The Duke and Duchess of Sussex to Step Back as Senior Royals: January 2020

[O-H Anglophile]

Meghan’s ex-friend and business partner wrote recently about how she expressed concern to Meghan about marrying unto the BRF and the completely different lifestyle that requires...and Meghan apparently cut her off, said something to the effect that “I’m happy now” and that was it.....Meghan cut this woman out of her life. Sound familiar ?

Many of the media, who seem to personally like Harry, describe him as mercurial - so how he feels and acts may change from day to day. If he cuts himself off from his family, I’ve no doubt he’ll regret it. Of course there are phones and other ways to communicate with loved ones, but to paraphrase a famous line, “the BRF are not like you and me”. Is Harry going to just pick up the phone and call his father when he’s not used to doing that (I’m basing this on what I’ve read about how Royals communicate with each other )? Will he do that for the Queen? Philip? William ? The same goes vice versa..

What a shame that Harry has cut himself off from his friends ...he’s really isolated himself from everyone who loves him

And who else does the mercurial temperament and cutting off friends remind you of? To me, it sounds an awful lot like his mother.

 

[_Heather_]

Not related at all, just out of curiosity. Isn't it on her passport or driving license? She's not Meghan Markle, Archie's birth certificate shows she took Henry's name, so what would she be?

No digs intended, I am genuinely curious.

I believe that I read somewhere quite some time ago that members of the BRF, on those rare occasions when they need a surname, will use their title or Mountbatten-Windsor. So, I'd imagine her official documents say either "Rachel Meghan Sussex" or "Rachel Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor" but I'm not 100% certain about that.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

Not related at all, just out of curiosity. Isn't it on her passport or driving license? She's not Meghan Markle, Archie's birth certificate shows she took Henry's name, so what would she be?

No digs intended, I am genuinely curious.

Because the U.S. doesn’t officially recognize titles. Like when the Cambridges sued in France.
She could still be using Meghan Markle or if she officially changed her name on her Social Security Number, U.S passport, etc it probably would be Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor.
It is officially her name in the U.K., and Archie’s birth certificate is a U.K. document.

 

[Missjersey]

And who else does the mercurial temperament and cutting off friends remind you of? To me, it sounds an awful lot like his mother.

Yes, I’ve thought of that in the past and think there are a lot of similarities. I wonder if his father is thinking that now...

 

[ACO]

Meghan’s ex-friend and business partner wrote recently about how she expressed concern to Meghan about marrying unto the BRF and the completely different lifestyle that requires...and Meghan apparently cut her off, said something to the effect that “I’m happy now” and that was it.....Meghan cut this woman out of her life. Sound familiar ?

The same ex manager who admitted she prematurely confirmed their relationship? Not shortly afterward Meghan told her their professional relationship was no longer needed. She has given many interviews over the past 3 years. I always thought it strange that a woman who's business is about protecting the privacy of her clients would be running to the press. Meghan is no longer her client but if I were a current one of hers I would be having second thoughts.

 

[Osipi]

Sorry, but what are you on about? What is often repeated in the media?

The Queen conferred upon her grandson the Dukedom of Sussex, with two subsidiary titles. Earl of Dumbarton would be Henry's primary courtesy title that his son could use. Upon marriage, Meghan became The Duchess of Sussex. Should they divorce, she would be Meghan, Duchess of Sussex until Henry remarried. The title is by no means linked to Meghan being a british citizen, else she shouldn't be holding it now?

This link announces the official creation of Letters Patent in regards to the title.
https://www.thegazette.co.uk/notice/3071743

No mention of citizenship.

I believe that if Harry remarried, his wife would then be The Duchess of Sussex whereas Meghan would be Meghan, Duchess of Sussex as a previous wife of the peerage holder. It would be the same if Andrew were to remarry. His wife would be The Duchess of York and Sarah still able to use Sarah, Duchess of York.

Its when the ex-wife remarries that she loses her ability to use her former spouses peerage title as a courtesy.

 

[Erin9]

And who else does the mercurial temperament and cutting off friends remind you of? To me, it sounds an awful lot like his mother.

Harry has long seemed to take after Diana in many ways. His charisma, ability to connect with people, seemingly to be more driven by his emotions, impulsive, being more free spirited. I’m trying to think of the ways he seems Windsor. Not sure.

I have thought lately that his use of the media/social media seems like her too. The interview that was imo a sympathy ploy. Using social media to blindside his family.

IF he has cut off some of his friends, then that would be like her too.

 

[Lumutqueen]

I believe that if Harry remarried, his wife would then be The Duchess of Sussex whereas Meghan would be Meghan, Duchess of Sussex as a previous wife of the peerage holder. It would be the same if Andrew were to remarry. His wife would be The Duchess of York and Sarah still able to use Sarah, Duchess of York.



Its when the ex-wife remarries that she loses her ability to use her former spouses peerage title as a courtesy.

You are correct! I got it the wrong way round. However we can assume a divorced wife whose husband has remarried would it elect to keep using that style. But you never know [emoji6]

 

[Tatiana Maria]

I believe that I read somewhere quite some time ago that members of the BRF, on those rare occasions when they need a surname, will use their title or Mountbatten-Windsor. So, I'd imagine her official documents say either "Rachel Meghan Sussex" or "Rachel Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor" but I'm not 100% certain about that.

On their British official documents, British prince(sse)s as well as British peer(esse)s may either use their legal surname or use no surname whatsoever. For the male descendants and unmarried female descendants in male line from Queen Elizabeth II and the Duke of Edinburgh, their legal surname is Mountbatten-Windsor.

https://www.heraldica.org/topics/britain/prince_highness_docs.htm#1960

To see examples, refer to the following posts:

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...eligious-conversion-43937-28.html#post2065963
http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...he-british-monarchy-44877-20.html#post2280723

When they merely need an unofficial surname for some occasion (e.g. as a professional name), the custom is for them to use the territorial designation from their title as a "surname".

 

[texankitcat]

Because the U.S. doesn’t officially recognize titles. Like when the Cambridges sued in France.
She could still be using Meghan Markle or if she officially changed her name on her Social Security Number, U.S passport, etc it probably would be Meghan Mountbatten-Windsor.
It is officially her name in the U.K., and Archie’s birth certificate is a U.K. document.

I would imagine she is still using Meghan Markle on her US documents unless during her few brief visits to the US, she had time to go through the process of changing all her legal documents to her married name of Mountbatten-Windsor.

 

[Denville]

I would imagine she is still using Meghan Markle on her US documents unless during her few brief visits to the US, she had time to go through the process of changing all her legal documents to her married name of Mountbatten-Windsor.

I would imagine she's changed her name..

 

[4Pam]

I think Meghan Markle recognised in Harry a Man 'discontented with his lot' in life, looking enviously at the family life his brother enjoyed with his wife and young family, and saw [clearly] that this man, with a global reach she has LONG desired, [but not independently achieved] could provide her with that fame, and 'Global platform'..

He was 'ripe for the picking'.

Now she has the Title, the platform, the child, what need has she of him any more ?

^^^


I was a little weary of her in the beginning & what's transpired in the last two weeks, not to mention leaving Harry on his own to meet with his family to discuss their very future, has left me annoyed. Maybe his position is what she was after, so she "champion" her causes. And now that she has it, what use does she have for Harry?



Who knows? I guess we all have to wait and see.

 

[4Pam]

I believe that if Harry remarried, his wife would then be The Duchess of Sussex whereas Meghan would be Meghan, Duchess of Sussex as a previous wife of the peerage holder. It would be the same if Andrew were to remarry. His wife would be The Duchess of York and Sarah still able to use Sarah, Duchess of York.

Its when the ex-wife remarries that she loses her ability to use her former spouses peerage title as a courtesy.

Does she continue to be a HRH if they divorce & he remarries?

 

[Betsypaige]

The same ex manager who admitted she prematurely confirmed their relationship? Not shortly afterward Meghan told her their professional relationship was no longer needed. She has given many interviews over the past 3 years. I always thought it strange that a woman who's business is about protecting the privacy of her clients would be running to the press. Meghan is no longer her client but if I were a current one of hers I would be having second thoughts.

I admit, I don't recall what her business was or is - I've only read that one article......and, maybe so about her current clients, but I'm not sure that's relevant.

And who else does the mercurial temperament and cutting off friends remind you of? To me, it sounds an awful lot like his mother.

Did Diana cut friends off? I'll be honest, I was never a fan of hers, so I didn't follow her.

I have thought lately that his use of the media/social media seems like her too. The interview that was imo a sympathy ploy. Using social media to blindside his family.

Now using the media....I am familiar with, lol

 

[Osipi]

Does she continue to be a HRH if they divorce & he remarries?

At the time of the divorce, she would lose her HRH exactly like Diana and Sarah did. It doesn't matter if Harry remarries or not. This came into effect and remains in place for all divorced wives of the royal family that do not have titles in their own right.

 

[PrincessKaimi]

I , and the British Public are now questioning why 'the lady' [if committed to this country and her marriage] retained her lawyers and agents, as well as business/es in the US throughout the marriage ?

Her tearful interview looks like one of her many theatrical performances, and only that.

Many now see clearly she only ever has but one 'commitment', and that is to herself..

Does your country require complete commitment to a project made in advance of experiencing the project? It seems that she and her husband are doing what most young couples do, and working out/defining their marriage as they go along - without reference to "country" perhaps. Maybe neither of them wants to put country above their own relationship with each other and with Archie.

 

[ashelen]

I had a friend from my teenagers years, he was always in our group of friends, until his late 30s he got a girlfriend and married her, after that she made him to cut off with all of us! There are some wife's who do that and we never saw him again, I think may be once, he said he would be in touch and reconnect with us never happen! I guess we were not good enough for her! So I am sure she had something to do with him cutting of his friends! And some people suggest here, if any of his friends showed concern about his relation with Meghan, he cut him off!

 

[O-H Anglophile]

Does she continue to be a HRH if they divorce & he remarries?

In the event of a divorce she would lose the HRH, like Diana and Sarah. She would only lose the title if she married again.

 

[Denville]

Does your country require complete commitment to a project made in advance of experiencing the project? It seems that she and her husband are doing what most young couples do, and working out/defining their marriage as they go along - without reference to "country" perhaps. Maybe neither of them wants to put country above their own relationship with each other and with Archie.

But they are not "most young couples". When Royals take on a role, they are usually expected to stick with it.. Its not that easy to replace them. Charles' older relatives are getting on, they cant do as much. The queen is very old now. 2 years ago, Meg and Harry took on the royal duties role when tey got married.. Harry knows what it entails, even if Meg doesn't.. so he really should have explained it to her, that this was something they couldn't/shoudln't back down on, so they'd better be quite sure they were willing to go on with it..

 

[CyrilVladisla]

If the rumours and talk turn out to be true and she doesn’t ever return to the U.K. for any meaningful length of time I don’t think I could support her and Harry keeping their titles. Whilst this is definitely a controversial thing to say, my thoughts are why have British titles and the privileges that come with them if you don’t actually spend any proper time in Britain? What does this mean for her British citizenship? Will she even become one now?
I also makes me feel even more uneasy that Frogmore cottage will be empty for the vast part of the year after all the renovation work on it.

IF the Sussexes are not going to be in Frogmore Cottage at all, than could not Frogmore Cottage be given to some other royals?

 

[Osipi]

But they are not "most young couples". When Royals take on a role, they are usually expected to stick with it.. Its not that easy to replace them. Charles' older relatives are getting on, they cant do as much. The queen is very old now. 2 years ago, Meg and Harry took on the royal duties role when tey got married.. Harry knows what it entails, even if Meg doesn't.. so he really should have explained it to her, that this was something they couldn't/shoudln't back down on, so they'd better be quite sure they were willing to go on with it..

The thing is that no where have they stated that they'd *not* be continuing the roles they already have in place. There is no indication that any of the roles they have now will go by the wayside and need someone else to pick them up.

This is what I think is a huge misconception in all of this. They'll not walk away from any roles, charities or patronages that they already have but perhaps not take on so many more going into the future. Its explicitly stated that they plan to keep on supporting the Queen and the monarchy and also launch their foundation. There'll be more time "away" to focus on their family.

 

[O-H Anglophile]

Did Diana cut friends off? I'll be honest, I was never a fan of hers, so I didn't follow her.

Now using the media....I am familiar with, lol

Yes, Diana cut off people, there were a number of friends and even family she wasn’t speaking to at the time of her death including her mother. She sometimes became friendly again with some of them. For example, she cut off her friendship with Elton John, but she made up with him at Versace’s funeral shortly before her death.

 

[Soula]

This is a tricky question for the Moderators.

What wil happen to H & M's status on these forums?

Of course any threads relating to the part they play in the BRF or to their work as royals etc will be valid but I don't want to know about their private work nor should these forums provide publicity for their brand.

Whatever work their brand does will be at the expense of the BRF and the Queen. She is an amazing lady and the original feminist IMO.

I vote we give them the privacy they claim to seek!

 

[Betsypaige]

I’m listening to a podcast with Omid Scobie and Victoria Arbiter. Victoria believes that it’s possible that this “half-in, half-out” plan is because Harry loves and is devoted to the Queen, but that his and Meghan’s ultimate goal is to completely separate. So....that implies that Harry would have those same feelings about his father and brother, and that’s truly disappointing to me.

Yes, Diana cut off people, there were a number of friends and even family she wasn’t speaking to at the time of her death including her mother. She sometimes became friendly again with some of them. For example, she cut off her friendship with Elton John, but she made up with him at Versace’s funeral shortly before her death.

Wow...what a shame that she wasn’t speaking to her mother - I didn’t know that. Of course friendships can end for various reasons, but cutting people off completely on a regular basis seems rather rough...

 

[DuchessMia]

Does your country require complete commitment to a project made in advance of experiencing the project? It seems that she and her husband are doing what most young couples do, and working out/defining their marriage as they go along - without reference to "country" perhaps. Maybe neither of them wants to put country above their own relationship with each other and with Archie.

However, I can see that your own bias runs so deep that Meghan has no chance with you (or, apparently with many Brits). It's as if she has to run a gauntlet. Apart from being an awful idea in the first place (to create a guantlet), at least Meghan and Harry have a choice about participating. Something of a choice, anyway.

Harry’s own brother was allowed to be a part-time royal for a number of years so as to ensure the success of his marriage and family. I’m still not sure why Harry asking for the same consideration, plus the opportunity to be financially independent, is causing all this angst. Harry is placing his family first. Just as others have done.

 

[gerry]

Harry’s own brother was allowed to be a part-time royal for a number of years so as to ensure the success of his marriage and family. I’m still not sure why Harry asking for the same consideration, plus the opportunity to be financially independent, is causing all this angst. Harry is placing his family first. Just as others have done.

Agree with this post; the fuss is because a) the Sussex family is targeted by media whatever they do and b) British tabloids want to create distraction from Brexit on January 31

 

[texankitcat]

Yes, Diana cut off people, there were a number of friends and even family she wasn’t speaking to at the time of her death including her mother. She sometimes became friendly again with some of them. For example, she cut off her friendship with Elton John, but she made up with him at Versace’s funeral shortly before her death.

I remember hearing at the time of her death that she was also estranged from her brother due to his declining to allow her use of the guest house at Althorp as a country home and his wanting to have the Spencer tiara returned to Althorp. She was also on the outs with Sarah, Duchess of York due to her claiming in an interview that she had borrowed a pair of Diana’s shoes and got a foot fungus, which sounds about right coming out of her mouth. It was many years ago, but that was the rumors I recall.

Correction: The Spencer Tiara was an earlier issue between them when he married.his first wife noe that I think of it.

 

[_Heather_]

Agree with this post; the fuss is because a) the Sussex family is targeted by media whatever they do and b) British tabloids want to create distraction from Brexit on January 31

Actually, the fuss is because William took on part time duties while he was serving in the military and while he was working full time as an air ambulance pilot for which he also donated his salary if I remember correctly. He was also newly married, not almost two years in. Had Harry and Meghan announced at the time of their marriage that they would only take on part time duties or would combine some sort of service work (such as an air ambulance pilot) with part time duties everyone would have been perfectly understanding. Instead, they've been married almost two years, took on full time duties including a high profile role with the Commonwealth, and decided to go about this in a catastrophic manner. Rather than a calm, cool, and collected statement two years ago that would have put paid to all of this right from the start, they took on the job, decided they didn't like it, and rather than allowing for the necessary time and arrangements, blew it all up in spectacular fashion and showing incredible disregard and disrespect for both HM and the RF not to mention the monarchy as an institution. That's what all the angst is about.

 

[Curryong]

William didn't work full time as an air ambulance pilot. It was a part time job. Harry was a fulltime Royal at the time of his wedding because both brothers did so due to Prince Philip's retirement from Royal duties.

I can just imagine the British media tearing into Harry and Meghan for stating that they wished to be part time royals from the start. There would have been article after article contrasting Harry and Meghan with fulltime William and Kate, who had three children. I don't think there would have been too much 'understanding'.

 

[VictoriaB]

Agree with this post; the fuss is because a) the Sussex family is targeted by media whatever they do and b) British tabloids want to create distraction from Brexit on January 31

Disagree with this. William & Kate were part time Royals immediately after their marriage. There was never any suggestion that they would not “upgrade” later on. Harry & Meghan went straight into the Royal role and now, after a couple of years want to step back, and live OS and be “financially independent”. Everything about the Sussex situation screams “we’re gone”.

I honestly cannot ever see Meghan returning to the UK for any substantial period of time. Harry, maybe, I’m not sure. Yes, I know what the website said about still performing royal duties, but I can’t see it. It might happen for a year or two but then I see the Royal duties getting fewer and fewer. The Queen”s statement did not read to me as if she were contemplating a situation like the Cambridge one.

As for distracting from Brexit, with the exception of the Mirror, the tabloids were the Brexit cheerleaders. They want to celebrate Brexit, not try to make people forget it.