A positive thread on Harry and Meghan (aka Thread 6)

[Mummy195]

@rousette

I'm sure you won't mind that your excellent link gets 'pinned'.

Some of the things MM did before marrying H.

threadreaderapp.com/thread/1282990766097301504.html

I've posted this before; I thought it was worth mentioning again, in light of recent reports.

It is thought the tiara in question is/was the Queen Mary’s Sapphire Bandeau, also known as the Maria Feodorovna Sapphire Bandeau.

The central sapphire is a removable brooch. The tiara can be fitted with other central stones, including a large, carved emerald brooch surrounded by diamonds. (It is thought that M wanted the emerald version).

It was thought that Queen Mary bought the tiara at auction in 1921 from Princess Nicholas of Greece, at the same time she acquired the Grand Duchess Vladimir Tiara, which was also from Princess Nicholas. (Princess Nicholas was originally Grand Duchess Elena Vladimirovna of Russia).

Unlike the Grand Duchess Vladimir Tiara, no-one knows where or how Princess Nicholas acquired it.

Maria Feodorovna (the first known owner) is the aunt-by-marriage of both Queen Mary (HMQ's grandmother) and Princess Nicholas.

It is possible that Princess Nicholas was given the tiara by Maria as a wedding present, but no-one knows for certain hence the 'unknown provenance'.

If I've attached it properly, the picture shows Queen Mary wearing the tiara with the carved emerald & diamond centre brooch as opposed to the sapphire. It looks very like the one that M chose.

Princess Margaret wore the sapphire version in the 50's & early 60's. It's not been seen in public since then.

Can Mumsnet read our private messages then? Really? (if thats true, then I had no idea, is that usual?)

I very rarely use Facebook as I hate it. But what about private messaging on Facebook. Is that secure? What if people are making contact and plotting criminal activities or terrorism?

I wouldn't trust Facebook either.

Iv’e always taken it for granted that MN read private messages. Likewise Facebook.

@My0My

He just says that Angela Kelly dragged her feet over the wedding hair mock up and loan of a tiara! So the blame is now on Ms Kelly. The dreaded Royal Household vipers!

I find this comment about Angela quite snide, if that's the right word. He's put a dig in about her but not actually explained what they mean by 'dragging her heels'. He still mentioned the tiara, why if nothing happened? Just because he didn't write any more detail in the book doesn't mean something didn't happen.

it does seem so odd that here we are in 2020 and saying a woman should wear tights and certain colour nail varnish......
what happened to feminism?

As many other people have said, the RF is a workplace with dress codes essentially. Millions of people are watching, it’s important to get it right.
I do find it incomprehensible that a woman who calls herself a feminist would marry into the RF at all.

If I was marrying into the RF one of the first members of staff I'd suck up to would be Angela Kelly. And I bet she can sniff out a sucker upper quicker than an offending dollop of dog poo on the sole of her Majesty's shoes.
Look at Beatrice and her dress. Somehow I doubt Her Majesty said "Beatrice I have thousands of lovely dresses and I know just the one...."

I imagine the idea for Beatrice to wear a vintage pass down was probably planted in the Queen's mind. And then Angela was tasked with making it happen. Maybe she and Beatrice had a fab afternoon looking through the wardrobe together but more likely she was tasked with selecting maybe a dozen for Beatrice to come and choose from, perhaps in the presence of H.M. but probably not given shielding rules.
However it happened it was Angela that made it happen.

Getting on the wrong side of her...massive mistake.

I suspect that, more than anything, shows a tendency to treat staff as servants which is neither sensible nor a likeable trait.

I don't think anyone on here cares about nail varnish or tights to be honest.

I think bringing Angela Kelly into it is a big mistake. The Queen is very close to her. I also wonder all the speculation about the 'viper' courtiers - well it is easy for a boss to blame employees isn't it? So the Queen could say for example, oh harry I did so want to see you but what could I do, those vipers who manage my diary just didn't tell me When she had instructed them to keep him away for a while which would seem very much a tactic the queen would use - pure speculation of course.

I've always assumed the owners of a platform have the right to read any content you post in the message section.

I just got an email notification for this thread and when I clicked on it it took me to a message from MNHQ saying the thread had been closed down? But clearly that's not the case?

how odd

How odd. The Meghan and Harry news thread has been closed.

I do feel a bit sorry for them both. It’s as if they’re stuck in an ever collapsing sink hole and all they have to get them out are the ceremonial spades that the RF use to plant trees with - look pretty but are bloody useless.

Also, you have to hope that they drop the ANL case, Charles gives them a big handout to cover the legal bills and then gives them a massive bollocking and tells them to take the lawyers off speed dial.

Marrying into the royal family is like starting a new job. You don't go in all guns blazing. You take it slow and observe. Get the gist of the way things work.

*Getting on the wrong side of her...massive mistake.

I suspect that, more than anything, shows a tendency to treat staff as servants which is neither sensible nor a likeable trait.*

Yes indeed.

@Bumlooksbig

I just got an email notification for this thread and when I clicked on it it took me to a message from MNHQ saying the thread had been closed down? But clearly that's not the case?

it will happen as it has now turned in to a same old same old negative type thread. its a shame as it was nice to have a place that was less negative.

I hope it doesn't happen. I thought there was good chat on here yesterday.

If there's only one Sussex thread allowed, it will end up hosting all comers. And yes @SetPhasersTaeMalkie I thought the chat yesterday was fine. Let's see what today's moderation brings.

Pretty impossible for the one allowed Sussex thread to be deemed 'positive' - where else are posters going to write anything other than positive comments? Unless MN wants to shut down conversation completely.

I do think it's odd that there is only one thread allowed, and it has to be 'happy' - all a bit stepford wives to me. Considering the things that are said about other public figures on this site, including WOC, like Diane Abbott it seems a very different approach to MM and Harry.

I rather agree that Harry has a lot to answer for with this mess. Nobody can reform the RF in a year or two, change in any organisation takes time and effort. A lot of quiet work getting people on side is done behind the scenes before change is made. Can you imagine if W&K has announced they wanted a change in succession to the press, and on Insta rather than worked quietly behind the scenes to get it done? Heels would have been dug in.

@MichaelMumsnet

We're fine with this long-running thread continuing.

To clarify, here's an outline of our approach:

For now, we are going to limit the number of threads running about Meghan Markle.
We will keep all discussion to one or two threads, and will look very carefully at reports about overt or covert racism. We will also be minded to delete bottom-feeding internet rumours (although not, to be clear, posts about stories that have appeared in mainstream outlets) - so again, please do report any you see.

one or two threads. they did not say just one. so there is no reason that another one could not be started.

Didn't Angela Kelly make a replica of the family christening robe? She's definitely somebody I'd like to have on side.

Yes @ MissEliza plus she makes many of HM’s clothes and she helped alter Beatrice’s wedding dress . I also read that she has the same size of feet as HM so breaks in her shoes for her .
She must be trusted by HM as she has been permitted to write a couple of books about her royal life.
Definitely someone to be kept close !

Well, H was up late at night by LA times for the Travelyst summit.

I think there is a second session again later today regarding Scotland.

www.newsweek.com/prince-harry-warns-crisis-due-no-tourists-therefore-no-income-1521535

I think we've all learnt from experience that any other thread will be zapped.