Do you think Meghan Markle and Prince Harry are royal, or royalty?

[Onlyonekenobe]

"Being royal": I wonder what that means.

A person can marry in and become uber-royal (Prince Philip).

A royal-born can marry out and remain royal (Charlotte Casiraghi, Eugenie/Zara/Peter etc).

Is Mike Tindall royal? If so, why? If not, how royal is Meghan Markle (asking about her specifically given how she's pushing Meghan Sussex now)? Is Harry royal after his disloyalty to and disdain for the wearers of the crown and the nation's subjects (reverse-treason?!)?

Personally I don't think Mike Tindall or Meghan Markle are royal: they're married to members of the royal family, can become divorced and would then be neither members of the family nor royal. Had she lived, I think Diana wouldn't be deemed royal today, notwithstanding being the future kings' mother and grandmother.

Just pondering. I think royalty is a matter of royal acts and service to subjects, rather than a matter of fact. I don't think the Duke or Windsor was royal after abdication (certainly not his wife).

No

In your opinion.

As a republican I find it all a bit bonkers. But if Charles is 'royal' , whatever that means , then why not Megan? They are both humans and it's all made up by other humans. I think she has as much right to wear a crown as Charles or Kate or the Red Queen in Alice.

Well obviously in my opinion.

But in all honesty I don’t see how you can compare the two of them in how they’ve treated the public, the country and their families.
One is respectful, one less so.

One seems family oriented (at least on the face of it), one seems to have ditched her family (I’m not including the awful father and sister in this btw).

They are different. It is different but other views are available and it would be a very boring world if we all agreed!

Didn’t Margaret say something like
“my children aren’t royal, their aunt just happens to be Queen” ?

I think Edward and Sophie seem to have taken that view - saying they've brought their kids up to work - and you could say same about Princess Ann's kids.

The Yorks seem a tad out of step with that - though maybe that's just the titles - though I think both princesses worked - and I think don't get Privy purse money but do charity and odd royal engagement.

I think main family seems to be stream lining along these lines - perhaps Harry wasn't ever on board with that though he'd drop in status as Wales kids grow up and have kids higher in succession than him anyway.

But as a republican, surely the concept of being royal is anathema to you? I mean - if you reject the principle of monarchy, then no-one can be royal.

The whole concept (and I'm a mild-mannered constitutional monarchist) is very hard to pin down. It's about continuity of line - and all cultures have this in some form - even the Soviets used to revere Lenin's remains and it was important to Stalin and Kruschev to be seen as 'descendants' or heirs of Lenin, even if only in a metaphorical sense.. It's about a semi-mystical idea of connection with the past that means a lot to some people and nothing to others. It means a lot to me, but I get that others see things differently.

This strange mystical aspect is, for me, where the RF win over an elected Head of State. The stretching back into the distant past and the idea that they've been somehow born and brought up to do the job (which they are). Until now this has meant that monarchs are undoubtedly not like the rest of us - their education, training and sense of a sacred purpose sets them apart from other people. But I I think William (and Harry) have lived a much more 'normal' life than their ancestors and that's going to have repercussions for the future. I would be happy for William to trim things down a lot to a more Scandinavian model.

Sorry for the digression into mystery and romance!

I don’t see either of them as Royalty, no. They’re both an embarrassment.

I don't consider Meghan Markle a royal. Or Mike Tindall. But at least Mike Tindall doesn't appear to 1consider himself royal.

I have been to Lenin's tomb! I was surprised how short he was, in (from what i remember) a very ordinary blue suit. And that you got hustled on, you couldn't stop and stare, had to keep moving past (there wasn't a crowd), and you got searched beforehand to make sure you didn't have a camera.

This was 20 or so years ago...

Before the Coronation I would agree with Camilla being on the same level as Catherine. But she has now been crowned so I think that makes her Royal in her own right. Catherine is in a different position from Megan because she is a working Royal. Meghan is royal adjacent these days.

And yes if David Attenborough was crowned I think he would then be Royal, just in case anyone wonders!

Although I assume if we got a president we wouldn't actually crown them.

No. I don't see them as royals. I do wonder what their children will say about it all when they're older. Maybe they'd have liked to be part of the royal family?

personally i wouldn't call W&K working royals

i find it bizarre that kate/meghan/camilla are seen as somehow better because they married a royal

It's not about being 'better'.

More of a civil service job.

I worked briefly with Gus O'Donnell. Very talented and seemed a genuinely nice guy. He is now in the House of Lords.

I think of the RF who represent the Head of State as similar. They help fulfil a constitutional role.

A historian I know (expert on the USSR) has seen it over the years and he thinks there's now very little left of 'actual Lenin'!

I'm glad we aren't able to see QEII or QVictoria lying exposed and looking all waxy!

And yes if David Attenborough was crowned I think he would then be Royal, just in case anyone wonders!

Oh wow - I've just remembered that when I was old enough to grasp who the RF were (top priimary school) I thought DA WAS a royal! It's partly the name - I confused him with the Duke of Edinburgh...sounds a bit similar to a child's ears...and partly the magnificent patrician demeanour.

I now think of David Attenborough, not as a royal, but as Almighty God, so he's been promoted. 😁

I'm so aware he's in his late 90s (same age as the late Queen) and I absolutely dread his passing.

Nice post. Yes I think the mystical side of it can be very appealing. But once you can see its all a soap opera , all the talk about this one versus that one is no different to preferring one or another character in Corrie?

I don't think any of them are better than anyone else. I see Royalty as a social and political status conferred by fulfilling certain duties ie, being a working royal. It doesn't make the individual better than me just as I don't see an Admiral or Chief Constable or Privy Counsellor as better. They are just titles that are part of our social and political structure.

Haven't RTFT but IMO 'royalty' is a manufactured concept with heavily feudal overtones that inexplicably still endure and enrich them.

@Samcro " I personally i wouldn't call W&K working royals " I think they are, because they do work on behalf of the RF and tours etc agreed / proposed by the Govt ( v loose definition there ) Whether you think W&K do enough work is a different matter and entirely and rightly your opinion to hold .

I think PH is royalty as born into it. MM is and never will be royal or royalty, she's a grifter, scammer, gold digger, yacht girl ... but she's not royal!

Of course they are 🙄
Royalty is a job, born in or married in, but it's a job

If you don’t have blue blood, then technically no, you’re not royal as in familial lineage. So Meghan is certainly not royalty. She just married royalty.

PH - yes
MM - no

Diana’s family, Spencer had more aristo credentials than the Mountbatten Windsors. Mike T is married to a royal, as per anyone married to QE2’s children or grandchildren. Prince Phillip was a member of the Danish and Greek royal families. Meghan isn’t a royal and her children by birth are royal as the biological children of Prince Harry. They ‘stepped back’ so Meghan resigned from the royal family, Harry & kids will always be royal in terms of blood ties.

Camilla is not royal in her own right. She has royal status on account of Charles. If she outlives Charles, William will become King and Camilla will no longer be the queen.
A president would be a ceremonial role, almost exactly the same as the monarchy, but without the nepotism. The Prime Minister would still be in charge, just like today.
Unless you wanted a presidency like the US or France. GOD FORBID.
One like Estonia or Germany would be ok, but not sure it would save us any money and tourism would probably take a hit.