The Duke and Duchess of Sussex: Transition & Future

[O-H Anglophile]

Originally Posted by ACO

I don't think the window is ever closed. They can very well bring it up and go through the process though I understand why the family wouldn't want to go through all that. But it would be interesting if like their HRH they just didn't use the titles at all. I think it would please many.

Let's see if Meghan attends. I expect Harry though.

No, a peer has one year to disclaim their peerage-Hereditary Peerage Act of 1963. But Archie would still inherit the title upon Harry’s death-then he would have a year to disclaim it or before his 22nd birthday if under age 21.

[Lady Daly]

Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile

They can choose to not use their Duke/Duchess titles but the only way to remove them is by Parliament. The window for Harry to disclaim his peerage was before his first wedding anniversary.

They are expected to attend the Commonwealth Service at Westminster Abbey on March 9th.

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sussex-label-could-soon-be-seen-on-art-and-anoraks-g3rpggpzc

They could continue to use their Duke/Duchess titles just not the label "Sussex Royal".


"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s use of the label “Sussex Royal” is being reviewed following their decision to step down from official duties.

Talks involving the Queen and senior officials are ongoing about the couple’s use of the brand as they prepare to start their new life outside royal duties, the Daily Mail"

Also, when does Spring officially start for the British Royal Family or rather exactly when do we expect Spring to officially begin in regard to the Sussexes?

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by ACO

I don't think the window is ever closed. They can very well bring it up and go through the process though I understand why the family wouldn't want to go through all that. But it would be interesting if like their HRH they just didn't use the titles at all. I think it would please many.

Let's see if Meghan attends. I expect Harry though.

The window to not have a title is set out in law - one year from the date a person gains the title. As Harry was given the title on his wedding day the window of opportunity for him to not use the title closed. His official title and name thus is The Duke of Sussex.

Until 1963 a peer of the realm could not hold and use their title but the law was changed to allow them to not have the title if they made that decision within a year of gaining the title... and they can't stop their descendants inheriting it either.

They could decide to not use their titles for commercial purposes but their titles will still be their official names and the ones that have to appear on legal documents in the UK.

[O-H Anglophile]

Originally Posted by Lady Daly

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/sussex-label-could-soon-be-seen-on-art-and-anoraks-g3rpggpzc

They could continue to use their Duke/Duchess titles just not the label "Sussex Royal".


"The Duke and Duchess of Sussex’s use of the label “Sussex Royal” is being reviewed following their decision to step down from official duties.

Talks involving the Queen and senior officials are ongoing about the couple’s use of the brand as they prepare to start their new life outside royal duties, the Daily Mail"

Also, when does Spring officially start for the British Royal Family or rather exactly when do we expect Spring to officially begin in regard to the Sussexes?

Probably when Spring begins for everyone else in the Northern Hemisphere-March 19. But Spring lasts until June 20th.

[Curryong]

Just remember the source of this article and the sort of newspaper in which it was printed. I'll wait for an official announcement on this issue, thanks.

[Lady Daly]

Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile

Probably when Spring begins for everyone else in the Northern Hemisphere-March 19. But Spring lasts until June 20th.

I like your humor! Perhaps Spring will come for the Sussexes as early as March 9, Commonwealth Day! Phil didn't see his shadow this year so we are in for an early Spring.

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Originally Posted by BaiSoSo

Well, the circumstances are very different, Meghan had to experience things (that we aren't allowed to refer to in this thread) that Harry won't have to experience in Canada. Vancouver has already shown that it is protective of the couple. BTW I think Meghan handled moving to the UK and even the BRF work just fine, however, if people are going to bully you for no reason you don't have to just sit there and take it for the sake of wearing a tiara once in a while...it isn't worth it.

As for Harry dropping friends he has known for years we don't if it happened, but if it did it's probably for a good reason. Many of those friends are the ones he went to bars with coming out drunk, over partying in Vegas perhaps he doesn't want that lifestyle anymore or they could have been leaks to the papers who knows. Harry is a family man now and is making decisions that are best for the three of them..whether people like it or not Meghan/Archie and their safety/happiness take priority over friends that's what happens when you get married.

Whatever Harry and his friends did when they were young doesn't change that it is a HUGE warning sign when a woman makes a man drop his friends especially coupled with everything else Harry had had to give up for her. And it had been said many times before that the criticism Meghan faced was the same as what her predecessors had to face and nothing in comparison to Camilla; I won't rehash that again because it is always looked over to rush to paint detractors as something they are not.
And how easy some forget that Harry has no idea how to make his own money and has only lived as a Prince even when he was a soldier. He is taking on this brand new life that he thinks he can do just like Meghan did a few years ago and she couldn't cut it.

[Lady Daly]

I am more worried for Harry than Meghan. Harry has left everything he knows, however, this might be not only what he wants but it also might be a good fit for him and that he thrives. My best wishes for both Harry and Meghan.

[Alison H]

Plenty of people uproot themselves and start a new life, for one reason or another, but it's something you need to plan for first. All this Sussex Royal stuff and everything else should have been sorted out in advance. It all seems so ad hoc and chaotic, and generally very ill thought out. It's not that unusual for someone to leave the UK for the US, Canada, Australia, New Zealand or anywhere else, but most people, other than very young people with no responsibilities, at least sort out a job and somewhere to live first, and they don't have to negotiate leaving the Royal Family!

[QueenMathilde]

Originally Posted by Erin9

Maybe. But I thought that was made pretty clear. They can’t use HRH since they’re not working members, but they’re still members of the house so they retain it. It really comes across to me as good PR all around.

No one is stripped of anything they’ve had since birth. No one is the “mean” person doing the stripping.

Well I'll admit to not reading the Mail Online article yet (they're the ones who broke the story) but I was under the impression no one was being stripped of any titles per se. They were just told that since they no longer had the HRH that they couldn't call themselves "Sussex Royal". I think they'd be better off not using it anyway - Meghan's supporters seem to have this "you go, girl!" attitude towards their leaving the royal family. So they should be fine with them just using the "Sussex" title. Or if the people of Sussex decide that they don't want them to have that title (which I still don't see a problem with) they apparently have lesser "earl" titles which would still make them "titled". And let's face it - Hollywood has no idea what different titles are. As long as she has a title they're happy. And they're more after Meghan than Harry. So it should all work out for them as I see it. If that makes sense.


The only title I can see them stripping that her followers (again, I think she's more loved than he is by their followers) is the "princess" title. They keep referring to her as "princess Meghan". And I'll admit I don't know how that works. I know that she's not really "princess Meghan" much like Diana wasn't "princess Diana" - she's "Princess Harry". But that won't make a difference to her anymore than it made a difference when Diana divorced Charles. And I don't know if they can be stripped of their "prince and princess" titles.


Someone with a better knowledge of titles can probably explain them better.

[Alison H]

Proper titles rarely seem to be used. Diana was usually referred to as "Princess Diana", even though she was "the Princess of Wales" during her marriage and "Diana, Princess of Wales" after her divorce. Kate and Meghan are frequently referred to as "Kate Middleton" and "Meghan Markle". I don't think anyone in Sussex is any more bothered about the title than the rest of the country is: it's not like they've got a particular connection with Sussex, any more than Prince Andrew has with York or William and Kate have with Cambridge.

I keep saying that "Sussex Royal" sounds like a hospital, but one article I read today remarked that it sounded like a potato, along the lines of "Jersey Royal", which made me laugh. It really is a silly name!

[wyevale]

^ I'm glad the term 'Royal' can no longer be USED by this couple, and the people from Sussex, that I know would appreciate them no longer using that name either.

They no longer represent the Royal family, and they certainly don't represent Sussex..Why should that 'fair county' be associated with them [in the Public mind] ?

'Mountbatten-Windsor' seems the only legitimate, long term name for them 'to go by'...

[QueenMathilde]

Originally Posted by wyevale

^ I'm glad the term 'Royal' can no longer be USED by this couple, and the people from Sussex, that I know would appreciate them no longer using that name either.

They no longer represent the Royal family, and certainly don't represent Sussex..

'Mountbatten-Windsor' seems the only legitimate, long term name fror them 'to go by'...

Well someone said that if they took away the "Sussex" title ( I know there's some controversy there) they still have lesser "Earl" titles. And I don't think the people paying them would care. So if Sussex is unhappy with them having that title I don't think it would affect them if they lost it.


The only title I can see that would upset people if they lost it is "prince" and "princess". And I don't know how you lose that. Diana didn't after getting a divorce. The HRH means nothing to the Hollywood crowd.

[poppy7]

I actually see no reason why they should keep their British charities unless it was merely in a private capacity. They all presumably have nonrpyal patrons anyway. They could just join them.

[wyevale]

means nothing to the Hollywood crowd.

Who [beyond this couples financial advisers] cares about them ?

The people of Sussex DO care about the 'good name' of their County, and want it left untarnished, by an association that has become toxic.

I believe the Duke and Duchess went there ONCE..

[suztav]

Frankly, I think prohibiting them from using the word "royal" should have been one of the first things. No one should be able to commercialize the word royal for their own personal financial gain. Crass!

[QueenMathilde]

Originally Posted by wyevale

Who [beyond this couples financial advisers] cares about them ?

Oprah. Ellen De Generes. George Clooney. All sorts of celebs care about them. And let's face it they're not counting on us to support them - they're counting on them to support them. So their vote is the only one that counts.


I think if the people of Sussex are unhappy with them they can strip them of those titles. It won't matter to their millionaire supporters.


The prince and princess titles I think are another matter.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by QueenMathilde

Oprah. Ellen De Generes. George Clooney. All sorts of celebs care about them. And let's face it they're not counting on us to support them - they're counting on them to support them. So their vote is the only one that counts.


I think if the people of Sussex are unhappy with them they can strip them of those titles. It won't matter to their millionaire supporters.

No they cant. Titles can only be removed by Parliament.. and Im sure Parliament have other and better things to do at present. As for their milliionarie supporters, are they going to keep Harry and Meghan in money?

[wyevale]

I'd be all in favour of them ceasing to use Sussex as their 'moniker', but the denizens of Sussex have no say, or power over that..

That there isn't a single Brit on the list of 'slebs' you name, speaks volumes..

[QueenMathilde]

Originally Posted by Denville

No they cant. Titles can only be removed by Parliament.. and Im sure Parliament have other and better things to do at present. As for their milliionarie supporters, are they going to keep Harry and Meghan in money?

Yes. That's what they're counting on. Their millionaire supporters supporting them.


How else are they going to earn money?


They don't expect you to buy their stuff. They expect Goldman Sachs to give them speaking gigs and Oprah to loan them one of their houses.


And British celebs too - Elton John to fly them to one of his private houses for a vacation.