If Harry still lived in the UK , do you think the feud would have been sorted by now?

[ThisPlumShark]

I do feel the biggest hurdle between Harry and his family is that he lives in another country, I think if he lived in the UK there would be more opportunity for them to sort it out

Also Harry and Meghan have security so why do they need seperate for a baby? What would a security officer just for Archie do? Stand over his cot all night?

Imagine slagging someone off to the entire world then calling your baby after them out of apparent love and reapect. It’s gaslighting of the highest order to a bereaved elderly woman. The more I think about it the more nasty and unhinged they are.

My friend who is a clinical psychologist thinks they both have narcissistic personality disorder. She’s said it for a long time and is anti Royal so isn’t on the side of the family

These 2 never admit they’re wrong ever. The only time they have is when a judge caught Meghan out and she had to admit she was wrong because otherwise it was openly breaking the law

She didn’t really admit the truth though! , she said she forgot!!!
yes forgot that she lied through her teeth! 🙄

I agree with you . I think a relatively easy way of doing this would to say Archie won't inherit a Dukedom. Which would mean H&M get to keep theirs for their lifetime but it stops there. The Dukedom was a gift from the Queen , so not a birth right. What is done about Prince and Princess a bit harder as they have those already so I think the genie is out of the bottle there and I am not sure Charles would have the will to "strip" titles. But again it stops there and no titles go down that line. It would have to be equitable so I think the Duke of Gloucester's son would be affected but I'm not au fait enough with the wider Royal family to know who else.

It will be easier to just let them naturally become non royal dukedoms. That's what is going to happen with Kent and Gloucester once this generation dies as the HRH attaches to the individual not the title. With no male heir they revert to the crown but in the meantime just let them join the rest of the aristocracy.

It's not as if in the modern age the monarch needs loads of dukedoms ready to hand out on marriage. Keep Cornwall as it for the Heir and Lancaster for the monarch and let the rest go. Edinburgh was special tothree late Queen but it doesn't really need to stay royal going forward.

I expect they'll want to keep Edinburgh because of the Duke of Edinburgh awards.

Sussex, Kent, Gloucester can just become non-royal and die out eventually like other non royal dukedoms.

I think they'll let the Sussex duckdom go non royal or die out naturally - it's easiest thing to do. So Archie gets to be a Royal Duke - any sons non royal dukes and if they remain in USA may choose not to use titles.

I think next lot of Royal marraiges they'll follow pattern of Edinburgh Dukedom and Edward - make it just them for their lifetime.

I think even if they don't update the letters patent Charlotte and Louis
could follow Ann and Edwards example anyway with any children they have - as there's now a precedent to follow. Then they could update letters patent on titles in future for future generations at some point with barly a murmur as they'd just be codifying what already been happening.

I love a good typo: Sussex duckdom

😀

It will be easier to just let them naturally become non royal dukedoms. That's what is going to happen with Kent and Gloucester once this generation dies

A shame, as Kent and Gloucester have been royal dukedoms since the Middle Ages. I suppose it was how George V granted them to his sons.

All this Royal/Non Royal Duke stuff is interesting because I've never unedrstood it.

I've always thought young women who marry a Prince must be disappointed when they beceome a Duchess, as they really want to be a Princess!
A Duchess is so old boring and staid.
A Princess is young beautiful and pretty!

I've also always thought M must have been disappointed with being Sussex, as it's such a non descript bland place name. Like being the Duchess of Surrey. Or Essex., or Northampton.
No offence to anyone from those places it's just I want to tbe the Princess of Wales not the Duchess of Reading if I'm marrying a Prince.

The Duke of York is the best Dukedom imo.
The Duke of Edinburgh also a good one.

Obviously all my opinions are based on childrens books and nursery ryhmes and I have no historical knowledge.

Cambridge was also a rubbish Duchess to be imo.

There used to be a (non royal) Duke of Leeds. That doesn't quite have the glamour factor either!

Royal Dukedoms in UK these days just mean you are son or grandson of King and can use HRH.

Dukedoms are highest level of aristocracy in UK - used to come often with money and power. Used to be a automatic seat in House of Lords - but house of Lords is now under the House of Commons and the elected part of Lords at moment from astocratic titles - so they don't all get seats these days and may be gone entirly by end of this Labour government.

In past royal bastards and poltical allies were given duckdoms but last none royal one created was under Queen Victoria.

They are a dying breed - most only past down male lines - and will at some point die out entiely as they run out of heirs. Some have seperated titles from money and land - others no longer have big estates at all.

In UK royal house women who marry in aren't princesses in own right - unless they already were - they share the husbands title - hence Princess of Michael of Kent - so she would never have been Princess Meghan - but Princess Henry.

Princess Henry sounds worse then Duchess of Sussex. Fairy stories don't care about accuracy plus many are more european in orgin than UK and their royal houses have different rules.

ld like to see a ludicrous privilege removed and something more appropriate put in its place
I mean the Royal Family have ludicrous amounts of privilege in this country, and have this privilege, by the sounds of it in the US because hes in the line of succession, which sounds like the visa Harry has. I would rather see the ludicrous privilege the Monarch and now the heir have to exemptions from legislation that cant be discussed in Parliament, or the ludicrous privilege that allows them to avoid tax, or the ludicrous privilege that allows them to make sure official documents can be kept secret for 100 years in case they embarrass them.

.....the ludicrous privilege that allows them to make sure official documents can be kept secret for 100 years in case they embarrass them.

All kinds of official records are kept closed for 100 years - census records, hospital records, education records, employment records - because they contain personal information about individuals. It's not a 'privilege' unique to the royal family.

How about wills, or Prince Andrews shenangans while he was meant to be working for us as a 'Trade envoy'? The Royal Family get to keep things secret that others don't, just to 'protect the mystery of the Monarchy' because they don't know how to behave themselves.

What has William done?!

It’s only the monarch whose will is automatically secret by law though.

Anyone can make an appeal to keep a will private - the judges made the decision to grant the request for the royals whose wills are sealed.

There will be non royal wills which will have been granted the same option. Most people won’t bother with it though because it’s an expensive route to go.

And I’ve previously said that I think keeping Andrew’s shenanigans secret is as much to protect the various government officials who were part of it. In fact more so probably - who knows how high up the chain knew and approved of what Andrew was doing.

Oh I am sure they will make up something.

Willam defrauded his brother out of sausages, using his firstborn privileges to exert undue influence on Nanny and deprive the spare of his rightful share. The Highgrove kitchen accounts have been sealed for 100 years to cover up evidence of all the additional spending on sausages required to satiate the unnaturally porculent appetites of the future king - the money for which, it is suspected, came directly out of Harry's trust fund. He's a wrong 'un, that Willie!

Shame on me! You are right. I also forgot that Will got the bigger bedroom. That must have been traumatic for Harry.

@JSMill Harry's and William's rooms at Balmoral have also been sealed - literally bricked up, lest the Spare loving public catch a glimpse of how tiny Harry's was compared to his brother's adjacent room; and turn up with pitchforks and Kirsty Allsop wielding a sledgehammer.

@PigeonDress The Bricking up of the Bedrooms , I believe from reliable sources, was done under Letters Patent issued by Edward VII , which gave the King's Mistress the right to convert the bedroom of the youngest son of the Monarch into her personal dressing room. Harry successfully sued his father to brick up the bedrooms so that his shame would be secret , "until such time as he shall choose to monetise it". It is also rumoured that Harry , as an early foray into the film world , rented the bedroom out to stand in as Harry Potter's bedroom under the stairs at the Dursleys for a sum Harry has never revealed but is thought to be substantially less than the income from the Duchy of Cornwall. This however cannot be substantiated. "Royal experts" believe the original of Edward VII's Letters Patent was used to make a massive spliff one night at Club H and therefore will never be made public.