Harry, who was William’s supporter (best man, to Americans) when he married Catherine Middleton in 2011, had not officially asked his big brother to return the honor as of early January 2018, although it’s hard to imagine anyone else standing beside him. And Meghan may select a maid or a matron of honor. Just as Catherine Middleton broke with tradition when she asked her sister Pippa to be her maid of honor, Meghan may select one of her best friends to support her, rather than following the British tradition of selecting a chief bridesmaid. Meghan may also break another royal tradition and give a speech at her own wedding. If the publicity-shy Thomas Markle does attend, several sources reported that he may prefer not to stand up in front of eight hundred people to deliver a traditional father-of-the-bride toast, so Meghan will be the one to thank everyone on behalf of her family.
One person who is not likely to receive a wedding invitation is Meghan’s ex-husband Trevor Engelson. After rebounding from his divorce with blond Baywatch starlet Charlotte McKinney, as of late 2017 Trevor was said to be dating Tracey Kurland, an attractive, also blond Los Angeles–based nutrition expert who reportedly interned at Twelfth Street by Cynthia Vincent, a clothing line popular with Pippa Middleton.
Trevor now works as a talent manager for actors, directors, screenwriters, and novelists. He’s also the producer of Heathers, a TV version of the 1988 black comedy that starred Winona Ryder and Christian Slater, and the television series Snowfall, which focuses on the crack epidemic in 1980s Los Angeles.
In late 2017, Trevor shopped a script about a divorced couple who has to share custody of their child. But there’s a twist! According to Town & Country, Trevor’s official pitch reads: Divorce is hard. Sharing custody is harder. Sharing custody with the British royal family when your wife marries a prince, in the unforgiving spotlight of London’s tabloid media, is next level.
It’s fiction, of course. Trevor and Meghan had no children.
Another ex whose wedding invitation may get lost in the mail is Toronto chicken chef Cory Vitiello. He cheekily posted a mouthwatering video of rotisserie chickens roasting on a spit after Harry’s self-deprecating revelation that they were “trying to roast” one in Nott Cott when he proposed to Meghan.
Cory may get all the “chicks,” but in the end, Harry was the one who got the girl.
Like most modern couples, including William and Kate, Meghan and Harry are already taking an active role in their own wedding plans. A palace insider said that “Miss Markle has described it as reflecting a fairy-tale wedding, which of course is really what it is. Staff have been struck by how unbelievably happy they are together. They are having huge fun planning this. No one has ever seen Prince Harry quite like it.” Rather than the usual process of delegating the wedding plans to the Lord Chamberlain’s office in conjunction with the Master of the Household’s Department, Harry has encouraged Meghan to be hands-on, as she has “great style and taste” and “a very clear idea of what she wants”—which sources have revealed may be a white and classic theme. According to Harry’s communications secretary Jason Knauf, an American former public relations guru, Harry and Meghan’s royal wedding will be “fun” and reflective of their relationship. “The couple of course want the day to be a special, celebratory moment for their friends and family. They also want the day to be shaped so as to allow members of the public to feel part of the celebrations too. This wedding, like all weddings, will be a moment of fun and joy that will reflect the characters of the bride and groom.” At least one giant viewing screen will be erected in Windsor so the crowds can watch the ceremony live. In the absence of a palace balcony, the much-awaited first kiss is expected to take place on the steps of the chapel after the couple emerges as husband and wife. At one P.M., the newlyweds will take an open carriage ride through the streets of Windsor.
The fullest expression of the bride’s character is always her choice of wedding gown. To that end, it was reported on December 20, 2017, that Kensington Palace had requested sketches from Tel Aviv–based wedding dress designer Inbal Dror. Her figure-hugging lavish designs, worn by A-listers such as Beyoncé and Naomi Watts, are more Hollywood princess than English princess—fashion-forward and hardly demure. The gowns’ lavish detailing, with layers of lace and tulle as well as lengthy trains, could make them perfect for a royal wedding; but they are often sheer, with deeply plunging necklines—more red carpet and runway-ready than apt for most naves and apses.
The buttoned-up spectators from the Coworth Park Polo Club would truly faint into their Pimm’s Cups at the sight of that actress in such a state of negligee walking down the aisle of St. George’s Chapel to wed the sixth in line to the throne of England.
Because St. George’s Chapel is a royal peculiar, meaning the monarch has direct jurisdiction over it, there are stricter and more conservative rules for bridal gowns than there would be if the royal marriage were taking place in a church or cathedral administered by a Church of England diocese. Even the wedding ceremony in St. George’s Chapel will employ traditional, even arcane vocabulary, such as wilt and thine.
Any wedding dress designer would need to conform his or her usual aesthetic to the sartorial parameters of the chapel dress code. Ms. Dror understands the specific requirements of a royal wedding, however, and submitted a trio of long-sleeved preliminary sketches for approval, in several silhouettes from ball gown to mermaid to trumpet-skirted, featuring long sleeves, ruffles, and high lace collars, while retaining the embellishments for which her gowns have become famous. However, the very fact that preliminary sketches for prospective wedding gowns were leaked prompted skepticism that Ms. Dror had indeed been selected. When it comes to royal weddings, the identity of the bridal gown’s designer tends to be shrouded in secrecy until the last moment; and in the past, British couturiers have been the chosen ones—because the brides have been British.
But Meghan and Harry are already breaking so many traditions that it’s just as likely as it is not that Ms. Dror or another international couturier will be designing Meghan’s wedding gown. And because Meghan isn’t British, she may not have been instructed to or be expected to follow the unwritten mandate to select a UK designer. That said, when the news broke at the end of January 2018 that Meghan had chosen her bridal gown designer and was already in preliminary fittings, even though the identity of the couturier remained shrouded in secrecy, British designer Stewart Parvin, who is also the Queen’s official dressmaker, was touted as the odds-on favorite.
What is likely is that Meghan’s gown will be ivory or cream, which is a more flattering shade than pure white and which photographs better as well. The gown is also expected to have a long train, in keeping both with the occasion and the proportions of St. George’s Chapel; but it’s highly doubtful that Meghan’s train would come anywhere near the record-breaking twenty-five-foot length of the train on Diana’s gown, the longest in royal wedding history.
Meghan is also expected to wear British jewels for the wedding ceremony, including a tiara loaned to her by the Queen. Her wedding ring and Harry’s are likely to be fashioned from a nugget of Welsh gold belonging to the monarch. Chips from the same nugget of gold from the Clogau mine in North Wales were used to fashion every royal wedding ring beginning with that of Harry’s great-grandmum, the beloved late Queen Mother. That specific nugget has pretty much been exhausted, but Her Majesty gave Welsh gold to William for Catherine’s wedding ring (he doesn’t wear one); and it is expected she will do the same for Harry.
Meghan may also incorporate the Anglo-American wedding tradition of “something old, something new, something borrowed, something blue.” The British used to add one more lucky element—“and a sixpence in her shoe.” The “something blue” for Americans is most often an elastic leg garter or a ribbon sewn into a hidden place inside the gown.
A great deal of excitement has also swirled around the couple’s possible choice of wedding cake. People went nuts when word leaked that Meghan and Harry might choose a banana cake instead of the alc
ohol-soaked fruitcake that forms the customary top tier for British wedding cakes. The reason for the fruitcake, which everyone knows lasts forever, is so that it can indeed keep long enough to be served when the couple’s first child is born. Speaking of inedible, a royal wedding cake typically takes three to four months to create, with or without a fruitcake. For a May date, the bakers had to begin their work in January. They start decorating it the week before the wedding day.
But Harry and Meghan may be going bananas, literally. And there may be some credence to the rumors. On October 31, 2017, after the royal romance had already been confirmed, Meghan posted a photo to her Instagram feed of two bananas with sleepy eyes, and smiles, and arms drawn on with a black Sharpie, cuddling—spooning—as it were, as the larger banana protectively embraces the smaller one. She captioned the photo: “Sleep tight xx.”
Couples love to share a sweetly personal inside joke with their nearest and dearest on their special day. But a former royal chef, Darren McGrady, confirms that Prince Harry has always enjoyed banana desserts. A banana-caramel cake that he baked for Harry and William when they were growing up was a particular favorite.
Prince William went nontraditional for his groom cake, opting for one made of chocolate cookies. But to abandon the traditional fruitcake topper on the main cake would demonstrate, even in such a seemingly innocuous way, that Harry and Meghan, as a modern royal couple, may be opening a number of windows and daring to “let daylight in upon magic.” Dispelling that sacrosanct aura of mystery surrounding the British royal family would send the Victorian critic Walter Bagehot, who coined the phrase, spinning in his grave.
The recipe for McGrady’s banana-caramel cake, which he shared with ET online, can be found on the Internet.
Whether or not there was any truth to the rumor, as soon as Dole, America’s most famous purveyor of the fruit, read the news that Harry and Meghan might be going bananas, they offered to make the couple’s wedding cake.
ALTHOUGH MEGHAN HAS been married before, that will not pose any obstacle to a church wedding.
In the sixteenth century, Henry VIII famously broke with the Church of Rome in order to be able to divorce his first wife Catherine of Aragon and marry his inamorata Anne Boleyn in the hope of begetting a son. This led to the Reformation and the founding of the (Protestant) Church of England. In 1534, an act was passed declaring Henry, and all subsequent monarchs, to be the supreme head of the church. In Henry’s day, and in the years before the British monarchy became a constitutional one, it was the sovereign’s way or the highway. In other words, if Henry wanted a divorce, he got one. But as time went on, the Anglican Church came around to sharing the same view as Rome, refusing to recognize divorcés as having legally ended their marriages.
However, in the early twenty-first century, the Church of England clarified its position on divorce and now permits divorced people to remarry “in exceptional circumstances,” although they must be asked a series of questions designed to ensure that “past hurts” have been healed and mistakes learned from. Since 2002, it has been up to the discretion of individual clergy as to whether they wish to officiate at a wedding where one or both persons have been divorced. A statement posted on the Church of England’s website in February 2005, two months before Charles and Camilla wed, states that the blessings of the church are not denied to someone who remarries after divorce if the parish priest is willing to officiate.
The Archbishop of Canterbury is the senior bishop and principal leader of the Church of England, and Justin Welby, the current archbishop, said he was “absolutely delighted to hear the news that Prince Harry and Meghan Markle are engaged,” stating, “I have met Prince Harry on a number of occasions and have always been struck by his commitment and passion for his charities, and his immense love for his family.” On Twitter, he posted, “I wish them many years of love, happiness, and fulfillment—and ask that God blesses them throughout their married life together.”
For over three hundred years, as a result of the Protestantism founded under Henry VIII and the Reformation in the sixteenth century, which led to centuries of religious tensions and violence sparked by the reigns of Catholic sovereigns Mary I and James II, Catholics were barred by a statute passed in 1701 known as the Act of Settlement from ascending the British throne, nor could members of the royal family in line for the throne marry someone of the Catholic faith.
As a recent example, to adhere both to state and church doctrine, Catholic Canadian Autumn Kelly converted to the Church of England so that her husband, Peter Phillips, who at the time was eleventh in line for the throne, did not have to forfeit his place in the succession.
Meghan was educated at a Catholic high school, but she is not a practicing Roman Catholic, nor was she raised as a Catholic. However, Kensington Palace has announced that Meghan will be baptized into the Church of England in advance of the wedding day. Moreover, per the Succession to the Crown Act 2013, persons who marry Roman Catholics are no longer disqualified from the line of succession.
It’s traditional for the monarch to bestow a title upon royal newlyweds on their wedding day, and there has been speculation as to which title Harry will receive from his granny. Her Majesty granted a passel of titles to Prince William, the loftiest being the dukedom of Cambridge. Catherine Middleton became the Duchess of Cambridge, Countess of Strathearn, and Lady Carrickfergus, as well as Princess William of Wales on her wedding day.
The Queen might name Harry either Duke of Clarence or Duke of Sussex. Each title is an old one and carries its own historical baggage.
However, a troika of misbehaving Clarences may kibosh that royal appointment.
During the reign of Edward IV, the Duke of Clarence was his next younger brother George, who presented a threat to his throne. The fifteenth-century Duke of Clarence was handsome and devilishly charming; but his personality was a fatal combination of ambition, greed, envy, and dim-wittedness; and he had a dangerous case of wanting everything any of his brothers had—including titles, estates, offices, and the crown. Clarence was a serial traitor who conspired a whopping four times to topple Edward IV from the throne and claim the crown for himself. Long before the Duke of Gloucester (the future Richard III) usurped the throne, Clarence plotted to usurp it from their brother Edward. In an effort to keep Richard from his intended bride Anne Neville, Clarence kidnapped her. Contrary to Shakespeare’s plot in Richard III, Richard truly loved Anne; they were childhood sweethearts.
In 1477, after Clarence ordered his followers to take up arms against their sovereign and be ready to “levy war against the king,” Edward IV had Clarence arrested and charged with high treason. That year, Clarence spent his Christmas in the Tower of London.
Their brother Richard, in his office as high steward, speaking on behalf of Parliament, pronounced the death sentence against him on February 7, 1478. And on February 18, the twenty-eight-year-old Duke of Clarence was liquidated—literally. It’s one of Shakespeare’s most memorable scenes, and the Bard evidently got that part right. Most scholars believe that Clarence was in fact drowned in a vat of Malmsey wine, his favorite potent potable—perhaps a perverse last request. After his death, his daughter Margaret (later Margaret Pole, 8th Countess of Salisbury) always wore a wine cock (the faucet or spigot from a wine cask) around her wrist. This unusual bracelet was accepted by her contemporaries as a tribute to her father, giving credence to the supposition about the duke’s mode of execution.
The Hanoverian Duke of Clarence during the last quarter of the eighteenth century and through the Regency of the early nineteenth century was of course the future William IV, known for his two-decade domestic partnership with the comedic actress Dora Jordan. Ten children together and he dumped her.
And during Queen Victoria’s lengthy reign, the second Hanoverian Duke of Clarence was her grandson Prince Albert Victor, known as Eddy. Eddy’s apparent lack of academic and intellectual acumen made him the butt of rampant fear about such a dullard ever becoming king after his f
ather Bertie, the Prince of Wales, had his turn. But worse than the prospect of a dope on the throne was that Eddy might not be eligible to reign at all. Whispers of “gross indecency”—the love that dare not speak its name—swirled around the young prince. Homosexuality was a felonious offense at the time, on the short list of items that could bar a man from inheriting the crown.
The homely Eddy, who also had his share of ill-advised female conquests, was accused of frequenting a notorious male brothel in London’s Cleveland Street. When it was raided in 1889, Eddy was not there (nor was anyone else); but many were convinced at the time that he had gay predilections and that some of his own connections, including one of his equerries, were Cleveland Street customers who were covering for him.
Eddy eventually fell madly in love with a Catholic, Princess Hélène of Orléans, but she would not give up her faith to marry him.
Engaged to the impoverished but Anglican Princess Mary of Teck instead, twenty-eight-year-old Eddy died of influenza on December 14, 1892, thirty-one years to the day that his grandfather Prince Albert passed away. Consoled in her grief by Eddy’s younger brother George, Mary ended up wedding him instead, becoming Queen Mary of England in 1910 when her husband, Prince Harry’s great-great-grandfather, became George V.
Eddy’s name was also put forward as the actual identity of Jack the Ripper, the serial murderer of a number of prostitutes in the autumn of 1888. While a pair of twentieth-century charlatans who sought to reopen the case by pinning the grisly attacks on the young Duke of Clarence were widely discredited, Eddy’s name still comes up in Ripperology lore. Given the reputations of these three previous Dukes of Clarence, none of them paragons, it’s unlikely that the Queen, who has a keen sense of history, will bestow this title on Harry.
American Princess Page 21
