on his unique heritage and needlessly causing his family pain.



And let’s get real: a woman cannot lead a man anywhere he really doesn’t want to go.. I think Harry knew very well he was marrying a woman who would likely not fit in easily with British Royal life and I think a part of him may have seen her as a potential escape route.


I agree. The “evil wife” narrative is tiresome and misogynistic. [...]Further, Meghan is isolated from most of her family. So as a couple they will need to rely on friends to support them. There’s no doubt Meghan is strong willed but it takes more than will to create the kind of life they seem to be seeking. They are setting sail with neither rudder nor anchor.
  #886  
Old 01-10-2020, 01:07 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Canada, Canada
Posts: 1,200
I am thinking about Harry and Archie's place in the succession now that this has unfolded.

As far as I've ever heard, the only ways royals have lost their place in the succession were to marry a non-Protestant or voluntarily renounce it in some other way (ie. Edward VIII).

As I was writing this I recalled that the King of Sweden had recently removed all his grandchildren Estelle and Oskar from membership in the royal house, but the children are still part of the line of succession. Also, his daughter Madeleine is now living in the U.S., I believe.

So I suppose it's not now unprecedented for royals to be relatively high on a list of succession and still not really be working royals or even living in the country.

All that said, it still doesn't seem quite right to me that Harry should choose this route for his son with them as high on the list of succession as they are. When Charles is king, Harry and Archie will be fourth and fifth in line. If something happened to the whole Cambridge family (which, barring an unprecedented disaster, won't happen but just supposing), can you imagine someone taking the throne who had primarily resided in another country and had no clear practical knowledge of what it meant to be a British royal?

Furthermore, iluvbertie sometimes raises the topic of counsellors of state. Archie would be on the list to be one at some point...how practical is that considering he is probably going to be raised in a different country?

I think this situation is all quite confusing and not nearly as straightforwards as Meghan and Harry seem to assume it will be.
  #887  
Old 01-10-2020, 01:27 AM
Claire's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,280
Had a bit of through on this - sent out a bit of emails and this is what we came up with for the royal funding problem.


Here is my list of possible funding for the Sussex's:
1. Disney deal - Harry can do a Save Africa documentary. Do a David Atterburgh/ Bear turn. Megan can do Inspirational women and then they can always do Megan and Harry save the World about their charities and such.
2. Cosmetics/ Fashion/ Fragrances/ Luxury Goods - I think this is very much where Meghan wants to play. Release a line of clothes with her friends. Think of how the Beckhams and Kardashians do it.
3. Members of boards - potential especially as they age.
4. Memoirs, Talking Dates ect - Like the Obama and Clintons. I expect Harry& Meghan to especially be involved here on issues that are close to his heart. I also expect a magazine or similar like O.


All of these options can be done within the byline of doing charity work. Many celebrities do exactly that.


The problem is with conflicts within the royals already - for example if Harry is the new face of Audi and Charles and William drive Land Rover. It will also throw the whole supporting British talent, trade and exports into dispute. But many of asked exactly who's minor royals do they want to be - the UK's, the Commonwealth or the worlds? Essential every 'royal' duty they do, can and will be looked at as them potential looking for money.
  #888  
Old 01-10-2020, 01:30 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 457
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarlita View Post
The facts as I see them.
Harry and Meghan have been horribly bullied to the point where we now are seeing these current events as desperation by them.

Harry and Meghan are a young modern couple trying to find their way within the royal firm.
And yes they are going to make mistakes. So they learn from these mistakes and carry on.

Prince Charles has learnt how to be tough over the years, but he is fair. And I am sure he will treat them with compassion while they work out a solution to the current situation.

The Queen is the toughest of them all. She will offer guidance and a level head and she will be very fair with Harry and Meghan.
Like Osipi I believe we need to wait while BP works something out with H & M.

And we must never forget as 2020 marches on, that much of what has been reported is pure speculation or made up narrative. And that is the problem , as people end up with an unrealistic view of this couple. Some bits are true facts sure. However, there is plenty that is just made up speculation.

So allow me to speculate and say that if Canada's parliament agree, then Perhaps Prince Harry could take the roll of Governor General. Which is the Queens representative. It would be a good fit for them.
There is no way Harry is going to be Governor General of Canada:
1. We have one, and she is midway through her term. To toss her aside to put in a pouting prince would not fly.
2. He's not Canadian. It's been a long time since any Brit filled the role.
3. To my knowledge, he doesn't speak French. Non-starter.
4. He's not nearly accomplished enough. The current one is a freaking astronaut.
  #889  
Old 01-10-2020, 01:32 AM
Countessmeout's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: alberta, Canada
Posts: 12,259
Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by rmay286 View Post
I am thinking about Harry and Archie's place in the succession now that this has unfolded.

As far as I've ever heard, the only ways royals have lost their place in the succession were to marry a non-Protestant or voluntarily renounce it in some other way (ie. Edward VIII).

As I was writing this I recalled that the King of Sweden had recently removed all his grandchildren Estelle and Oskar from membership in the royal house, but the children are still part of the line of succession. Also, his daughter Madeleine is now living in the U.S., I believe.

So I suppose it's not now unprecedented for royals to be relatively high on a list of succession and still not really be working royals or even living in the country.

All that said, it still doesn't seem quite right to me that Harry should choose this route for his son with them as high on the list of succession as they are. When Charles is king, Harry and Archie will be fourth and fifth in line. If something happened to the whole Cambridge family (which, barring an unprecedented disaster, won't happen but just supposing), can you imagine someone taking the throne who had primarily resided in another country and had no clear practical knowledge of what it meant to be a British royal?

Furthermore, iluvbertie sometimes raises the topic of counsellors of state. Archie would be on the list to be one at some point...how practical is that considering he is probably going to be raised in a different country?

I think this situation is all quite confusing and not nearly as straightforwards as Meghan and Harry seem to assume it will be.

Archie will never be councillor of state bar tragedy so it's not really a concern. When William is king, the next four in line would be his three children and Harry if the kids are over 21.

Right now we have
Charles
William
Harry
Andrew

If Harry removes himself by moving to Canada, Beatrice would be bumped up as she would be the 4th in line over the age of 21 living in the UK.

I really don't get the upset other then announcing it sooner then the queen knew. If they had announced this when they got married no one would blink. The Wessexes were part time royals the first few years. The Cambridges too.

I don't see them being stripped of their titles or losing place in succession. There is no grounds for it. They wouldn't be the first royals to have a private life. A small chance they lose HRH but even that I find doubtful.

I have no doubt Charles knew this was coming. Harry wasn't going to spring thus on his dad and think Charles would still help fund them. They aren't dumb enough to bite the hand that feeds them partially.

Charles is going to have to consider more then the next few years as well. When he was picturing slimming down the monarchy he pictured both his sons and their wives as the older royals retired. Now the question is does Harry come back full time down the line when his brother is king and needs back up? Or does William need to look else where? Posibly one of the York girls.

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Claire View Post
Had a bit of through on this - sent out a bit of emails and this is what we came up with for the royal funding problem.


Here is my list of possible funding for the Sussex's:
1. Disney deal - Harry can do a Save Africa documentary. Do a David Atterburgh/ Bear turn. Megan can do Inspirational women and then they can always do Megan and Harry save the World about their charities and such.
2. Cosmetics/ Fashion/ Fragrances/ Luxury Goods - I think this is very much where Meghan wants to play. Release a line of clothes with her friends. Think of how the Beckhams and Kardashians do it.
3. Members of boards - potential especially as they age.
4. Memoirs, Talking Dates ect - Like the Obama and Clintons. I expect Harry& Meghan to especially be involved here on issues that are close to his heart. I also expect a magazine or similar like O.


All of these options can be done within the byline of doing charity work. Many celebrities do exactly that.


The problem is with conflicts within the royals already - for example if Harry is the new face of Audi and Charles and William drive Land Rover. It will also throw the whole supporting British talent, trade and exports into dispute. But many of asked exactly who's minor royals do they want to be - the UK's, the Commonwealth or the worlds? Essential every 'royal' duty they do, can and will be looked at as them potential looking for money.

The reality is these two will have plenty of offers in any field.

Even strip them of their title, they will. People won't forget he was Prince Harry no matter what name he goes by. Might get them more business, as the former royal turned black sheep.

Look at Fergie. And these two are young, attractive, popular and Smart.

There is no conflict with brands. William and Charles don't get free land rovers as product endorsers. They choose to drive them.

There are plenty of commonwealth brands and businesses they can work with. And keep their link to the British and commonwealth through the charity work they continue. There are plenty of British born designers and business's with offices in the USA or Canada instead as well.

They likely had offers long before they made this choice. Likely one of the deciding factors. They aren't fools, they know his trust and her savings would not bank roll them forever.
  #890  
Old 01-10-2020, 01:38 AM
Claire's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,280
I was trying to come up with a list of royal financial dealings for private funding. It is a long tiring and well impossible venture. As we really don't know. Yes - we know that Sarah Ferguson did Weight Watches, Zara Philips did something with land Rover and a pram company. Many people have sold access to Weddings and such. And it was all allowed. Yes - within limit and presumable with the Crown consent.
The thing is Harry and Meghan don't need to be royal, have titles, live in the UK, do duties or have any involvement with the monarchy whatsoever to make money off of their role. That is the way a celebrity obsessed market works. They will also be royals. They hold all the cards. I agree that BP can hold Frogmore up as an attempt to get them to rein in a bit, but essentially they can buy a house anywhere.
Problem - cashing in on past infamous exploits has an expiration date. Eventually the market will tire of them, their target audience will move on to someone younger and more relevant. And yes more attractive, everyone ages. So they have basically 15 years to cash in at most.
  #891  
Old 01-10-2020, 02:03 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 12,844
Just a note about the requirements to be a Counsellor or State:

1. The spouse of the monarch
2. The first four adults in the line of succession (heir apparent from age 18 and the rest from age 21)
3. MUST be resident in the UK.

So if Harry and Archie are to live in north America they become ineligible to be CoS as they won't be residing in the UK.

At the moment there is no 'time requirement' but I could see that changing. Elsewhere today I saw a suggestion that the Regency Act could be amended to make Catherine Regent for an under age George, rather than Harry. If they were to move in that direction they could easily put a finite time in the UK restriction on the CoS's at the same time.
  #892  
Old 01-10-2020, 02:10 AM
Duke of Marmalade's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
TRF Author
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Posts: 13,799
After pulling that stunt, I doubt we will see Meghan attending a high profile BRF event ever again. She's gone, and she won't return, because her plan has never been to become a bread and butter royal but a royal celebrity superstar. Good luck with that!
  #893  
Old 01-10-2020, 02:10 AM
Purrs's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 172
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tarlita View Post

So allow me to speculate and say that if Canada's parliament agree, then Perhaps Prince Harry could take the roll of Governor General. Which is the Queens representative. It would be a good fit for them.
No. We have a governor general already and for over the last 50 years, he/she has been a Canadian citizen.The days where a British person including the grandson of our current monarch could be our governor general are long over.

Although I like Harry, I do NOT want him to be our governor general and as a Canadian tax payer, I do not want to be supporting him. I've heard the same from other Canadians.
  #894  
Old 01-10-2020, 02:17 AM
Rayal's Avatar
Gentry
 
Join Date: Sep 2019
Location: Liberty, Missouri, United States
Posts: 59
Speaking with my friends today at lunch it was unanimous that here in America we will greatly welcome Prince Harry and Princess Meghan if they so choose to live here. They are both smart and enjoyable people and its easy to make a small fortune here as long as you already have collateral money which I assume they do. I thought they were treated most unfairly in Great Britain, but there is always an opportunity to change one's way of life. In a way they will be 'our royals', but only in thought and never legally of course....lol.
  #895  
Old 01-10-2020, 02:17 AM
Tarlita's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Near Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 2,111
My apologies to all Canadian's about the GG suggestion. I do understand your sentiments.

After the second world war we had the Duke of Gloucester here as GG and by all accounts that wasn't very successful either.
  #896  
Old 01-10-2020, 02:17 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: South, Germany
Posts: 52
Quote:
Originally Posted by evolvingdoors View Post
(...) If things were different, if it was just Harry, or Harry and a spouse who cared about duty and not money and fame, this decision, again if true, would not have happened.
I doubt that Harry does care about fame to be honest. This would be against all he was fighting for (normal life, not being hunted by the press).
  #897  
Old 01-10-2020, 02:22 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Top End, Australia
Posts: 740
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rayal View Post
Speaking with my friends today at lunch it was unanimous that here in America we will greatly welcome Prince Harry and Princess Meghan if they so choose to live here. They are both smart and enjoyable people and its easy to make a small fortune here as long as you already have collateral money which I assume they do. I thought they were treated most unfairly in Great Britain, but there is always an opportunity to change one's way of life. In a way they will be 'our royals', but only in thought and never legally of course....lol.
I'm sorry but there is no such person as "Princess Meghan" - she is the Duchess of Sussex.
  #898  
Old 01-10-2020, 02:36 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Oakland, United States
Posts: 490
Quote:
Originally Posted by Princess View Post
I doubt that Harry does care about fame to be honest. This would be against all he was fighting for (normal life, not being hunted by the press).
We are in agreement on that.
Sadly that is not the life he will have with Meghan by his side, that much has been proven by now

Quote:
Originally Posted by VictoriaB View Post
I'm sorry but there is no such person as "Princess Meghan" - she is the Duchess of Sussex.
Her title is Ms. Meghan Markle, at most Mrs. Mountbatten-Windsor, she has today proven she is not even worthy of the duchess title.
In my neck of the woods of the globe titles are usually earned through dedication and hard work. She has not shown dedication nor worked hard to Earn! The peerage titles she has gained by simply marrying Harry.
  #899  
Old 01-10-2020, 02:36 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Top End, Australia
Posts: 740
It's been interesting to read the opinion on this thread.

My own view is that Meghan and Harry have obviously been very unhappy for some time. From a humanitarian perspective, its cruel to keep someone in a situation in which they are so obviously unhappy. From a practical point of view people unhappy in their job are generally not going to be effective in that job.

For these reasons I don't have a problem with the Sussex's decision. I do have a problem with how it happened. As many others have said, springing the public announcement on the family was unnecessary and showed no respect for the Queen, Charles or William.

Now that it has happened, I agree with those who have said it must be a clean break rather than the half in/half out version on their web page. I have no problem with them going to live quietly in Canada or the US. I do have a problem with them setting up some sort of rival Court.

Likewise, if they are not working for the Crown then no public funding including from the Duchy, no protection paid for by British (or Canadian) tax payers and commercial rent paid for on Frogmore.

I am also uncomfortable with them using their royal titles for commercial purposes if the income is not going 100% to charity. If they want to endorse products or take speaking engagements and live off the proceeds - even a small amount of those proceeds - then do it as Harry and Meghan Mountbatten Windsor, not as Their Royal Highnesses the Duke and Duchess of Sussex.

I'm sorry it has come to this and I hope they will be happy in their new life but I can't see that happening, the British Media is not going to be any less intrusive than they are now.
  #900  
Old 01-10-2020, 02:43 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Canada, Canada
Posts: 1,200
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Just a note about the requirements to be a Counsellor or State:

1. The spouse of the monarch
2. The first four adults in the line of succession (heir apparent from age 18 and the rest from age 21)
3. MUST be resident in the UK.

So if Harry and Archie are to live in north America they become ineligible to be CoS as they won't be residing in the UK.
I see; so at this point there is a good chance Beatrice will be added to the list to replace Harry, then?
__________________

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 of Sussex and The Invictus Games: 2014 and 2016-2018, 2020 Dman The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family 1150 09-06-2020 08:30 PM




Popular Tags
#royalrelatives #royalgenes abdication anastasia 2020 armstrong-jones baby names baptism biography bridal gown british royal family brownbitcoinqueen canada carolin chittagong clarence house coronavirus customs dna dubai duke of sussex dutch royal family emperor facts fantasy movie general news thread george vi gradenigo historical drama history hochberg house of windsor introduction jumma kent languages list of rulers luxembourg mail mary: crown princess of denmark northern ireland norway palestine pless popularity prince constantijn princess alexia (2005 -) princess chulabhorn princess dita princess of orange queen consort queen elizabeth ii queen mathilde royal court royal jewels royal spouse royalty royalty of taiwan royal wedding royal wedding gown russian court dress settings stuart swedish queen thailand tips tradition uae customs united kingdom united states of america von hofmannsthal working royals; full-time royals; part-time royals;


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:43 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises
×