Prince Harry introduced Duchess Kate & Meghan Markle last week in London

wenn23865811

At least twice a year, the British tabloids try to sell some fan fiction about the Duchess of Cambridge and Prince Harry. Harry and Kate always seem to flirt with each other during public events, and Harry is often the “third wheel” for events with the Cambridges, especially in the past few years. Some say that Kate and Harry are very, very close, and that she’s “his closest female friend” and something of a surrogate mother. I doubt that so much, but I do think they’re friendly and that Harry adores his niece and nephew. Anyway, the big story has been “when will Harry introduce Meghan Markle to Kate?” Some outlets reported weeks ago that Kate and Meghan had already met, and some outlets said it happened yet. Who knows? Well, The Sun knows. And it sounds like The Sun got their story straight from a Middleton.

Smitten Prince Harry has introduced girlfriend Meghan Markle to sister-in-law Kate for the first time, The Sun on Sunday can reveal. The sexy actress was even introduced to the other most important girl in Harry’s life – niece Princess Charlotte. It’s a further sign of how the relationship between the royal and the Suits star is hotting up.

A pal said: “Kate was really looking forward to meeting Meghan and she knew how important it was to Harry. They are very close and he really values her opinion on girlfriends. Obviously Harry’s mother, Princess Diana, died when he was very young so Kate really fulfils that older sister/maternal role. It went really well and Meghan was very excited about meeting her.”

Harry and Meghan had just returned to London from their first romantic holiday to see the Northern Lights in Norway. Meghan, 35, had already met Prince William two months ago at Kensington Palace while Kate was still at their Norfolk home Anmer Hall. But after celebrating her 35th birthday there on Monday, she travelled down to London on Tuesday for the meeting. Prince George stayed in Norfolk as he goes to nursery there, but she brought Charlotte, 20 months, with her.

The pal added: “Harry and Meghan went over to Kate’s apartment in Kensington Palace. William was also there and she got to play with Charlotte who she just adored. Meg had bought Kate a small birthday present – a very smart leather-bound ‘dream diary’ for her thoughts and ideas which Kate loved. This just shows how serious Harry is. He wants to take their relationship to the next level.”

[From The Sun]

While I don’t doubt that Kate and Meghan have already met at some point, I find it hard to believe that Kate – who makes laziness an art form – would go out of her way to travel from Norfolk to London on the day after her birthday JUST to meet Meghan and Harry. Granted, she was going to be in London anyway on Wednesday (for two work events) so maybe she just came up early and just happened to meet Meghan. I do wonder though… is it really that big of a deal that Kate and Meghan met? I thought it was a much bigger deal that Harry introduced Meghan to his father very early in their relationship. I guess it’s important that Kate and Meghan meet because Kate is going to have to plot her strategy for how she combats all of the positive media stories about Meghan and her charity work. I guess that’s why Kate needs her “secret weapon,” her mother. Now, I would pay someone to introduce Meghan to Carole Middleton. Also: Meghan had to bring Kate a gift, because of course she did.

Just FYI to Harry: Now is exactly the time to branch out and get your own press office. It’s going to get worse from here because it’s becoming clear that the Middletons are trying to control the narrative around Meghan.

wenn24552902

wenn20806314

Photos courtesy of WENN.

Related stories

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

96 Responses to “Prince Harry introduced Duchess Kate & Meghan Markle last week in London”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Who ARE these people? says:

    What would Kate write in her Dream Diary?

    • EO1 says:

      Something about twirling her hair.

    • Amelia says:

      “Dear Diary,

      Had an awful nightmare last night.
      Dreamt I spent two *hours* at a charity function yesterday, with no photographers or Ben Ainslie. Sigh. *doodles hearts and KM + BA*
      I didn’t even have a clutch to hold onto, so I ended up shaking hands with so many serfs, I can still feel their sweaty fingers on me.

      I can’t quite remember what the charity was for, but it wasn’t even black tie, and there were so many of those hideous cheesy nibbles Bill insisted on putting out during that dreadful reception at KP.

      Afterwards, was frog-marched into attending yet another event, not nearly enough time to change outfits or top up the ‘tox.
      This time with the Irish Guards! That scruffy wolfhound tackled me to the ground before I could wake up. I swear I’ll never touch another shamrock as long as I live.

      Will have to spend the rest of the day in the salon to make up for this trauma.”

      “PS: Must send Mummy an invitation to tea. She has a new press plan apparently, something about invoking Wallace Simpson’s memory.”

      • TheOtherOne says:

        Haha. Love!!!

      • Olenna says:

        LOL!

      • Tiny says:

        I’m crying!
        I need some more coffee, since I’ve dribbled this one all down my shirt like an idiot, although you forgot the crazy comped vacations to the Maldives or somewhere

      • Liberty says:

        fabulous

      • Lorelai says:

        @Amelia: 👏🏻👏🏻👏🏻😂😂😂

      • LAK says:

        Wallace Simpson!!!LOL 😂

      • Liberty says:

        – and no kidding, just yesterday I was reading a synopsis of Vickers’ book on the later years of Wallis Simpson’s life and thinking, hmmmm! hmmm! “hiding under a blanket moaning as he abdicated….” Hmm!

        So well done! :-)

      • LaMaitresse says:

        Brilliant! Only thing I would have added was something inane like ” I had a lovely lace dress on and Bill’s Dad muttered £8000.00, and it’s isn’t even English, but I really try to economize and I thought I saw Jecca wearing something similar”.

      • Tough Cookie says:

        LOL I love the part about the scruffy wolfhound

      • BTownGirl says:

        THE WOLFHOUND hahahahahhaahaha!! Thank you so very much for making my day :)

      • milla says:

        while i do think you are funny, i do not get the attacks on kate. she married a royal, so he should be the target, not kate.

        he does nothing, he is as lazy as they come, even though he knew he will become king one day. she did not.

        and we do not know if she is that vain or simply scared not to make the wrong move. silly gal, she should have married a nice billionaire, since it is pretty obvious the family is into it. her sister will have happier life.

  2. Mikasa says:

    Yeah this whole article doesn’t sound made up at all.

    • Birdix says:

      Yeah, especially “William was there” as if he’s the wallpaper or something. And I imagine George can miss a day or two of nursery school if he wants.

      • Mikasa says:

        Yep. I don’t know who the article wrote but it would be more believable if (s)he had left out this cringeworthy “dream diary” part.

    • midigo says:

      Mmmmh. Damage control after Thomas Markle got arrested?

      • Mikasa says:

        Maybe … are they close, do you know that?

      • TheOtherOne says:

        Damage control for Will leaving his helicopter job to be a full time royal, but he will work not to overshadow his father. I can’t wait for Kaiser to post about that and the commentary.

      • Mikasa says:

        @TheOtherOne: I read the comments on the DM article, I think I have only read 4-5 nice comments when it comes to decision.

      • Megan says:

        Messy relatives don’t seem to be an issue for the royals, like Uncle Gary for example.

      • Sarah says:

        Oh, boy. Of course it’s not Meghan’s fault, but she will be smeared with this. THIS is the reason that Meghan should run as far and as fast from Harry as she can: this is just the start.

    • Adele Dazeem says:

      Agreed. Total fan fiction.

      I also don’t buy the “Harry adores Kate” narrative. Not sure why, but I just feel like he has his own friends that have nothing to do with his brother.

      • Mikasa says:

        I also don’t think that they are that close, it’s all made up.

      • Alix says:

        He may not “adore” her, but at Will & Kate’s wedding reception he did mention in his speech that, with her in the family, he now had something he’d always wanted — a sister. Awww.

        Dude absolutely does need his own press office now, though.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Alix, did you expect him to repeat what he said at the time of the engagement? That he barely knew her? Even Harry, as many mistakes as he makes, sometimes knows how to play the PR game well.

  3. Cakelover says:

    But the Daily Mail told us last year Meghan has already met Kate and Wills. Now they say this was the first meeting lol

    • Odette says:

      Well, to be fair, the DM said Meg had met Will, not Kate. Plus, the DM and Sun are different papers, right?

      • Cakelover says:

        They are different papers but the Daily Mail now copies royal stories from the Sun. I think the truth is no one knows what’s going on behind closed doors and that’s why they write this and that and hope maybe it’s true.

      • Odette says:

        Well, I must confess, I’m not of the opinion that everything written is wrong and fake. I mean, defamation laws exist. Now, it may not be 100% true, but it’s definitely a story that Harry and the Cambridges are OK with. That said, the scenario seems pretty plausible and innocuous; I’m not sure why people would think this was a lie. Meghan met her boyfriend’s sister-in-law; no biggie.

      • Cakelover says:

        Maybe they have already met, maybe they haven’t. Maybe they were in Norway together, maybe they weren’t. Maybe they’re still together, maybe they aren’t and so on – no one knows.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Odette, for the most part the BRF has traditionally ignored stories related to personal relationships, whether they are true or false. That was why Harry’s statement about treatment of Meghan Markle and her family (as badly-written as it was) was such a big deal.

        The PR coming from the Middletons for 15 years is a different kettle of fish, and not to be considered part of BRF strategy.

    • Liberty says:

      ….maybe she was introduced to Carole first, lol. “Mummy will handle this impertinent little miss, dearie! There is no room for two commoner success stories in this family! We SHALL be Queen one day, never fear! You just keep brushing your hair, that’s my little pet, and try on the nice new jeggings Mummy brought you.”

  4. Digital Unicorn (aka Betti) says:

    I’ve been saying for years that Harry needs to get the hell away from Jason and his incompetents. Its been obvs for some time that the Middletons (Carole) are influencing the press team and using them to promote themselves. Of course they will try and control the narrative around Meghan, they need her to make Waity look better. If anything is going to make Meghan run for the hills its the Middletons and their incessant interfering and controlling ways.

    Plus I don’t buy that Harry and Kate are close, he tolerates her and is friendly to her as she is married to his brother – its called good manners. Harry is close to the York Princess and Zara from what i can recall and am sure its their opinion that matters to him more than Waity’s.

    Someone is feeling insecure and a bit neglected by the Wales brothers!!!

    • Jan says:

      Exactly.

    • Sixer says:

      This is a Middleton attempt to big up Katie Keen and create the impression that she is the BRF arbiter of acceptability for girlfriends and possible spouses of junior members of the family.

      1) There is no such arbiter (as LAK is forever pointing out).

      2) If there were such an arbiter, Katie Keen would be about a gazilionth in the queue to be that arbiter.

      3) The imagination has to be spectacular to conceive of Katie Keen as a motherly matriarch.

      • Digital Unicorn (aka Betti) says:

        I imagine Katie Keen has a checklist:

        - Controlling helicopter mother
        - Dodgy relatives with crim connections
        - Wealthy relatives that fun the lazy lifestyle
        - Super fake accent
        - Pathological need to flash her biscuit to anyone and everyone at all times
        - Ability to gurn for the camera
        - Big hair
        - No sense of style
        - How thin is she? Is she thinner than me?
        …….

      • Sixer says:

        BBC is reporting Bill is leaving the EAAA.

      • LAK says:

        Sixer: that Normal Bill leaving EAAA story was spectacularly mishandled yesterday. If it were upto me, poor Jason would be fired this morning, but since he is not, let’s add it to the long list of mishandlings and creating a mountain of bad PR out of nothing.

        To wit:

        1. Sunday morning, a small story is posted to all papers including the DM saying he is definitely leaving blah, blah coz Madge is handing over. The usual article about how this is the year W will finally step up.

        2. Sunday afternoon, DM’s story is updated *with quotes* saying even though he will be full time, he will do less than Charlie because he doesn’t want to ‘elbow him out of the way*

        3. Sunday evening, to try to deflect, a new story released anout which campus the boy will attend come September – Nottinghill or Kensington.

        I’m still having vapours of the embarrassed kind over the second update.

        Normal bill #whateverworkmeans thinks he can work harder than Charles and or thinks he can be more popular than Charles. William without Kate or Harry doesn’t pull crowds or media. Charles still does.

        Normal bill pulls media when he invokes Diana. How often can he pull that card. It feels used up.

      • Digital Unicorn (aKa Betti) says:

        @LAK. This is normal Bills attempts to manage expectations that even thou he’s bored of the EAA job and is why he’s leaving for full time duties he still isn’t prepared to up his numbers by chucking Daddy under the bus by saying he doesn’t want to hurt his fathers ego. All BS to set the scene for more Daddy blaming.

        Neither Wills or Kate draw the crowds, Kate gets the press attention but it’s Harry who gets the crowds. It’s only whe the 3 of them r together that the crowds r bigger. I think there will be more 3 some engagements this year as they ride on Harry’s good PR.

      • Liberty says:

        Well, then I vote you and LAK as the new impartial Arbiters/PR Office Directors. Modern, knowledgeable, fearless, have brains and critical thinking skills. Everyone, sign my petition!

      • Sixer says:

        It’s a total disaster, as per. I concur with you guys!

        Liberty – can I also arbiterererererer the line of succession?

      • Liberty says:

        Absolutely, Sixer, I think that is a must!! (begins retyping petition)

      • Megan says:

        I think there was a time when Charles was paranoid about his sons outshining him, but I think those fears have long been put to rest.

        William has doesn’t do much of anything and Harry has carved out a very different path for himself.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Harry needs to put his PR in his father’s hands.

      “I’m looking forward to getting to know her” – Prince Harry about Kate Middleton at the time of the engagement. After his brother had been with her for a decade.

      No, KM is not his advisor and I doubt he would take her advice to heart (ie. telling Chelsy cheating comes with the territory so accept it). Given the choice, he’d ally with his bullied cousins instead of the woman who bullied them.

      • Lady D says:

        Those cousins did their fair share of bullying too. I don’t know who started it, but neither group is innocent here.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Refusing to move seats at a fashion show years later so Pippa could sit in the front row does not constitute bullying.

        Those cousins are many years younger, were in their tweens and teens when KM began her attacks. Meanwhile, it has been shown that Middleton herself was never the victim of bullies at school and that was all a ruse for sympathy.

      • Digital Unicorn (aka Betti) says:

        What bullying did the York Princesses do? Other than stick up for themselves.

        Lets not forget the roller disco where Kate cursed out Beatrice in front of the paps after Beatrice asked her why she didn’t tell her it was fancy dress. The Daily Mail reporter found B in the toilets crying and thats how she got the story.

        Kate and Pippa bullied Harry’s GFs and any woman who William showed an interest in. Its also been reported that Kate is not so nice to her own staff – an RPO leaked that one and was then sacked.

        These 2 are as nasty as they come and I hope Meghan has thick skin as she will need it in order to survive the Middletons nasty media games and Kate lording it over her with her ‘grand’ attitude.

      • Bridget says:

        I thought the disco incident was terrible, but let’s also get real. The York sisters were intentionally and publicly snubbing Pippa at that fashion show. They weren’t defending themselves, they were sinking just as low.

      • Izzy says:

        Like it or not, the York sisters are members of the BRF, and Pippa is NOT – no matter how much Carole Meddlesome wishes it were so. They had every right not to move seats for her, and frankly would have that right even if they weren’t royalty. The Middletons’ expectations that they should be treated like members of the BRF are both obvious and nauseating.

      • Digital Unicorn (aka Betti) says:

        @Bridget – no, the fashion incident happened when Pippa arrived late and then demanded that the York Princesses move so she could sit in the front row (where she was not originally seated, she was in the 2nd row). The seats where already full and there was no space to be created for her. You know she could have gone further down the front row and prob found a space there but by accounts she made a beeline to where the Princesses were seated and made a scene, acting as if being Kate’s sister made her higher up the ladder than 2 blood princesses.

        The Princesses had every right to stand their ground and stay where they were – Pippa had NO right to demand that they move for her.

      • Bridget says:

        Leaving someone intentionally publicly embarrassed, whether you feel they deserve it or not, isn’t cool. And this is from someone that thinks Eugenie has grown up well – normally I wouldn’t judge someone on what they did or said that one time many years ago, but that seems to be the game here.

      • Digital Unicorn (aka Betti) says:

        @Bridget – Pippa embarrassed herself, she choose to have a pissy fit when she arrived and saw the Yorks in the front row and she in the 2nd. She asked to be seated next to them. As I keep saying they had every right to refuse to move – she had NO right to demand that they do. But somehow the Yorks are the bad ones here all because they didn’t want to participate in Middletons’ desperate attempts to get some free PR for herself.

    • Zardi123 says:

      Well commented agree with your posting

  5. JMO says:

    I doubt that she has met Charles, don’t know…

  6. AT says:

    William had an engagement on the 10th in the afternoon, so it makes sense that Kate would travel to London with him a day early. The meeting probably happened.

  7. sarri says:

    Oh the first pic, Harry has soon no hair. I hope George will not lose his hair.

    • Lucky Charm says:

      Generally hair loss comes from the mother’s side. Michael Middleton has a full head of hair, so I doubt George will have to worry about it.

  8. Scar says:

    I’ll just sit back and watch as two women gets pitted and compared simply because of the guys they’re involved with…. By women of course

  9. Mrs.Curious says:

    Has the KP ever commented on a royal breakup?

  10. Talie says:

    Piers Morgan has met with Meghan too…so she has at least one major media outlet in her pocket. And yes, on top of the fact that she likes to do charity work already…she’s in a good position.

  11. kcat says:

    We like Harry so we assume he adores his niece and nephew, even though I am not sure that we have seen or heard a lot of evidence of that. We don’t like Kate so she put in the bare minimum effort to meet someone.

    the fanfic seems to be spreading to other places than British tabloids.

    • notasugarhere says:

      We can look at their track records.

      Harry appears to adore children and has a natural rapport with them, as shown in dozens of public appearances.

      KM has shown, in 15 years, that she puts in the bare minimum about anything that isn’t related to landing or keeping a prince.

    • Tina says:

      A person I do trust is Michelle Obama, and she told a story to Good Morning America about how George was asking Harry why he was so quiet: “I have to say the most precious thing, if you haven’t already fallen in love with him, is to see him with his nephew.”

      Speaking about her night with Hary and the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge at Kensington Palace, she said about Prince George: “He said ‘uncle Harry, why are you so quiet? Why are you so quiet?”‘ Harry said “so embarrassing”, and Mrs Obama turned to him and said: “And I was like ‘you’re not quiet’.” The prince replied: “(I was on my) best behaviour, I’m normally throwing him around the room and stuff.”

  12. seesittellsit says:

    It’s perfectly obvious that Markle is Harry’s current girlfriend. In any relationship that lasts more than 3 months, the GF is likely to meet family members little by little. Does this guarantee an engagement? No. Is one possible? Absolutely. Will that be fun for all of us? Absolutely. Will the Middleton Matriarch approve? Probably not – fortunately, this is one arena in which Mrs Machiavelli will not be able to influence events in any way whatsoever.

    And that’s all we know for sure. The rest is clickbait to keep them on the front pages and sell papers.

    Meanwhile, I watched a bit of “Suits” for the first time recently, curious to see Markle – there’s a reason she’s still a D-list actress at 35, and this is likely as far as her acting career will take her. So if Harry pops the question, I would leap at the role of Pss. of the United Kingdom of Great Britain as her next career move. She’s just not that talented and in her business, 35 might as well be 50 and pretty women with great bods are a dime a dozen. Go for the royalty role, Meghan . . . .

    Still keeping my fingers crossed for that July wedding and the fun of watching Carole Middleton’s face at the service, but not holding my breath, either, just because the tabs say so.

    • HappyMom says:

      I agree. But the Middletons don’t need to be at their wedding. As much as they would like to be, they are, not actually, the Royal Family.

      • Maria says:

        Harry is a nice guy so might feel obligated to invite the Middletons.

      • seesittellsit says:

        @Happy Mom – I can’t imagine that Charles’s second son’s wedding, which will be the social event of the year and include the Middleton’s oldest grandchild as part of the wedding party, would not include those grandparents. Excluding them would be, I think, a major social snub that Kate would not soon forget, and absent the unthinkable, the long game eventually does go to William and Kate. I doubt Harry would be that stupid. Unless, of course, he really broke with tradition and eloped to Africa . . . wouldn’t THAT be something?!

      • nic919 says:

        Was Diana’s family invited to Prince Andrew’s wedding? If so, then the Middletons should be invited, if not, there is precedent to exclude them. Or just Ma and Pa at the most.

      • Lorelai says:

        Agree that it makes sense for Carole and Michael to be invited, especially if George and/or Charlotte are in the wedding party.

        Pippa and James? Meh…not so much.

        I am just so excited at the thought of Royal Wedding 2017…!

      • seesittellsit says:

        @nic919 – good question. I honestly can’t remember. So far as I can remember, the groom’s side – that is to say, the BRF – was plentifully represented down to second cousins, but I don’t remember anyone from Diana’s family.

        I suppose it could also represent an opportunity for Charles to pay back Carole Middleton for seeing that he has as little contact with his much-wanted grandchildren as possible, but it would represent quite the social snub.

        You know – if the engagement did take place and a July wedding was planned – it would also undercut dear Pippa’s May wedding as the social event of the year.

        Grins.

      • Kitty says:

        You guys do know they won’t have a wedding at Westminster Abbey if Harry decides to marry MM right?

      • Tina says:

        @Kitty there is no reason on earth why Harry’s wedding shouldn’t be at Westminster Abbey, if he wants it to be. Anne’s (first) wedding was there. Andrew’s wedding was there. Margaret’s wedding was there. As the second child, it is his birthright.

      • Kitty says:

        @Tina. I feel sorry for you to be uneducated. He can’t marry in Westminster Abbey if he marries MM because she is a divorcee. He would have to legally marry in a civil court and maybe at St. George’s Chapel like Charles wedding in 2005. The Queen wouldn’t be able to attend.

      • TheOtherOne says:

        @Kitty does this mean TQ can’t attend any wedding he has because MM is divorced?

      • Tina says:

        @Kitty, you have no idea what education anyone on these boards has. It is entirely up to the minister in question as to whether one can be married in the Church of England following divorce. Given that Harry, the royal in question, has never been married, it seems unlikely that the minister would choose to refrain from marrying him in church. Harry is, of course, also not first in line to the throne, as Charles was when he married Camilla (and Charles and Camilla had both previously been married and divorced in the Church of England). I have no idea in which church Meghan was married (if any), but I doubt it was in the Church of England.

        TL; DR: Harry can get married wherever he wants, including in Westminster Abbey, as long as the vicar agrees (which he will). And the Queen can attend, or not attend, as she pleases.

      • LAK says:

        Kitty: what Tina said.

        The church of England accepts divorcees marrying in it.

  13. Kitty says:

    @Tina, well I don’t think they will marry.

    • Maria says:

      Kitty can we agree that you insisting that Meghan and Harry can absolutely not be married in church is an uneducated guess?

  14. carolind says:

    No divorced member of the RF has been married in the Church of England. As we all know Charles was married to Camilla by a registrar – a service the Queen did not attend – and the marriage was then blessed by C of E. Twenty or more years ago divorced Anne married her second husband in Scotland in a Church of Scotland.

    Regardless of who Harry marries I doubt if it will be a huge London wedding. I should think it will be at Windsor as Edwards’s marriage and Charles’s second marriage were.

    Regarding York Princesses, a lady I know of the highest moral standing spent a weekend last summer with the BRF at Balmoral. She was the only non-royal there. Al BRF there but Anne and Wm and Kate. She liked them all but although she did not say straight out, gave the impression she did not think much of the York Princesses and their daddy.

    Pippa, Kate and the Yorks could all be bad.

    • Tina says:

      But Harry is not a divorced member of the RF. And I highly doubt that Meghan was married in the Church of England. You may be right that Harry will choose a quieter wedding, but there is nothing actually preventing him from marrying in Westminster Abbey if the Dean gives his permission (which I cannot imagine being withheld).

      • Maria says:

        Megan’s first marriage was a civil wedding, and Tina, I agree that they could be married where they liked. It’s strange that we are even discussing this, since the founder of the Church of England was himself a divorced man, and a king to boot, and his name was Harry!

      • Carolind says:

        Isn’t Megan divorced though and isn’t she Catholic?.

        I don’t know the rules of the Church of England at the moment but I know until recently a divorcee could not be married there (to heck with Henry VIII). The Queen’s cousin who died recently, Margaret Rhodes, married a divorced man in the Church of England in 1950 BUT his first marriage (with presumably a great deal of help from George VI) was annulled so technically he had not even been married before. This was quite remarkable bearing in mind that his first wife had given birth to their child earlier in the same year of his marriage to Margaret Rhodes. It’s not even as if his marriage to Margaret Rhodes took place at the end of the year. It was end of July or beginning of August. The Queen did not attend the wedding as she was about three weeks away from the birth of Anne but all the rest of the royals were there including the then King and Queen.

        Even if it is permissible the royals would run easy on his one. Remember it is only 10 years ago since Charles married Camilla in a civil ceremony which Elizabeth II would not even attend.

        All that apart, I doubt if the country would want a big, flashy wedding for someone who was not a direct heir. William is the only royal to have had a big wedding since 1986. Edward and Sophie were married at Windsor in the late 1990s and I am sure it would be something similar for Harry.

        Surely, too, it would be the Archbishop of Canterbury giving any guidelines about the wedding? He is the chief cleric in the Church of England and would probably perform the ceremony it it was in the Abbey. I will have to check who performed Charles’s blessing and who married Edward and Sophie.

      • Tina says:

        I do know the present rules of the Church of England (being British and attending said Church on occasion) and as I said above, the Church of England accepts divorcees being married in the Church if the minister in question gives his permission. And we don’t know if Meghan is Catholic or not, but it doesn’t matter, as the law has been changed such that people don’t lose their place in the line of succession by marrying Catholics.

        This is not 1950, and it is not 2005. Charles and Camilla had both previously been married in the Church of England. More importantly, Charles is first in line to the throne and memories of Charles’s tragic first wife were still vivid in the public imagination. It would have been vastly inappropriate for Charles and Camilla to have a big wedding under any circumstances.

        This is Harry’s first marriage and if he wants a big one, he has every right to have it. And it is my personal belief that if she is living and physically able, the Queen wouldn’t miss it for the world.

      • carolind says:

        Well, we will see who is right Tina if it all ever happens. At the moment neither of us knows.

  15. jennifer says:

    Dear Diary,
    Harry brought the American as we call her over to meet us- She seems very nice and a bit different from Chelsey or Cressie but diary not sure I was able to fake the sincere welcome to the fold smile- I am concerned- None of us care that she was married or has a history and least not that her mummy is African American- However, what happens if her brother becomes unravelled- isn’t that a security threat- it is a deep concern- he says he wants to shake our hands well err no thank you. I don’t know what will happen but having a loose keg is troubling. Hmmmm let’s wait and see what happens.

    • Carolind says:

      I have checked and it has been possible for a divorced person to be married in Church of England since 2002. It was the Archbishop of Canterbury who issued guidelines about Charles’s wedding and he was the lead at the Blessing ceremony.