Meghan attends BP Christmas Lunch with Harry for the first time

Meghan attends BP Christmas Lunch with Harry for the first time

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle attend the annual Christmas Lunch at Buckingham Palace yesterday, December 20.

Embed from Getty Images

This is the first time Meghan has attended this event, and the first time she’s met the extended royal family.

Embed from Getty Images

Meghan wore a dress by Self-Portrait, and Maison Birks Snowflake Large Round Jacket Earrings ($5,995.00).

Embed from Getty Images

Apologies for the abbreviated post – I don’t have much time at the moment.

120 thoughts on “Meghan attends BP Christmas Lunch with Harry for the first time

  1. I like the dress. I know… lace! But it looks good on her, and my goodness is she ever radiant in these photos. Engagement happiness looks good on her as well.

    And lmao at the expression on Harry’s face. There are a couple of other photos where he looks like this – how close are photogs allowed to the car? They would seem to be blinding him in a different image.

    1. She looks incredible. She’s glowing! I like her “Princess Makeover” so far. It’s enhancing her natural beauty. Poor Harry and those flashes!

  2. Wow she looks glowing…it must be love❤️

    Harry looks a bit hungover but I suspect it is all the flashes close to his face when he’s driving.

    Thanks MMR I’ve been looking forward to this.

    1. There is a video out on twitter of Harry driving in and it is quick but it shows how close they are. I have never been directly in the glare of paparazzi cameras, but I have been near them at TIFF and even from a distance they are bright and blinding. I know why movie stars often wear sunglasses at night.

  3. I have never seen this many cameras close to the car like that. Meghan looks flawless. I did not like the top of her outfit, though, but her makeup (whoever does her makeup needs to work on Kate) and earrings and hair were fab.

    On a more disgusting note. Princess Michael took the opportunity to wear a blackamoor brooch to lunch. Richard Palmer, a veteran royal reporter, noted that Meghan and Harry did not stay long. I wonder if there was drama about the brooch or what.

    I hope Princess Michael gets a serious time out and no wedding invite. She should be ashamed.

    1. I read about that horrible person and it is disgusting. She has a long history of being a racist and should not be invited to the wedding. It is not St Balthazar’s name day anyway, so it is utter bs that she wore a blackamoor broach. This is a classic example of a micro aggression that non whites have to deal with.

      1. I agree Nic. Princess Michael did this to be racist. Her father was an SS officer, so she comes by her views honestly.

      2. Where did you read that, do you have a link? I did not find anything on Richard Palmers twitter…

      3. If this is the blackmoor brooch, it was a vile move to make, but at one of the first family events is a very horrid move. I hope this is not left alone and reporters correctly identify the brooch and call her out. The public should loudly voice their displeasure and she should make a private and public apology for her offensive choice.

        If this is indeed the blackmoor brooch, she should do the right thing and make herself scarce for the wedding. Thus, making it easier on Harry and Meghan. They should not be made to look negative in any light, by leaving her and her husband, off the wedding guest list. I say good riddance. It makes two more spaces for a couple of decent human beings to attend what is sure to be a lovely day.

        1. It’s not a new surprise that Princess Michael is racist, but it’s really surprising that she would have the audacity and utter classlessness to wear that brooch. And there’s no way that it was just a coincidence.

      4. You’re right, I looked up at the article ion Dailymail and in the picture in the car, she’s clearly wearing it. How disappointing.

        1. This is shocking – even if Meghan hadn’t been present that brooch is inappropriate for anyone representing the royal family – even at the fringes.

          Princess Michael does not have a good history. One has to wonder if she cares what people think. They live in grace and favour housing in Kensington Palace (where she once suggested in an interview the Gloucesters give up their flat to Harry) so they can’t be completely indifferent to public opinion.

          You don’t suppose the Michaels are meant to give up their flat to Harry – it will be interesting to see what happens. Michael is a great favourite of the queen.

          I notice the press is ignoring this so far but she has to have known she would be photographed wearing it. It looks like it might be on a coat rather than whatever she is wearing underneath.

          1. I find it interesting while Michael and the Queen are close the Queen cannot stand his wife…

            Freddie and Gabriella seem quite normal, decent, well-educated people. What happened? Good nannies?!

          2. While I know that the Queen supposedly made a comment about Princess Michael being grand, I thought that they got along, they seem to have a mutual fondness for horse racing.

    2. >>”On a more disgusting note. Princess Michael took the opportunity to wear a blackamoor brooch to lunch. ”

      Sooooo disgusting. What a racist, nasty woman and just a horrible move to make on her part to wear that brooch. I hope she is keep off the wedding invite list.

    3. I am so stunned that she wore that brooch. I had never even heard that term before and had to look it up. I literally gasped when the google images of the brooches popped up. That is so insane.

    4. Can please someone give links- because as I haven’t seen any proof (photos or articles) that she wore the brooche? And Harry and Meghan left after Charles and Camilla (Richard Palmer per you second link).
      If she wore it, that would be quite offensive, but I will keep my fire till there is more than just rumours started by Leah’s post (only comment I have seen claiming that she wore it).

        1. Thanks- I am shocked. Hoped this rumour would clean up. Why would you even think of something like that, when you are well aware that there will be photos taken? She and her husband must have known that this would go public. No wonder Charles will cut down on working royals. Less people to worry about.

      1. Oh yes, she wore it. Check out the Getty Images collection. I looked on google images and I don’t see any other instances of her wearing this brooch. So to me, there is no other explanation than she pointedly wore this to be sh***y. She needs to lose her grace & favour, because she clearly has no grace. However, as a side note — that google image search is highly entertaining. This b. is cray and follows the more-is-more school of dressing and accessorizing. She looks like a soap opera character come to life.

  4. Meghan looks very polished and has refined her makeup. Not as much eyeshadow as she typically wears, I think. And her engagement ring is so gorgeous. I did wish that Harry would have kept his mother’s gems for another occasion but I get it, this is clearly a gesture that was important to both of Lady Di’s sons.

    1. I think Meghan is lucky to have avoided Big Blue. Firstly it is huge as a ring to wear every day…Diana said as much. And secondly its association with such an unhappy marriage. I love Meghan’s ring , and I agree the ‘boys’ both felt a link to their Mum was important.

      1. Yes, I really really do not understand Williams reasoning behind it at all.

        “Here, darling, every time you look at this ring, you will be reminded of my mother and father’s unhappy marriage, their infidelities, divorce, and finally, her tragic death at a young age… Love you!”

      2. Somehow in my weird imagination, I believe Kate/and or Carole wanted this to be Kate’s engagement ring. If Kate did not want it, she would not be the first bride-to-be who wanted a different ring. Anyone remember the Sex and the City story line about Carrie getting a very ugly diamond? I realize it is a gift, but if someone really knows and loves you, they usually want you to have something that is your taste, since you hope you will wear the ring for many decades.

        Not only did Meghan get a much nicer engagement ring, she received one with more effort and thought from her fiance, and she ended up with (dare I say?) the better/sexier prince.

    2. I LOVE her ring. It’s exactly what I wanted – a huge center diamond with side stones. I’m sure Harry was keeping in mind my preferences when he designed the ring 😉

      I am hoping Meghan gets Diana’s aquamarine jewelry or Harry just continues to have her jewels made into other pieces for Meghan. This way everyone gets the memories and sentimental connection, but Meghan keeps her own identity.

  5. I am a very superstitious person and I said from day one, nothing good can ever come of Kate having that ring. Nothing. I strongly believe it is cursed and is bad karma.

    I am glad Meghan has a brand new ring, devoid of bad memories. That is the right way to start a marriage.

    1. And it showed a thoughtfulness on Harry’s part. I think I’d have felt a bit let down if my long term boyfriend gave me a ring that held no particular sentimentality to me, but which had held famous meaning to someone who is not me.

      I’m certain Kate loves her ring, but William, a bit more originality would have been welcome.

      1. Although I thought that it was odd of Wills to give his wife to be a ring associated with a fiasco marriage.I don’t believe that it is cursed or brings bad luck.That’s just silly with no basis in reason.

      2. Leah,

        You believe Diana’s ring is cursed. A relationship between man and woman can be cursed; not a stone! Everything happens for a reason. There is no reason for you to be superstitious if you believe in Karma.

    2. If William wanted “the ring” to be a part of the engagement/marriage for Kate, he really should have turned it into a necklace or had it re-styled. He could have easily had the stone re-cut to a different shape and then used some of the diamonds to flank the middle stone or made into earrings, etc. Or, if he didn’t want to re-cut the sapphire, he could have had it made into a pendant necklace, bracelet, etc. It really just shows that he’s cheap and has no imagination.

      1. William’s just cheap, and I doubt he cared very much about buying Kate a ring. He’s not gotten her much of anything over the decade plus they’ve been together. He’s just not a thoughtful, giving person, it’s all about him.

        Diana hated the ring and chose it because it was the biggest!

        1. There’s no suggestion Diana hated the ring – she chose it herself at a time when she was happy and wore it up to the separation.

          I thought it a lovely gesture on William’s part – and as someone who wears a family ring without a thought as to cost – will say it’s almost hateful to make these comments – about people being cheap, about mothers-in-law, and all the rest. It was a beautiful gesture – one Harry chose to emulate with a diamond from his mother. If there had been a suitable ring, I’m sure he would have given it to Meghan.

          I could have had a new ring but every day when I wear my ring I think of a beloved person who did not have a happy marriage but who was wonderful and special – and I will give William credit for thinking as my hubby and I do.

          1. Julia: Diana loved to tell the story of why she picked that ring out of the selection sent to her and it had nothing to do with happiness or contentedness.

            She said she deliberately chose the biggest, gaudiest ring in the selection as an act of rebellion because she was expected to choose a smaller, more tasteful ring befitting her background and the person she was about to marry.

            Charles really should have paid attention right there because his seemingly little mouse of a fiancee demonstrably showed spirit of rebellion.

          2. My understanding is she subsequently denied that story. It’s late and so I can’t do much research without disturbing people but my recollection is that came from Leslie Field – one of the main sources on royal jewellery.

        2. I doubt if William gave Kate that ring because he is cheap. He could have selected the engagement ring or Kate could have selected the ring and Charles would have paid for it, just as (IIRC) the Queen paid for Diana’s ring.

          1. The other Julia I agree. My engagement ring was my beloved grandmother’s and my wedding band was my husband’s beloved grandmother’s. I don’t wear my engagement ring often but I wear my wedding band every day. It’s not very fancy and it’s not my style and even though we could afford to upgrade it to something much “nicer” I wouldn’t trade it for anything. My husband was very close to his grandmother and while I never met her I feel a connection because I wear her ring.

          2. Diana has told other stories about choosing that ring. Once, she said that she chose it because it was most like her mother’s ring which she had always admired. I’ve seen pictures: Diana’s sapphire is much larger, but the setting is much the same style as Frances’.

            ETA: Sorry. This was meant to be in response to Herazeus above.

          3. As always, I just love your comments Herazeus. I was reading up on Dickie Mountbatten last night and how he wanted to get his granddaughter, Amanda Hicks, married to Charles. She refused him after the horror of losing so many family members in the boat bombing in Ireland. Do you think life as we know it for Charles would have been any different with Amanda as Princess of Wales? Would she have cow toed and behaved as expected? I realize this is clearly supposition, but I wanted your opinion. TIA.

          4. Graymatters: She was talking about the size of the ring, not the style. She said that looking through the selection of rings, with stones of varying sizes, she deliberately picked the biggest, most vulgar stone size as an act of rebellion.

            Btw, digressing to Oedipus complex, i wash searching for Frances’s engagement ring when i came across these pictures of a young Johnny Spencer. How creepy is it that Diana had an affair with a man who had such a strong resemblance to her own father? No wonder people thought Harry was a Hewitt because he looked like a Spencer for the longest time, but Hewitt looks like Johnny Spencer too.


            Lori B: She would have accepted the arrangements because that is the expectation of their set.

            Diana was unusual in rejecting the socially accepted behaviour of her set, but we also know that she was a hypocrite in that regard since she indulged herself in the same behaviour with other people’s husbands.

          5. Thanks, Herazeus. Diana’s parents were certainly attractive when they married, I think. And yes, Johnnie Spencer then looked a lot like James Hewitt at the time of his affair with Diana. Ew.

          6. Lori – I don’t think so – my suspicion is the reason Amanda rejected him was that she knew about Camilla and his closeness to her.

            I don’t think Hewitt looks much like Johnny Spencer so we can agree to differ – and Diana’s other lovers certainly didn’t. I suspect it was a romance that started with opportunity – the riding lessons.

            Most of Diana’s long-term relationships were with single men, Hewitt, Gilby, Khan and Fayed. The latter may have been secretly engaged but it’s unclear if Diana knew that – it was not known until after his death.

            The relationship with Mannakee remains unproven (as do the allegations Charles had him killed – most unlikely.) Mannakee remained married until his death and his wife has said she didn’t know whether there was a relationship or not.

            Will Carling was the only man whose marriage she is said to have broken up. Carling and Diana both denied a relationship.

            Oliver Hoare may have been one of her lovers – she certainly made obsessive calls – but he and his wife remain married – so the suggestion Diana broke up lots of marriages simply isn’t true.

            The Diana/man-eater has been heavily promoted by supporters of Camilla – one reason I suspect that relations between Charles and both his sons aren’t close and have worsened by most reports since these recent biographies. Diana was no more a saint than any of us but the attempts to tarnish a woman who can’t answer back is unbecoming.

          7. I think that you are responding to Diana being called out for her hypocrisy. You don’t have to be a Camilla promoter to see that Diana was very hypocritical (and manipulative) when she and James Colthurst looped Andrew Morton into writing a book where she whinges over Charles’ infidelity only to find out that she had extra-marital relationships too.

            Diana was married when had relationships with Mannakee, Gilbey and Hewitt. What is unclear about the relationship with Mannakee was whether they had a sexual relationship but Diana herself said that she was in love with him.

            Oliver Hoare and Will Carling were both married during their relationships with Diana.

            Hasnat Khan and Dodi Fayed are the two romances that can arguably classified as being romances between single adults, but it should also be noted that these two romances came after Diana whinged about Charles and Camilla while she herself was engaging in adulterous relationships.

  6. I actually love this dress (I’ve seen full shots of it elsewhere – not on Meghan, but from the vendor). It’s a perfect example of how you can be both conservative and fashionable. I’d put this in the win column. And those earrings are cute, and the ring has definitely grown on me. I wasn’t too impressed at first, but it really is beautiful. And she’s just glowing.

    1. It always makes me laugh when this comes up because I’m wearing a ring from a bad marriage and Hubby and I have been married over thirty years – hopefully no curse – and no bad feelings either – I much preferred a family ring to a new one.

      1. James Colthurst was a friend of Diana’s, they met when she was a teen.. They remained friends over the years and he was one of her confidantes and he served as the go-between between Diana and Andrew Morton during the writing of Diana: Her True Story.

  7. Meghan glowed yesterday, but I’m perplexed why they stayed such a short time? They would have barely got through the first course. They reportedly also left the Kensington staff Christmas party early too.

    1. re the Kensington staff party, apparently William and Kate made people bring their own alcohol. I would have left early as well.

      I wonder if Meghan and Harry left early-and Richard Palmer, royal reporter, said they did-due to Princess Michael’s racist brooch.

      1. There are so many people at the lunch, no need to pay her rudeness any mind. Besides, I think Meghan has more dignity and grace than to let a stuffy windbag ruin her day.

      2. My understanding is that people brought their own alcohol because there was an issue and that venue could not serve alcohol on the date of the party.

        However if the people in charge made it a rule, then it would be “William, Kate and Harry made people bring their own alcohol,” not just “William and Kate…”

      3. Leah … some fun facts… 1). Richard article said that H&M were one of the last to leave the lunch 2). The Kensington staff party is for both Harry’s and the Cambridge’s Staff- how did you decide that it was the Cambridge’s that forced people to bring alcohol? Overall I like Meghan and I like to defend her against some of the outright hate that she has gotten from some. But I have to say the W&K vs H&M is not only tiring but I suspect the very opposite of what Harry who loves his Brother and Sister in law and for that matter Meghan would want. We get it you don’t like W&K, but the one side is evil and the other angelic is a deservice to Meghan, and fans of Meghan. Fans like me who, have a more of a balance view of her. Of course we all have the right to our own opinions but let’s start with facts and not what we want to see.

        1. The KP staff having to bring their own alcohol for a staff party is cheap. And that falls on the trio and whoever organized the party. Meghan is excluded this time because she isn’t a part of KP yet.
          Apparently it was because the restaurant has its liquor licence cancelled. I would be concerned about a restaurant where that happens, but once they were advised of that, KP managers should have arranged to deliver drinks there or provide vouchers for something.

          1. You don’t understand how liquor licenses work. With no license, people can bring alcohol for their personal consumption only, but not to serve other people, so the hosts of the party wouldn’t have been able to serve alcohol in any capacity. And what would the voucher have been for, the liquor store down the street? That would be weird.

      4. Can you please verify per link. I haven’t found any comment by Richard Palmer on the brooche???? There was a comment by another poster who claimed she wore the brooche but he didn’t pick it up, and this other poster (privare person, no journalist or magzin) didn’t give any links or further sources.
        Racism is a hot and very serious topic and I feel uncomfortable to spill things like this if you have no proof. Where I am from, this could be persecuted as slander if it is untrue and you could have known.

    2. They left after Prince Charles and duchess of Cornwall so I don’t think they left early but just on the early side of the end of the event. And I don’t blame them for leaving as quickly as possible without being rude after having to deal with Princess Michael wearing a racist brooch.

  8. It has been been rumoured that the Queen has issues with Queen Michael, remarking once, “perhaps she is too grand for even us.” La

    Ray, what other occasion would Harry save his Mum’s gems for? I, for one, think it is perfect that he used some of her diamonds for his bride. With all the BRF divorces in recent years, we can only pray that Ms Markle is his forever bride. Diana had a lovely collection. Thus, I am confident her offspring will be able to gift their wives with her jewels, if they so choose, for years to come.

  9. Meghan looks great. I think the Series of pictures in the Daily Mail confirmed society’s bias, however….the women are expected to look perfect, and the men can react as anyone reasonably would with flashbulbs in their eyes. If Meghan squinted like Harry or if Kate scowled like William or if Camilla had a furrowed brow like Charles the commentators would be vicious. Also, Charlotte is getting lots of chatter, whereas George is just present. It’s interesting, and it made me think about how I react to photos. My critical eye goes to the female first too.

    1. Very interesting read–thanks for sharing! And the author, Laurel Thatcher Ulrich, is a favorite of mine–great researcher and historian. Just seems odd to see her writing about someone with no New England connection.

      1. I love Laurel Thatcher Ulrich! I was introduced to her in college in an American history course… /nerd

      1. I just posted on the wrong post about these – I love them! Until I have proof to the contrary I think both these people genuinely adore each other.

    1. I was just coming post the links. Meghan and Harry look GORGEOUS! They look so in love. Hot hot hot! I’m so excited to have gotten the pics today and not have to wait until the new year. YAY!

      I also love that they photos are not photoshopped into oblivion.

      1. I’ve read some interviews with MM before where she talks about loving her freckles and not liking photographers to airbrush her skintone. Maybe it was in the big Vanity Fair piece.

    2. The b&w photo is amazing, but the first one is kind of tacky? I really dislike her top. They look like a celeb couple.

    3. Gorgeous, personal photos, although I don’t care for her top and skirt. Certainly couldn’t call it a boring choice though =).

      And we would expect Meghan to be comfortable in front of the camera, but I’m surprised that Harry appears so open and at ease. Must be an excellent photographer, and being in love really suits Harry!

      1. Did you see how much the dress cost? I wonder what people would say if Kate wore a dress which cost that much?

          1. They said it was privately purchased. KP did. Maybe Meghan bought it with her own money. Look, she wore an inexpensive gown to the luncheon yesterday. Can’t win em all. She is going to wear expensive clothes at some point and I for one, expect a duchess to look like a duchess.

            And beside, Meghan does not have Kate’s history of always buying really expensive clothes and wearing them once.

            And even though I didn’t like this dress, I generally like Ralph and Russo designs.

          2. Yeesh, 56,000 is a large number in any currency. I am hopeful that she will wear this again?

            I thought the dress had character. I think her style is interesting, if not personally to my taste. Lizzie, is right – certainly can’t call it boring.

    4. I love the aesthetic of them and the warmth, but I really hate her dress. I said on KMR it looks like a figure skater’s reject dress turned into a gown and not super appropriate, for either her role, location, or the fact that she’s in a gown and Harry’s in a regular suit. Otherwise I love the pictures, they show a warmth and love that is nice to see versus the dour public image of other royals.

      I wonder if they’ll release more, or if the photographer will.

      1. I agree. Either she is too dressed up, or he is too dressed down. Their clothes look they are going to different events, but met up to take a photo. But their body language says “Love”.

        And I think Meghan is very beautiful. She can’t take a bad picture.

      2. Ellie, the more I see the images, the more glaring their mismatched attire is. First, I mostly noticed their faces and their happiness leapt right off the screen. Something you want out of your engagement, really.

        But on my second go, I couldn’t help but notice what you said. They look to be departing for separate dress up parties after this shoot. His blue suit and tie do not match her couture gown. And now that I’ve noticed it, it won’t stop bothering me. I love the boldness of her dress and the juxtaposition of their excitement with the calm outdoors. So, in my mind, Harry is the one who need have dressed better for the occasion.

        Truly, I have never loved his and William’s penchant for cobalt blue dress suits anyway. Here’s hoping that Harry’s days of looking the unkempt bachelor are well behind him.

  10. I think Meghan coming to the Buckingham Palace Lunch is such a positive sign. Look how glowing Meghan looks and Harry driving. Those two young people look so grown up. I like Meghan’s earrings and it is a shame there is only a glimpse of the dress. Even though it is lace, it looks right for the occasion. Thank you MMR, Happy Christmas. For what must be a busy time for you.


      The closeup is on twitter, but here is a googlepage of typical blackamoor brooches style.….0……0i30k1.783.PZKr1wNaTLg

      1. Oh my gosh that is highly offensive! I think Princess Michael knew exactly what she was doing by wearing that. Unbelievable.
        Thank you Herazeus.

      2. Having done a bit of reading out of curiosity I guess a lot of these brooches are supposed to represent the Magi and blah-blah. Do you think she did it out of being, well, a b*tch which we know she is or she just likes it (after all by a very expensive famous designer looker me I have money)?

        1. I think she did it to be nasty. Her father was an SS officer, she was in NYC once and told black tourists to “go back to the colonies.” The woman is a racist through and through.

        2. Ellie: The Magi reference is something that has been completely made up to explain away this type of art.

          It is now being used to excuse Princess Michael, but it couldn’t be farther from the truth.

          Blackamoor started out because merchants wanted to show off their wealth in the form of a gaudily dressed black African, usually a child. Black being a prequisite for the colour they wanted to fetishise. And Arab style clothing and accessories inspired by travels to the Middle East and to Venice. Didn’t care for accuracy.

          In alot of Blackamoor art and decoration, it’s very clear that the black person is depicted as a servant and a slave and positioned in ways that immediately tell the audience of that servant status. In some academic quarters it’s speculated that it was seen as a triumph over one race.

          It’s egregious in the extreme and the reason it has fallen out of favour as an art form. People might still purchase it on the downlow, but they are not doing it publicly.

          That is why i was shocked that the Cambridges had a blackamoor painting in their drawing room considering Kate is an art historian.

          I can see Princess Michael owning this piece as a direct result of bygone fashions, because many aristo homes had this stuff. Including the Queen.

          …but in the last 20yrs, it has fallen out of fashion because people are aware of what it represents, and most people have consigned it to the attic. Including the Queen.

          If Princess Michael wore this because the misinformed PR-ing of the art form as representing the Magi, then she is an idiot, because it does not.

          And if she wore it deliberately, she also has the perfect excuse to pretend the PR given excuse is the reason she wore it instead of being deliberately offensive.

        3. I agree that she did it to be nasty. I have read and watched interviews with her where she speaks about her blue blooded ancestry. She is an incredibly pretentious snob for sure. I don’t know enough about hee to know if she is racist but the choice to wear this brooch knowing that Meghan might be nervous about being the first biracial person to marry into this family in recent memory….well it just smacks of insensitivity and poor taste.
          Do we have evidence that she ever wore this brooch before or did she purchase this for this specific occasion? What an ugly thing to do.

          1. That brooch looks rather old, but it could be new. I wouldn’t be shocked if it wasn’t a family heirloom from Princess Michael’s family.

          2. Leah: Most aristo families will have examples of blackamoor in some form because it went through a phase of being very popular in the 70s and 80s.

            If you watch glitzy 80s soap operas involving mega wealthy families, most of the decorative ‘antiques’ on show is usually blackamoor.

            You’ll find that most aristo families also have blackmoor jewels handed down too.

    1. I think that’s all fine and true, I don’t like this revisionist history and tearing down of statues and I don’t wish to see such heirloom jewellery destroyed. Some of these pieces should be in a museum – but to wear it, on this day, in this context to meet Meghan for the first time at such a high profile lunch, is clearly offensive. I would have thought non core royals would never deliberately insult the main royals. Interesting.

      1. It’s not revisionist history, it’s actually acknowledging the real origins and historical context of the statues and the art, in truth giving a fuller history than the whitewashed pretence that they are only about innocently honoring history. No, the statues were put up as part of a deliberate backlash against black people gaining civil rights.

  11. The engagement photos: I like, but don’t love, the close up black and white. It is lovely, but as an official portrait for the public view, I prefer seeing their eyes.

    The other black and white seems a bit off…she looks very Hollywood glam, Harry is in his regular suit and shoes, and yet they are casually walking in the grass outdoors. It’s as if they have three different asthetics in one photo.

    The color photo is very nice but very staged in positioning.

    Personal opinion: I hope her wedding dress isn’t so fussy.

    She photographs Beautifully, and they look happy.

  12. Meghan looked lovely for the Christmas Lunch! Princess Michael is repulsive and absolutely wore that broach deliberately. She shouldn’t be invited to the Wedding! The engagement photos are gorgeous! I did feel that Meghan looked like she belonged on a Vogue cover, but at least it wasn’t boring! I don’t think anyone can deny she’s stunning and they both look truly happy and in love!

  13. I just saw the brooch on Princess Michael. Staggeringly offensive – it’s massive, 5-7cm, stands out against cream, no no way goes with her outfit. I’m speechless. Astonishing that only one of the many lackeys or senior royals as hosts in attendance could have taken her aside before she went to lunch and said – take that brooch off or get out.

    1. It does really stand out. And she pinned it high on her shoilder. She wanted the photographers to see it. What a nasty woman she is.

  14. Too much BS over a gown that was probably lent to her by business associates. If she chose it, she chose it because she liked it. The public is well-aware of her occupation and her access to high fashion clothing. The dress complements her figure and coloring. Can’t ask for much more in an engagement photo. If the photographs had remained gray-scale only, I think the comments would have been less about his suit and her dress and focused on the composition. Releasing the 3rd photo fed the speculation about the cost.

    The cost of the dress is irrelevant in this photo. Nobody asks how Harry has acquired his auto; assumption is that there is an accommodation from the manufacturer. Apply the same reasoning to Meg’s dress. It is a perquisite of her occupation and she used it, just like her fiance used his. The photo is a capture of a point in time in the lives of two people who have decided to publicize their engagement. It is a point in time. You have been invited to view it. You can’t change the past. You can only take stock of what has happened already and wait to compare this point to some point in future. They move on with their life, you wait to observe and, have no control over it at all.

    My 30-something and 20-something nieces and cousins see nothing wrong with the dress she wore for this occasion. These women are contemporaries of this couple. My impression is that their perception of this couple is normal and expected for their individual circumstances. They expect the public presentation for H&M will change — because life changes everyone. They expect that both H & M will shift their public presentation over the course of the next year. It may parallel their own lives – mistakes and triumphs, sorrows and joys. And that is life as they all expect it to be.

    1. TMZ is reporting: “A spokesperson for the wife of the Queen’s cousin tells TMZ … she’s “very sorry and distressed” she wore her Blackamoor brooch to the Xmas shindig. We’re told it was a gift she’s worn many times before, without controversy.

      A source connected to Kensington Palace tells us Princess Michael was not trying to insult Meghan or any people of color. The source says she’s learned her lesson, and is going to retire the brooch for good.”

      The story is shown on the opening page of the site.

  15. I just wanted to say I’m glad that debate on the Blackamoor brooch was allowed on this site. On another site I frequent the comments not seeing the brooch as a deliberate attempt to offend Meghan were scrubbed and the posters who made them were banned. I got the feeling that the posters recognized that the brooch wasn’t politically appropriate but that people on social media were making a bigger deal out of the brooch than the flesh and blood people at lunch like Meghan and Harry. I thought those comments should’ve remained and if other posters wanted to disagree let them do so. That site also posts about American politics so I think the blogger wants political homogeneity when politics touch the royal family stories like they did with the Broodamoor brooch.

Comments are closed.

Back To Top