People Mag: Meghan Markle probably won’t be a princess, she’ll be a duchess

Harry Meghan engagement

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle have already had a busy day, I guess. No, their people have had a busy day. Prince Harry reportedly told his Kensington Palace staff (POOR JASON) two weeks ago that he wanted to announce the engagement today. Which means that this is the official rollout from Harry’s office, working in concert with Buckingham Palace and Clarence House. So far, everything is going to plan, and everything has been planned down to the smallest detail. The “wild card” here is the sit-down interview, where any question can be asked and Harry or Meghan might go off-script. The interview will apparently air at 6 pm GMT, which is 1 pm EST (here on the east coast, in America). What will they say? Hmmm…

In the meantime, please enjoy these bonus photos of Harry and Meghan at their engagement photocall, and please enjoy all of the speculation from People Magazine regarding their titles.

Don’t look for Princess Meghan anytime soon. Now that Meghan Markle is engaged to Prince Harry, her royal title is one of the key issues to sort out. Unlike Kate Middleton, however, she will not be given a princess title — but the Duchess of Sussex could be just the right fit.

When Kate married Prince William, the couple received their royal titles of Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. As the next in line to the throne behind Prince Charles, William is expected to become the Prince of Wales — and Kate, therefore, the Princess of Wales — when Charles ascends the throne. (Princess Diana, of course, was previously the Princess of Wales.)

Harry is fifth in line to the throne and will slide down to sixth after William and Kate’s third baby arrives in April 2018. Most insiders believe that if the Queen hands him a royal dukedom, like Prince William received upon his 2011 wedding, Prince Harry will be made the Duke of Sussex on his own wedding day. That would make Meghan the Duchess of Sussex, mirroring Kate’s title of the Duchess of Cambridge.

Other options include the Duke of Clarence and Avondale, the Duke of Connaught and the Duke of Windsor — but considering that the last Duke of Windsor (Edward VIII) abdicated the throne to marry his divorced American wife, that seems unlikely.

‘Unless they create a new title for them, I think the Duke of Sussex is the most likely title,” says Joe Little of Majesty magazine. “Otherwise, Keghan would be known as Princess Henry of Wales and people wouldn’t not understand that these days. But they may surprise us.”

As for where the newlyweds will live, Clarence House confirmed on Monday that they will settle in Nottingham Cottage, Harry’s two-bedroom residence at Kensington Palace in London, where staff already know Markle. In a similar fashion, Prince William and Kate Middleton lived together at St. Andrews University and then at a secluded farmhouse in North Wales briefly before they wed in April 2011. There has been speculation that one day Harry will move into Apartment 1 at the palace, which has 21 rooms and is currently the home of the Duke and Duchess of Gloucester.

[From People]

It is SO RICH for People Magazine to do a “don’t call her a princess” story considering they refer to Kate as “Princess Kate” constantly (and it still hasn’t stuck, no one but People Mag really does it). I believe Meghan will end up a duchess too, and I think the chances are pretty good that they’ll get the Sussex titles, but we won’t know for sure for months. Remember when the Queen gave Will and Kate the Cambridge titles? It was THE DAY OF THE WEDDING. I still have my fingers crossed that Meg and Harry will get an entirely new title, because why not? The Duke and Duchess of Crumpets, y’all. So old school! Also: didn’t Prince Edward reject the Duke of Clarence title? I seem to remember reading that a while back, that Edward loves researching the history of titles and the Clarence title has a fraught history, so he rejected it and the Queen ended up giving him the Earl of Wessex.

Also: I feel like I’m getting drunk on these photocall pics. They look so happy and in love!!

Harry Meghan engagement

Harry Meghan engagement

Photos courtesy of WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

75 Responses to “People Mag: Meghan Markle probably won’t be a princess, she’ll be a duchess”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. BritAfrica says:

    I’ll wait for the palace to announce their new titles.

    • LAK says:

      The engagement white washing is already in overdrive. Just listened to a talking head on the BBC discussing her career as if she were Cate Blanchett.

      Her background has been upgraded to ‘affluent, rich background’, her father is ‘an award winning cinematopgrapher’. Meghan herself has been so successful over the past 15yrs, but apoarently preferred to remain low key because her talent was so out of this world, but she herself was low key.

      And on and on it’s going.

      I’m going to have to stop watching/ listening coz it’s puke worthy.

      Yet fascinating to see it in action.

      • BritAfrica says:

        I know! It’s beyond hilarious to call her ‘Straight outta Compton’ a few months ago but now she was ‘affluent’ growing up!

        They were a normal middle-class family. Why is that so difficult to acknowledge? I think being bog-standard middle-class is her biggest asset. A lot of us will relate to that and her.

      • Nicole says:

        Yep its amazing isnt it? She was literally trash up until last week because minority.
        Meanwhile black twitter is in FULL celebration of the fact that there’s a princess who is half black. Heck this marriage would not have even been a THOUGHT 10-20 years ago.

      • Cee says:

        Yeah, in a second they’re going to say her african american mother descends from african royalty. *rolls eyes*
        She’s perfect as is, no need to “embelish” her.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I found the ElleUK person on BBC today was a bit much with the gushing.

      • BritAfrica says:

        @Nicole

        It’s great to see a reflection isn’t it? 😂 I remember smiling stupidly all day as well when Obama made it to the WH.

        I think that it’s absolutely fitting that the Obamas will attend the wedding. And happily, your President Trump will not be there but I expect Mrs Trump may attend.

      • LAK says:

        Every new royal bride is white washed and sold as the best thing that’s ever happened. Their background is so OTT rearranged that one expects unicorns by the wedding.

        It’s very effective because people who don’t pay attention believe the new whitewashed history and think any criticism or attempts to correct the record is jealousy or bitter betty grapes, and don’t believe a word of the correct record because there is an innocent belief in the veracity of palace statements.

      • Megan says:

        Harry looked so uncomfortable when he met Melania at the Invictus Games, I don’t see her getting an invitation. As for the Obamas, Harry will definitely invite his favorite gal pal Michelle.

        When it comes to invitations, no one can ever top Serena and Alexis so they may as well use E-vite.

      • LAK says:

        I think receiving an invitation from the Queen of the UK and 16 realms to the wedding of her grandson trumps all other invites.

      • Megan says:

        @LAK LOL! I meant the look of the invitations, not the event itself.

    • Dixiebells says:

      I know every person who has married in gets the “breath of fresh air” treatment but she truly seems like one. She seemed calm and sure of herself at the photocall, and she doesn’t strike me as the type to be all that hung up on her ultimate title. I think she’ll be polite in accepting whatever it is, but I really think she has an opening here to let her eventual charity work define her much more than a title. I could see her starting (and truly running) a foundation or other project.

      Now having seen them officially “in action” however brief, I think they really have potential to be the royal power couple. I can’t wait for the interview!

      • BritAfrica says:

        I agree DB. She seems really in step with what she will be expected to do so I hope she really ‘brings it’ re the charity work.

        People are done with half-hearted attempts and all that. If you marry into this family you have one job – produce heirs and do the charity work so I hope they both really commit to that.

      • Spring says:

        I agree, too. While I’m not strong on the royal family’s cost-to-benefit ratio for Britain, It’s great to see diversity — in multiple senses of the word — finally being brought into the fold.

    • Snappyfish says:

      Odds are they will be the Duke & Duchess of Sussex. I think People Mag (imo) calls Catherine Princess as she will one day be the Princess of Wales & they made a poop load of money on the last one.

  2. Hh says:

    Won’t she still technicall be “Princess Harry of Wales” (a la Princess Michael of Kent)? Also, Duchess is more than I’ve got going right now. Hahaha! 🙂

    • notasugarhere says:

      Yes, one of her titles would be Princess Henry of Wales. If he’s given a dukedom on the wedding day per tradition, they’d go by the higher titles of “Duke and Duchess” which outrank the prince title. http://www.celebitchy.com/privacy_policy/

      • spidey says:

        There are royal dukes (currently Philip, Andrew, Duke of Kent) who are the sons or grandsons (previously) of the monarch who are already princes but are sometimes given specific ducal titles. There are ordinary dukes – hereditary dukedoms such as Devonshire, Norfolk where the ancestor got the title centuries ago for great service to the monarch of the time, but they are not royal.

        Prince outranks the lot of the dukes – they are born princes automatically and have to be royal; royal dukes get the titles later as with Andrew and William. I don’t think we will see any more ordinary dukes who aren’t royal princes to start with.

        Hope that makes sense.

      • LAK says:

        Once the inheriting title holder falls outside the criteria of child/ grandchild of the monarch, then their dukedom stops being royal.

        The current Dukes of Kent and Gloucester are the grandchildren of George V. Therefore their dukedoms are royal.

        The heirs of the current dukes of Kent and Gloucester are not children or grandchildren of the monarch so whilst they will inherit the dukedoms, those dukedoms will stop being royal and be regular dukedoms.

    • Sisi says:

      No.

      a Dukedom is a higher title and will ALWAYS win out.

      The reason why Princess Michael of Kent is announced as such (quoted from other blog):
      “A prince in the UK is the son of the sovereign or of one of the sovereign’s sons. The sovereign’s sons are usually given a title upon marriage (e.g. Prince William is Duke of Cambridge) and his wife takes the feminine version of that title (so we have Kate Duchess of Cambridge). With the grandchildren of the monarch who are princes, however, only the eldest in each family will inherit the title. Prince Michael is the younger of two sons (of a son of George V). His older brother, Prince Edward, inherited the dukedom so he is Prince Edward, Duke of Kent and his wife is the Duchess of Kent. However, Prince Michael has no other title other than “Prince Michael”. Because of this, his wife takes the title “Princess Michael” – she cannot be “Princess Marie-Christine” as that would imply she was a princess by birth, which she is not. ”

      Michael is called “of Kent” because his father was the Duke of Kent, and on dads death that title went to Michaels brother.
      In the case of the Michael and his wife it’s not that they have been given the title prince and princess on marriage, they weren’t given a title at all because they were too far removed from the throne.
      There’s far too much romanticism around the prince/princess titles. I blame Disney XD

      Since Harry is the child of the future monarch, he will be granted a Dukedom anyway and his situation is not similar to Michael of Kent.

      • Alix says:

        Thank you! In some countries, Meghan would get the princess title before her own name, but not in Britain. She WILL be legally “Princess Henry of Wales” (until Wills succeeds, maybe? Help me out, @Sisi), the same way Kate is technically “Princess WIlliam”, but just as Kate is known as HRH the Duchess of Cambridge*, so Meghan will be HRH the Duchess of (we think) Sussex.**

        * Without first names, please, which imply that said duchess is widowed or divorced.

        ** Does anybody else find “Duchess of Sussex” a bit of a tongue twister?

      • spidey says:

        Sorry sisi but a prince is higher than a duke.

        http://www.genealogyinengland.com/Information/rankspeerage.htm

        And that is why the order is Prince William, Duke of Cornwall and not the other way round.

      • Chinoiserie says:

        It’s not due to Disney really. More like toy lines and other marketing for girls and Disney caught up with the trend in the 2000s in their marketing. Before that it was just fairytale adaptations and the films marketed on their own.

  3. Huckle says:

    Lovely couple! She is so gorgeous, and he’s such a hunk 🙂 Congrats to them.

  4. Maria says:

    I guess they will be confered a dukedom when they marry. I’m hoping for Sussex because Clarence was that shady son of Edward VII.

  5. Megan says:

    I think Phillipa Gregory’s novels sealed the doom of the Clarence title.

  6. Nene's Wig says:

    I want her hair and that coat.

  7. Fa says:

    Only royal blood began princess.

  8. Maria says:

    I don’t know whether Edward rejected the Duke of Clarence title or whether it was because he will inherit he Duke of Edinburgh’s title when he passes.

    • notasugarhere says:

      He chose Earl of Wessex because he and Sophie liked the movie Shakespeare in Love so much. He won’t technically inherit the Duke of Edinburgh title, as that one was “given” by HM. The understanding is he will be granted the title Duke of Edinburgh after Philip passes away. That depends on if HM follows through on that or if Charles does (if HM passes before Philip).

      • Maria says:

        But an Earl is below a Duke right? So he must be hoping he will get the title once Phillip
        passes. Is the Queen technically still the Duchess of Edinburgh? Will Edward have to wait until she pases? Sorry my title knowledge is poor.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Yes, Earl is below Duke but I think that’s what the two of them wanted (Edward and Sophie). They also asked that their kids not receive royal titles, so they are Lady and Lord.

        The assumption is he’ll be granted the Edinburgh title, but really more to continue to honor Prince Philip and his work at Duke of Edinburgh through the years. They’ve started taking on more work with his Duke of Edinburgh scheme in the last few years, preparing for a transition.

        I *think* HM still has the Duchess of Edinburgh title, but someone can correct me on that one. Since it was a granted title, not an inherited one then too? I’m not sure what happens if Prince Philip passes away before she does. She might then be Dowager Duchess of Edinburgh.

      • LAK says:

        Yes. Duke is the highest title. It goes: Duke, Marquess, Earl, Viscount, Baron, Baronet, Knight

        These days, women get Dame which is on the same level as Knight.

        Queen is still the duchess of Edinburgh as well as all her other titles. If she outlives Philip, she’ll be the Dowager Duchess of Edinburgh + her other titles.

        The Queen expressed a wish for Edward to receive Edinburgh Dukedom after Philip passes, but that depends on whether HM or Charles is monarch. Guaranteed if it’s HM as she’s already expressed her desire. Charles could grant it or something different or not at all.

      • carolind says:

        It has been said that Edward will not get the Edinburgh title until both the Queen and Duke are gone i.e. if the Duke goes first, he will not get it until the Queen also goes. However, it is not a given that he will get it. I think it will depend on Charles.
        Prince of Wales is not an automatic title. It has to be conferred by the sovereign. Charles did not automatically become P of W when his mother became Queen. She did not confer this on him until 5 years later.

    • LAK says:

      He is expected to inherit Edinburgh after Philip. Right now he is Wessex. A title last known in pre-England, in the Kingdom of Wessex. Apparently he saw it in the film SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE, loved it and asked for it. A nod to his thespian leanings

      • Cee says:

        Doesn’t he also represent/is president of The Duke of Edinburg Award? Sophie Wessex is very visible, too. Seems clear it is known he will receive that title once it reverts back to the Crown.

  9. Lucy says:

    There’s something so…imperfect about them. I mean this as a complement. They both seem quite nervous and emotional, yet so happy and at ease with each other.

    • Hella says:

      I agree. They are beautifully Wabi Sabi (beautiful in imperfection).

    • Izzy says:

      It’s the happy and at ease with each other part that really counts, too. It bodes well for their marriage, especially in the fishbowl they’ll be living in.

  10. Eliza says:

    I may have this wrong but technically they’d both be Princesses. Princess William and Princess Henry. But Duchess is a higher title than those so they go by their dukedoms.

    Diana was never Princess Diana… she was Diana, Princess of Wales if I recall correctly.

    • frisbee says:

      Only girls of Royal blood have Princess as their title, I.e Princess Anne, Princess Eugenie etc.. She will be a Duchess ( of wherever) Princess Henry of Wales. The Princess title is only conferred from Harry, she will never be granted this in her own right. Duchess as a title does’nt top a Princess of Royal blood because basically nothing trumps Royalty in the matter of titles, protocol etc.

  11. rose says:

    Nothing but Respect for my Princess.

  12. Anna Allen says:

    you are never a princess if you marry into the British royals. it’s a blood role. they would be PRINCESS HARRY or PRINCESS WILLIAM

    • BrandyAlexander says:

      How come Diana was a princess then? I went on a Diana binge this summer and read a few of the books about her, and I’ve been trying to figure out why Diana was a princess, but Fergie was a duchess. Is it strictly because she married the heir?

      • Hikaru says:

        Diana wasn’t a princess either, the people called her princess because they liked her. One can’t get royal blood from sleeping with a royal, it’s not an STD.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Sarah Ferguson was also Princess Andrew, Sophie is Princess Edward. Diana was technically “Princess Charles” and “Diana, Princess of Wales”. She was never “Princess Diana” that’s just what media and people called her.

      • BrandyAlexander says:

        Thanks for the info. Now that I think about it, I think I WAS mixing up “Princess Diana” with “Diana, Princess of Wales”, and not noticing the difference.

      • LAK says:

        Think of ‘princess Diana’ as a nickname that stuck.

      • BrandyAlexander says:

        So, to amend my original question – Why was Diana (or whoever marries the heir) titled “Name, Princess of Wales” but everyone else marring in becomes Princess Man’s Name of wherever? Is it JUST that the heir (and thus whomever they marry) gets to stand out a little more than the rest?

      • notasugarhere says:

        It is the name order using the title.

        FirstName, Princess of Wales
        FirstName, Duchess of Wherever

        Charles, Prince of Wales
        Camilla, Princess of Wales (which is one of her titles but she doesn’t use it)
        Camilla, Duchess of Cornwall

        Edward, Earl of Wessex
        Sophie, Countess of Wessex

        I never remember the “the” rule with married vs. divorced.

      • LAK says:

        Name,title = divorced woman.

        When you marry, you lose your name and gain a courtesy female version of your husband’s title which also has a definitive article “The”. Hence The Princess of Wales or The Duchess of York or The Duchess of Cambridge.

        Ie The (female version) title = married woman.

        When you divorce, you regain your first name, and a comma, before the title. You lose the definitive article “THE”. Hence Diana, Princess of Wales or Sarah, Duchess of York or Catherine, Duchess of Cambridge.

        Ie First name + comma + title minus the definitive article = divorced woman.

      • perplexed says:

        Honestly, I always thought people called her Princess Diana because of the Princess of Wales title, which came after her name rather than before it. Had Prince Charles been known primarily as Duke of Whatever, I don’t know if we would have called her Princess Di. People probably would have called her Duchess Di, like Lady Di and Shy Di.

        By the end of her life she got so famous, I think you could have referred to her by only her first name in casual conversation, and people would have known who you were talking about. (I.e “Oh look, Diana did this today…”) Maybe the press referred to her by an official title out of respect, but I got the impression she was so famous that only one name was needed.

      • LAK says:

        Perplexed: in the European royal families, you marry a prince, you become a princess in your own right. So if Diana had married Frederick of Denmark (as an example), she would legitimately be Princess Diana.

        I think calling her ‘Princess Diana’ was a can’t-be-bothered-to-explain-it-to-the-public bit of journalistic laziness. She’s married to a prince therefore she’s a princess. Besides newspapers to sell. Easy headline. At first she was called ‘Lady Di’ (her original, birth style) or ‘shy Di’, then ‘Princess Diana’ took off and stuck.

        And when post-divorce and death she was referred to as ‘Diana, Princess of Wales’ most people didn’t notice the changed title. It still had princess in it therefore ‘Princess Diana’ she remained.

        You are right thst she became so popular that she had mutated into the one name celeb category.

    • Anatha A says:

      @BrandyAlexander It is because “Prince of Wales” is a title, like Duke of Edinburgh or whatever. It doesn’t mean “son of a king” as the other Prince titles are, but is a title in its own right. Prince as in ruler. So technically Diana was “Diana, Princess of Wales, Princess Charles of England”. The first one is a title, the last one is the “Prince, because said person is son of king/queen”.

      • BrandyAlexander says:

        @ Anatha, Thank you, this answer made the most sense to me. All the rules I read around Diana this summer baffled me a little, and I’m glad to have clarification on that one. It does seem like the BRF is slowly evolving with the times, which is good for them in the long run.

      • LAK says:

        Anantha: Titles do not work like that in Britain.

        Prince/princess in Britain refers to child/ Grandchild of monarch in the male line. It is restricted to these blood connections.

        Duke is a peerage title that has nothing to do with someone being a prince.

        There are some dukedoms reserved for the royal family, but can pass out of the royal circle if the title holder isn’t a child/ grandchild of the monarch.

        Exception are the 3 dukedoms that are always held by the royal family to be inherited under special conditions:
        Cornwall = held by the heir apparent
        York = held by second son of monarch
        Lancaster = held by the Sovereign

        Prince of Wales is a special title different from the usual child/grandchild princely titles. It is held by the heir apparent. Prince Charles would still be a prince even if he wasn’t the Prince of Wales. He is granted the Prince of Wales to denote that he is the heir apparent.

        You do not become a princess in your own right when you marry a prince. Ditto any other title in the peerage.

        When you marry a title, you take on the courtesy female version of your husband’s highest title. Thus Diana as a married woman was The Princess of Wales because that is Prince Charles’s highest ranked title. When she divorced him, she regained her first name, a comma before the title to indicate her new marital status. She transitioned thus:

        Lady Diana Spencer = Maiden name
        The Princess of Wales = Married name
        Diana, Princess of Wales = divorced name.

  13. JenB says:

    They will make the CUTEST babies!! (If it’s their wish, of course.)

  14. Plum says:

    Meghan doesn’t have any title of her own, so as per British custom she’ll adopt the feminine version of her husband’s titles. Her full title would be something like “Her Royal Highness Princess Henry of Wales, Duchess/Countess of Whatever”. Never Princess Meghan because she isn’t a born Royal: it’s a title by marriage alone.

    Kate’s official name (according to her kid’s birth certificate) is “Catherine Elizabeth, Her Royal Highness The Duchess of Cambridge.”

    • LAK says:

      The certificate has a proper gap between her first names and her title. The way you’ve written it such that there is a comma between her first name and her title means she is a divorced woman. A comma means divorce.

    • spidey says:

      I may be wrong but I think they have more or less stopped saying Princess William etc. as it doesn’t look too good these days.

  15. SJhere says:

    Well, I say Congrats and Best of Luck to them. They look very happy together. 🙂
    With all the horrible crap going on in the world, I say good for them and let happiness rule.
    I’ll take any good news I can get every chance any comes around.

    Personally, I really like her ring! That bauble is so big she could slice open the mail with it.

  16. Rhys says:

    Interesting body language- she is rubbing his arms as if to calm and encourage him in almost elder sister’s way. She seems more mature than him. With Wills and Kate you can tell he is the one calling the shots. These two are very different.

    • BrandyAlexander says:

      I saw her holding his hand with both of hers and read that as her being very nervous. I think they both were. And I don’t blame them – I couldn’t imagine having to announce an engagement to the world in this manner. But they do seem in love and happy. I wish them a long and happy marriage.

      • Who ARE These People? says:

        I think it’s nerves too, and also they’re protective of each other. He seems like he would have liked to be private about this for as long as possible, and I hope they both enjoy at least some of the public aspects of their engagement.

        Personally, I loved making mine public, but then I wasn’t marrying a Prince, just a prince. : )

      • BrandyAlexander says:

        Aww, what a sweet sentiment about his husband (assuming this wasn’t yesterday and you’re already married – LOL). I feel the same about mine, and I liked telling everyone when I got engaged too. But I couldn’t imaging having to hold a press conference with complete strangers to announce it to the world!

  17. Eldy says:

    Actually Meghan will get a similar royal status than Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyons ( the late Queen Mother) got when she married the Duke of York in 1923 :
    Her Royal Highness the Duchess of X, with the status of a Princess.

    So she will be a Princess but referred to as HRH the Duchess of X.

  18. minx says:

    That’s great news, congrats to them.

  19. Her Higness says:

    WISHING THEM A LONG HAPPY ABUNDANT MARRIAGE

  20. Amelie says:

    I like that these two seem so animated and can barely contain their excitement. I know they’ve only been together about a year and a half so there’s still the whole newness of the relationship and they might not be so affectionate in public a few years down the line. But the difference between the announcement of their engagement and Kate and Will’s is very apparent. I get W&K had been together nearly a decade at that point (a few breaks ups etc.) and they still seemed pretty happy but more low-key. Meghan is just radiating happiness. She has that smile that lights up her entire face that only a few people have.

  21. Marianne says:

    Kate’s not a princess, so why would she be?

  22. raincoaster says:

    Nope, nope, nope. She will be a princess AND a duchess. You do not marry a Royal Highness (as opposed to a Serene Highness) and not become a princess. She’ll go by her ducal title, so as to be more “of the people” and also because the Brits are weird that way. It’s tradition.

    • LAK says:

      Nope. You do not become a princess when you marry a prince. In European royal families -yes, but not in Britain.

      You are given a courtesy female version of your husband’s highest title and are known by that. If your husband is a duke, then you are a duchess. His being a prince as well as a duke is irrelevant eg The Duchess of Cambridge. If Prince is his highest title, that is what you get eg Princess Michael.