Engagement of Prince Harry of Wales and Meghan Markle: November 27, 2017

[Lady Nimue]

Wording or not, the Queen has officially given consent. The document from 2011 did not have trusty and well beloved, the flourishes would be on the charter. Of course the tabloids are trying to create a scandal, implying the queen is throwing shade at Meghan without presenting the Will and Kate document. If there was a problem with Meghan the queen would have never given consent. Samantha and Nikkai Priddy can't be happy now because it shows their hit pieces on Meghan didn't work; and that is something to cheer about.

If there were a problem Meghan would never have been at Sandringham at Christmas nor at the Commonwealth service, not so? In spades the Queen is letting it be known that Meghan is A-OK by her. It's why Meghan is being so unusually embraced, in fact, in my view, to push-back on the nay-sayers.

 

[AlowVera]

We have the more detailed document from 2018 for Harry and it’s basically word for word of William’s charter version minus “trusty and well beloved”

Seems odd at least to me to omit those words in the detailed document only to add them in the charter.

We don't have Harry's Charter version yet. Both Harry and William's PRIVY version which Harry's was release today are identical with the William's privy version.

The Charter should be released closer to the wedding. At that time comparisons can be made about Harry's Charter document vs. Williams.

 

[Rudolph]

Royal Reporter just said on Twitter that according to the Clerk of the Privy Council this is the official version released today.

It’s the Instrument of Consent.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

My understanding is Catherine has always been Catherine. It has been the tabloids that began referencing her as Kate. There is a video of Catherine when she was a child (quite young, maybe 8 or 10) where you can hear someone calling to her and using Catherine (not Kate).

Miss Middleton used Kate and Catherine. From the 2011 Official Royal Wedding website

Should I use Kate or Catherine?

Miss Middleton uses both names equally, and she has never expressed a preference for either Catherine or Kate since her engagement to Prince William. Catherine is the name that Miss Middleton grew up with in her family, and Kate is the name that she tends to use in a work context.​

Here is the 2011 Privy for William and Kate

https://privycouncil.independent.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/website-list-9-feb-2011.pdf

Here is Harry and Meghan's from yesterday.

http://privycouncil.independent.gov...018/03/2018-03-14-List-of-Business-Part-1.pdf

Again, folks keep referring to the charter which is a different document. That was released a few days before the wedding. I assume the same will happen with Harry and Meghan.

Here is the charter for William and Kate

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DYV0lAhUQAAqrxJ.jpg:large
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DYV028kWkAM3Yys.jpg:large

Difference is, 2011 Privy does not include detailed version of the consent. But today's order has this version with very similar wording of the 2011 William and Kate's charter except these mentioned adjectives.

The consent charter for Prince William and Kate Middleton

Elizabeth the Second by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Our other Realms and Territories Queen Head of the Commonwealth Defender of the Faith

To all to whom these Presents shall come, Greeting!

WHEREAS by an Act of Parliament intituled "An Act for the better regulating the future Marriages of the Royal Family", it is amongst other things enacted "that no descendant of the body of His late Majesty King George the Second, Male or Female, (other than the issue of Princesses who have married, or may hereafter marry, into Foreign Families,) shall be capable of contracting Matrimony without the previous consent of His Majesty, His Heirs or Successors, signified under the Great Seal, and declared in Council":

NOW KNOW YE that We have consented and do by these Presents signify Our Consent to the contracting of Matrimony between Our Most Dearly Beloved Grandson Prince William Arthur Philip Louis of Wales, K.G., and Our Trusty and Well-beloved Catherine Elizabeth Middleton

IN WITNESS whereof We have caused Our Great Seal to be affixed to these Presents

GIVEN at Our Court at Buckingham Palace the ninth day of February Two thousand and Eleven in the Sixtieth year of Our Reign

BY THE QUEEN HERSELF SIGNED WITH HER OWN HAND​

The full version of the consent for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle

ELIZABETH THE SECOND, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Our other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith, To all to whom these Presents shall come, Greeting!

WHEREAS by an Act of Parliament entitled "Succession to the Crown Act 2013", it is amongst other things enacted that "a person who (when the person marries) is one of the 6 persons next in the line of succession to the Crown must obtain the consent of Her Majesty before marrying", such consent to be signified under the Great Seal, declared in Council, and recorded in the books of the Privy Council:

NOW KNOW YE that We have consented and do by these Presents signify Our Consent to the contracting of Matrimony between Our Most Dearly Beloved Grandson Prince Henry Charles Albert David of Wales, K.C.V.O., and Rachel Meghan Markle.

In Witness whereof We have caused Our Great Seal to be affixed to these Presents.

Given at Our Court at Buckingham Palace the Fourteenth day of March 2018 in the Sixty-seventh year of Our Reign.

BY THE QUEEN HERSELF SIGNED WITH HER OWN HAND​

I am only being speculative, but perhaps the language "our trusty and well-beloved" is reserved for Queen Elizabeth's subjects.

 

[Somebody]

The consent charter for Prince William and Kate Middleton

Elizabeth the Second by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Our other Realms and Territories Queen Head of the Commonwealth Defender of the Faith

To all to whom these Presents shall come, Greeting!

WHEREAS by an Act of Parliament intituled "An Act for the better regulating the future Marriages of the Royal Family", it is amongst other things enacted "that no descendant of the body of His late Majesty King George the Second, Male or Female, (other than the issue of Princesses who have married, or may hereafter marry, into Foreign Families,) shall be capable of contracting Matrimony without the previous consent of His Majesty, His Heirs or Successors, signified under the Great Seal, and declared in Council":

NOW KNOW YE that We have consented and do by these Presents signify Our Consent to the contracting of Matrimony between Our Most Dearly Beloved Grandson Prince William Arthur Philip Louis of Wales, K.G., and Our Trusty and Well-beloved Catherine Elizabeth Middleton

IN WITNESS whereof We have caused Our Great Seal to be affixed to these Presents

GIVEN at Our Court at Buckingham Palace the ninth day of February Two thousand and Eleven in the Sixtieth year of Our Reign

BY THE QUEEN HERSELF SIGNED WITH HER OWN HAND​

The full version of the consent for Prince Harry and Meghan Markle

ELIZABETH THE SECOND, by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of Our other Realms and Territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith, To all to whom these Presents shall come, Greeting!

WHEREAS by an Act of Parliament entitled "Succession to the Crown Act 2013", it is amongst other things enacted that "a person who (when the person marries) is one of the 6 persons next in the line of succession to the Crown must obtain the consent of Her Majesty before marrying", such consent to be signified under the Great Seal, declared in Council, and recorded in the books of the Privy Council:

NOW KNOW YE that We have consented and do by these Presents signify Our Consent to the contracting of Matrimony between Our Most Dearly Beloved Grandson Prince Henry Charles Albert David of Wales, K.C.V.O., and Rachel Meghan Markle.

In Witness whereof We have caused Our Great Seal to be affixed to these Presents.

Given at Our Court at Buckingham Palace the Fourteenth day of March 2018 in the Sixty-seventh year of Our Reign.

BY THE QUEEN HERSELF SIGNED WITH HER OWN HAND​

I am only being speculative, but perhaps the language "our trusty and well-beloved" is reserved for Queen Elizabeth's subjects.

That's what I was wondering as well. Meghan cannot be 'her' trusty and well-beloved anything as she isn't the queen's (subject).

 

[Mbruno]

That's what I was wondering as well. Meghan cannot be 'her' trusty and well-beloved anything as she isn't the queen's (subject).

I fail to see why "trusty and well-beloved" would have anything to do with nationality or citizenship. Can anyone confirm that is the case ?

 

[jacqui24]

It's interesting some are trying to make an issue out of few words and trying to use that as an indication of the Queen's feelings towards Meghan. The Queen has made her feelings regarding Meghan plenty clear by including in events that has not included fiances or fiancees in the past both as family and in official events.

 

[Soula]

I think the omission of those few words speaks volumes

 

[Curryong]

Is there a version of the Privy Council consent that was issued for the Duke of Gloucester and his Danish bride anywhere on the Forum that could be used for a comparison, or Prince and Princess Michael when they married?

 

[Osipi]

My take on the wording is that there is nothing really to be read into the lack of the term "our beloved and trusty" when it comes to the Instrument of Consent.

What we're forgetting here is that HM, The Queen and her Privy Council have issued this document as part of something that is required from the monarch for Harry to marry Meghan. This is issued by The Queen and not Granny. We have no problems accepting the fact that the monarch is apolitical when it comes to government matters but we fail to see that this Instrument of Consent is also a very legal document where the Queen's personal feelings have to be set aside. In order to not give her consent to the marriage, she would have to have a strong *legal* reason to withhold her consent.

The most logical explanation, to me, is the the "our beloved and trusty" adjectives denote a subject of Her Majesty's realm. It has absolutely nothing to do with her personal feelings whatsoever.

 

[jacqui24]

I think the omission of those few words speaks volumes

Out of curiosity, do you think the Queen personally writes these consents or is it a mere formality by the time the consent is actually given?

 

[Rudolph]

Out of curiosity, do you think the Queen personally writes these consents or is it a mere formality by the time the consent is actually given?

She signs in her own hand so she certainly reads it. You’re not suggesting someone at the Privy Council office took it upon themselves to add ‘trusty and well beloved’ to the official consent?

The BRF does everything by the book.

 

[jacqui24]

She signs in her own hand so she certainly reads it. You’re not suggesting someone at the Privy Council office took it upon themselves to add ‘trusty and well beloved’ to the official consent?

The BRF does everything by the book.

I'm suggesting she didn't personally draft either one. I'm sure they have someone else in the background to drafts these things up. I don't know about everyone else here, but when I read a document, I read for the substance, which the consent to marriage here. An embellishment is certainly something that I wouldn't think about if it wasn't already there.

I don't know why they specifically left those words off this time. I'm merely suggesting that I don't think the Queen took it upon herself to publicly sly a woman she has included in events she didn't have to both as family and as a future working royal. Perhaps the person that drafted is new and didn't look at the prior consent close enough. Perhaps that is something that will later be added to the scroll. Who knows. The public announcement from BP is the same. But for some to suggest this says a lot about the Queen's personal feelings is quite a stretch when we've seen actions from the Queen that says the exact opposite.

 

[Soula]

Out of curiosity, do you think the Queen personally writes these consents or is it a mere formality by the time the consent is actually given?

The Queen is meticulous and not prone to making mistakes

 

[Gawin]

I think the omission of those few words speaks volumes

I don't. As AlowVera points out the document matches the wording used in William and Catherine's.

The words "trusty and well-beloved" only appear in William and Catherine's own copy, issued on April 21, 2011, just eight days before their wedding.

If Henry and Meghan's copy - which presumably will be issued days before their wedding - doesn't include those words then AND ONLY THEN will we have reason to wonder.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uk...ed-grandson-William-and-trusty-Catherine.html

 

[TLLK]

Is there a version of the Privy Council consent that was issued for the Duke of Gloucester and his Danish bride anywhere on the Forum that could be used for a comparison, or Prince and Princess Michael when they married?[/QUOTE

I'd love to see it as well Curryong but I doubt that these documents are available on line anywhere considering that these weddings were decades ago.

 

[Rudolph]

Harry’s Instrument of Consent was already released today. That’s it.

 

[Dman]

Everything so far has pointed to the fact that The Queen and the family has officially embraced Meghan as Harry’s fiancée and future wife.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Can I be a bit picky please?

Can we not refer to the Council by the single word 'privy' as that means a toilet.

The single word 'Council' means a council while the full body that agreed to this is the Privy Council.

Unless there were two council meetings this week there were four people plus the Queen at the meeting where this consent was given. That is not unusual by the way - four or five out of the over 600 members.

I think people are reading way too much into the wording of this document ... this is the 'consent' but the formal pretty document that will go on the wall somewhere possibly will be far more detailed in its wording.

One difference in wording I have picked up - for William it was 'our dearly beloved grandson' but for Harry it was 'my dearly beloved grandson'. Has something happened to Philip that hasn't been made public yet???? or is it simply a difference in terminology due to Philip's retirement ... or something else - because Harry is the spare compared to William the heir? or ...

 

[jacqui24]

One difference in wording I have picked up - for William it was 'our dearly beloved grandson' but for Harry it was 'my dearly beloved grandson'. Has something happened to Philip that hasn't been made public yet???? or is it simply a difference in terminology due to Philip's retirement ... or something else - because Harry is the spare compared to William the heir? or ...

I thought the monarch is always we or our rather than singular?

 

[ACO]

Well if some think the Queen secretly hates Meghan or something then that's their right. I don't think that's the case but it is what it is. Do we know what was on Edward and Sophie's or Andrew and Fergie out of curiosity?

 

[Gawin]

Harry’s Instrument of Consent was already released today. That’s it.

No it's not. We're comparing apples to oranges.

This is the OFFICIAL copy (the apple) which matches William and Kate's official copy.

It is NOT Harry's more elaborate and decorative copy (the orange) which will be his to keep and won't be released until days before his wedding.

If Harry and Meghan's orange doesn't match William and Kate's THEN we can debate this.

 

[Nico]

It's interesting some are trying to make an issue out of few words and trying to use that as an indication of the Queen's feelings towards Meghan. The Queen has made her feelings regarding Meghan plenty clear by including in events that has not included fiances or fiancees in the past both as family and in official events.

Sophie was included in family/official events way before her wedding to Edward (the decommissioning ceremony for "Britannia" in 1997 for exemple).
But yes i agree, Meghan is now part of the family in all but name.

About the adjectives, the theory about Meghan not being a British subject is interesting.

 

[Rudolph]

‘Trusty and well beloved’ wast pulled out of thin air. It’s used when the Queen deals with the most preeminent people of her realm.

Dukes are always referred to as ‘our trusty and well beloved cousin’.

It’s inclusion in William and Catherine’s consent wasn’t an accident.

 

[Royal Suitor]

Not sure why there's so much confusion that these are two different documents. Privy Council consent issued roughly two months before wedding date and consent charter issued 7-10 days before. I realize the wording is similar but as Gawin said we're comparing apples and oranges.

See Will & Kate's charter on left and both couples Privy Council consents on the right.

https://twitter.com/x/status/974329070157692929

Examples of other Privy Council declarations of consent.

https://twitter.com/x/status/974338680134434822

 

[Gawin]

‘Trusty and well beloved’ wast pulled out of thin air. It’s used when the Queen deals with the most preeminent people of her realm.

Dukes are always referred to as ‘our trusty and well beloved cousin’.

It’s inclusion in William and Catherine’s consent wasn’t an accident.

It wasn't included in William and Catherine's consent. It was included in their more elaborate and decorative PERSONAL COPY of the consent.

 

[Rudolph]

There’s only ONE consent. For William it was issued 9 Feb and for Harry today.

The fancy version is a copy of the original. It’s a government document bearing the great seal of the realm. It just can’t be fiddled with adding words

I’m not suggesting it’s a slight just pointing out that there isn’t two different consents issued.

 

[MARG]

It's interesting some are trying to make an issue out of few words and trying to use that as an indication of the Queen's feelings towards Meghan. The Queen has made her feelings regarding Meghan plenty clear by including in events that has not included fiances or fiancees in the past both as family and in official events.

I think the omission of those few words speaks volumes

Wow, what a lot of fuss over a few words. I believe that regardless of what the Press Office released, Megan's standing with HM speaks for itself.

Megan, as Harry's fiancee, has been invited to Sandringham to spend Christmas with HM and the rest of the Royal Family. That is a great honour that not so long ago would have been considered impossible. She was also invited to accompany Harry to the Interdenominational Commonwealth Service where the attendance was listed in the Court Circular.

However, the family arrived in strict order of precedence and sat in order of precedence. Meghan however, arrived with and sat beside Harry and not at the end of the row beside the Duchess of Gloucester where I would assume a mere Ms Markle would be seated in precedence.

I believe HM has made herself more than clear on Megan's standing with her and the BRF. Action always speak louder than words,

 

[Rudolph]

Mike Tindal before marriage was invited to William and Catherine’s wedding sat next to Zara and even made the CC if I’m not mistaken.

Before him Sophie attended royal events. Meghan certainly isn’t the first to attend events.

 

[Osipi]

There’s only ONE consent. For William it was issued 9 Feb and for Harry today.

The fancy version is a copy of the original. It’s a government document bearing the great seal of the realm. It just can’t be fiddled with adding words

I’m not suggesting it’s a slight just pointing out that there isn’t two different consents issued.

With the acceptance of the wording I've highlighted, wouldn't it then stand to reason that HM's personal feelings would have been kept out of the legal Instrument of Consent as it was issued by HM, The Queen and her Privy Council?

Logical thinking isn't my strong suit but I try.