Duchess Camilla will take over Meghan’s old patronage with the National Theatre

Given all of the royal gossip over the past three years, it’s easy to forget all the times we’ve heard some specific story about which royal hates Meghan for such-and-such a reason. I certainly forgot that the Duchess of Cornwall had beef with Meghan in March 2020, during the Sussexes’ farewell tour, the epic You Coulda Had a Bad Bitch Tour. Because Harry and Meghan were only in the UK for a little bit more than a week, they scheduled events back-to-back. Which meant that they ended up “stepping on” other royals’ events. Camilla had scheduled a big speech on domestic violence that week and no one else had anything else on the schedule. Then Meghan visited the National Theatre and released photos on her Instagram. Camilla fumed about that for months. She’s still mad about the thunder-stealing. Camilla was also mad, as it turns out, because she always wanted to be patron of the National Theatre. Now she’s getting her wish:

The Duchess of Cornwall is set to become patron of the National Theatre after being left ‘miffed’ Meghan Markle was given the role in 2019. The Duchess of Sussex, 40, was stripped of the royal patronage last year after she and Harry stepped back as senior members of the royal family. Now sources say Camilla, 74, was ‘pretty miffed’ after Meghan was handed the coveted position, a role which had belonged to the Queen for 45 years.

‘She really wanted it’, a source told The Sunday Times. ‘She was pretty miffed when it went to Meghan, and will be all the more delighted to take it on now, after being disappointed not to get it first time round.

Meghan was given the patronage in 2019 – with royal insiders claiming her career as an actress made her a ‘natural fit’ for the position, after she starred in the US legal drama Suits for seven years. The esteemed role was among the patronages Meghan lost after the Sussexes confirmed they would not be returning as working members of the Royal Family last February.

An avid supporter of theatre and literature, Camilla is said to be ‘delighted’ to take over the patronage and is keen to support an industry which greatly suffered during the pandemic.

During her time as patron Meghan made just one public appearance at the theatre, shortly after her appointment, and visited privately in March 2020. Pictures of the visit were released on the same day Camilla delivered a speech on domestic violence at the Southbank Centre in London – a move said to have angered the Duchess of Cornwall. Buckingham Palace had reportedly urged royal correspondents to focus on the Duchess of Cornwall’s long-planned engagement, which came on a day when there were no other major Royal engagements. Camilla was said to be ‘very upset’ at the release of the images, insiders told the Mirror.

[From The Daily Mail]

What’s strange is… why didn’t Camilla get the patronage of the National Theatre before Meghan even joined the family? There must have been some reason they didn’t want Camilla in the first place. It sounds like Camilla was seething about not getting the patronage before Meghan even came around, and Cam seethed even harder when it was just handed off to Meg. Anyway, sure, now Camilla is getting the patronage she always wanted. It’s been suggested – by Keeners – that Kate might have wanted the National Theatre patronage too, but the courtiers are apparently wary of giving Meghan’s old patronages to Kate (because of the comparisons, etc). It also sounds like this was some kind of years-long manipulation by Camilla to get a high-profile patronage. It’s not like Meghan cares at this point, in any case.

Photos courtesy of Avalon Red, Backgrid.

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

65 Responses to “Duchess Camilla will take over Meghan’s old patronage with the National Theatre”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Noki says:

    They all want the shiny fun sounding patronages(sports,theatres). Not that they dont need the support, but would like to see them fighting over refugees,shelters, race equality groups etc too

  2. equality says:

    I doubt that Meghan personally posted the photos to Instagram on the day; my bet would be that it was KP stirring up things.

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      I’m with you on that bet. That Camilla story didn’t make sense since KP posted photos of their Ireland trip the same day and Harry had the Silverstone Experience with Lewis Hamilton event.

    • Over it says:

      This has always bothered me, it’s not Meghan fault if the royal rota rodents would rather stalk her instagram account that cover Camilla. So the institution and camel toe getting mad at Meghan was always mental.

    • Becks1 says:

      The images were released by Sussex Royal, so it wasn’t KP stirring things up.

      but I’m looking at the IG now and the dates etc, and I think the timing of the release makes sense – she visited the NT on March 5, and then that night was the Endeavor Awards (with the iconic rain shot) and IIRC, that was the first time we saw the two of them together on that visit. So they clearly wanted that event to get the most coverage, so held off on the NT pictures/visit until the next day and Harry had an event that same day (March 6) with Lewis Hamilton. That all makes sense to me and seems reasonable.

    • Myra says:

      There wouldn’t be anything wrong if Meghan did release it herself on that day because royals have no problem doing events around the same time. They do it all the time. They only have a problem when Meghan does anything because the spotlight goes to her. That’s not a Meghan problem. The more you pay attention to the royals, the more you realise how petty they are.

    • Agreatreckoning says:

      If the royal correspondents/BM were to focus on Camilla’s event and didn’t, that’s on them. It’s false for the DM to state there were no other major royal engagements that day since Harry had one.

      https://www.harpersbazaar.com/celebrity/latest/a31260760/prince-harry-visits-silverstone-experience-london/

  3. MsIam says:

    Camilla being jealous and resentful? No never! Who would believe such a thing?!

  4. Aurora says:

    What a downgrade for the National Theatre. To go from a former Hollywood actress with the connections and networking skills to give them visibility to a former mistress who brings exactly what to the table?

    • Sid says:

      It should have gone to Edward, who has a theatre background. I suppose having the next queen consort as your patron is more “prestigious” than a royal earl, but Edward probably would have shown real interest in working with the theatre beyond the once-a-year appearance the Ratchet Royals do for most of their patonages.

      • L4Frimaire says:

        I thought Edward seemed the most suitable to get it but it seems the Wessex’s aren’t going to get the visibility they crave. This is new info with Camilla wanting it and upset Meghan had it, but that woman has always had issues being second tier and knowing she’s second tier. It seems strange that with Andrews and Philip’s hundreds of patronages out there, the first ones reassigned are Harry and Meghan’s. Part of this is because it will get publicity and part of it is to once again taunt the Sussexes. Anyway, good luck to the National Theatre, Camilla really being that breath of fresh air, lol.

      • Mac says:

        All of the big patronages are going to go to Camilla. Charles is positioning her for QC. Everyone else is going to get sidelined because Charles doesn’t want any competition.

    • Charm says:

      She’ll do exactly as betty did for 45 years as their patron. I:e not one damn thing.

    • Princessk says:

      Absolutely. The National Theatre has established links with America which Meghan in time would have built upon. The National Theatre also made it clear that they want to attract a younger and more diverse audience, and now they have an ageing upper crust Camilla to do it.

      • sunny says:

        Truly this. The National Theatre has been trying to reach new audiences, British youth, and also showcasing more diverse playwrights. Camilla as a patron doesn’t seem like the best fit.

      • TEALIEF says:

        The National Theatre doesn’t need Camilla. How about actors with actual theatrical, cinematic, and television bona fides, with pull both in the UK and America.  I suggest they contact Helen Mirren OBE, and Gugu Mbatha-Raw MBE to be co-patrons for starters.

  5. Chaine says:

    Yeah I’m sure the organization is thrilled to have lost an actual real actress in her prime and picked up a 75-year old who doesn’t seem to have ever worked a day in her life much less in the theatre.

    • ABritGuest says:

      I wonder how patronage’s go. If there’s any truth to idea Camilla wanted the NT, wonder why she didn’t campaign for it long before Meghan joined the family. Strange

      I also wonder if there’s any truth to this idea she was miffed about Meghan getting the NT. doesn’t really paint Camilla in the best light so wonder if this is accurate or the reporter being naughty here.

      The NT wants to attract more diverse, younger audiences which is why they dropped ‘royal’ from their name. That’s probably one reason why they were said to be keen to keep Meghan as a patron. Can’t see that having the older future Queen consort really helps with this aim but that’s what the firm is left with for front line royals so.. kind of thought Edward would have loved this more but oh well.

      It’s interesting how filling the roles Harry & Meghan had seems to be the priority rather than the patronages that Philip had even when he retired.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        If anyone was ‘miffed’ it was probably Kate with her grand My Fair Lady experience.

        Now, I could see Camilla getting miffed if there was a royal patron for a UK Wine of the Month club and she didn’t get it.

      • BabsORIG says:

        “It’s interesting how filling the roles Harry & Meghan had seems to be the priority rather than the patronages that Philip had even when he retired”. Right? And for their ages, my goodness, these people are really thirsty!!! Everyone is “miffed” or “upset” or “incandescent” or “enraged” (or whatever else these fools use) at this and that or for this and that reason🙄. Do they even know that they are 70+ years old? I mean who cares about this bitter, backstabbing old hag who caused so much pain and hurt to Harry’s mother, the woman that fully participated in wrecking Diana’s marriage and is now very jealous of a much younger Meghan, who also happens to be Diana’s daughter in law? I mean, everyone wants the lime light on them!!😲 Even a 70+ year old woman who has absolutely nothing interesting about her wants the attention to be on her; sweet Jesus, these folks are thirsty🙄🙄

      • Tessa says:

        It seems Camilla is never satisfied. She should be happy that she was let into the family. And her husband did not have to lose his place in line of succession and she would get titles. YEt she wants more and more and more.

  6. Cessily says:

    She just reminds me of an evil Mrs Doubtfire.. all the fuss about how they are dividing up the Sussex’s old charities is really twisted. I’m sure the Sussex’s wish them the best and hope they actually show up for and help the charities they scavenged.

  7. Jais says:

    People were so jealous of Meg. From the start. Like the queen could’ve given you that Camilla but she didn’t.

  8. Kalana says:

    The knives are out for Camilla. This isn’t a nice article on Camilla’s new patronage. Without Harry as the family scapegoat, the new target is the former mistress.

    But Charles already got William to denounce Diana’s words when she spoke about the affair.

    • Tessa says:

      William using the word paranoid in reference to his mother was a disgrace. And it was too late, because the Panorama interview has been seen for years and used as references in books about Diana.

  9. windyriver says:

    I’m glad they didn’t give it to Ms. Textiles, who probably still wanted it. I’m glad Meghan got it instead of Camilla. But – I’m glad it now goes to Camilla (vs. Kate), as it’s inadvertently a complement to Meghan. Yes, it made sense to give it to Meghan because of her background, but this appointment confirms its an important patronage – which Meghan was considered good enough to handle right off the bat.

    In fact, wasn’t TQ herself the former patron before Meghan? So this is actually going back to business as usual. Any advantage the theater might have received from Meghan’s brief connection was the exception, rather than the rule…

  10. Becks1 says:

    I know I said this at the time but I still don’t think Camilla really cared about Meghan “stepping on her news cycle” or whatever. Camilla barely gets covered as it is, even with some of her bigger speeches and initiatives. As soon as H&M stepped foot on English soil that March, no other royal was going to be covered or talked about, whether or not pictures were released of Meghan doing an engagement. the RRs barely care what Camilla does.

    I could see Charles caring more though.

    As for the National Theater patronage….I do think Kate wanted it, because I think she views performing arts patronages as easy, she gets to show up to a performance once or twice a year and its work, and those visits tend to generate more publicity and she gets to wear a new dress etc – but for this, I can also easily believe this story, that Camilla wanted it as well and was salty when Meghan got it. well now she has it so she should be happy.

    there is a push though to establish a Camilla v. Sussex narrative in the press lately though which I find interesting. Like the DM etc want us all to really really understand that Camilla and H&M did not get along and she’s glad they’re gone and there was bad blood there that Harry may talk about in his memoir etc.

    did something really bad happen between the Sussexes and Camilla? Was she the one so concerned about the baby’s skin color? Or is this about trying to get ahead of another story?

    • Layla says:

      @becks1 she backed out of an appearance with Harry and Meghan just before they stepped back as well, so you remember? When Meghan wore that beautiful midnight blue Sentaler coat

      • Becks1 says:

        I do remember that, it was November 2019. Not sure what that has to do with anything I said.

      • Nic919 says:

        I believe Camilla was at an engagement a few days before that one and she was coughing and so it likely she didn’t go because she was sick. Perhaps she didn’t want to go anyway, but they had announced it and Camilla isn’t usually one to cancel engagements last minute.

    • Myra says:

      Good observation. There has been a few stories setting up Camilla against the Sussexes. Maybe they don’t want to use Charles as the stick to beat the Sussexes with since he is now in the “poor grandpa – forlorn father” role. This narrative won’t last too long, at least not until the memoir is released.

    • Amy Bee says:

      @Becks: I think Camilla was very upset, why else would it get on the front page of the Mirror? I also think she backed out of the Field of Remembrance joint appearance because she didn’t want to be overshadowed by Meghan and Harry.

      • Becks1 says:

        I mean its possible she was upset, but she gets overshadowed all the time. Does anyone really care what she says or does? the most attention I’ve seen her get in the press is when she winked after meeting with the Trumps (and her big glass of red wine on that same visit.) and Harry had an engagement scheduled that day anyway that was going to get more attention than her speech.

        Maybe she has been really annoyed about having her work overshadowed for years, but that’s how it’s been and its not because of Meghan.

      • Agreatreckoning says:

        We don’t know Camilla was very upset. We only know that Russel Myers, who wrote the original story back in August 2021, said Camilla was upset about being ‘overshadowed’. Which makes no sense since Harry had his engagement with Lewis effin Hamilton the same day. There is no workaround that. Two charismatic guys doing an event together would have easily ‘overshadowed’ Camilla’s event via the BM without Meghan and the National Theatre sharing the photos.

        Why else would it make the front page of the Daily Mirror? Please. The most inane false stories about Meghan made the front page of the majority of BM Meghan stories. Avocadoes…sheesh. The list is endless bad argument.imo Camilla and the Diana cruelty is one thing. The BM is parlaying those feelings to the battle of Charles vs. Will.imo As a few other posters have said, these stories aren’t done in a favorable way to Camilla. If they came from CH, she would have come off differently.imo Hard to say. As mentioned, the August 2021 original story came from Russell Myers. The RR who went with Will on his Middle East trip June 2018 and wrote Will was making peace in the Middle East his lifelong mission.
        https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/pod-save-queen-life-tour-12853122

        It is very curious that the BM is big on putting out stories that Charles is worried about Harry’s memoir and not Will. Harry spent more time with Will and knows the things Will has done. H & M left KP, not Clarence House. No matter what, H & M’s patronages lost good people. Whoever replaces them will never measure up to dynamic, charismatic and genuinely interested duo of H & M. No matter how hard the BM wants to sell it.

  11. Layla says:

    I wonder how the national theatre feels about this? They were pretty upset when they lost Meghan as their patron right?
    (Also, am I the only one who’s glad Keeny or Whiny didn’t get it?)

    • L4Frimaire says:

      I think after 2 years, it’s time for everyone to move on. The Sussexes couldn’t have kept these patronages because of the palace politics and the resentment towards them, regardless of where their home base is. Look at how they’re using the security issue to try to keep them from returning to the UK.

    • dido says:

      I like to check these organization’s social medias to see how they feel. Looks like National Theatre didn’t announce or celebrate it on their Instagram or Twitter…so guessing they’re whatever or not too thrilled about it.

  12. Over it says:

    And that’s how you wear white duchess camel toe

  13. kelleybelle says:

    One word: Ugh.

  14. s808 says:

    i especially feel for the National Theater losing Meghan as a patron. Man oh man could they have benefited from the netflix deal. shame.

    • Layla says:

      It would’ve been perfect! She definitely would’ve either done something with Netflix or a colab with another media powerhouse. It’s frustrating the way the patronages are suffering. It’s not like these so called “rOyaL” patrons are giving them any benefits and the ones that did they purposefully got rid of

  15. rea says:

    The shade is real. QE snubbed Camilla and made Meghan the patron to get under her skin.

    • MF says:

      The funny thing is: Seems like Camilla actually thought she had a shot at the National Theatre patronage even when an actual actress joined the familly. LOLOLOL. Can you imagine if the Queen had given that patronage to Cam instead of Meg? It would’ve made the TQ look like an idiot.

  16. KC says:

    That picture of Camilla sitting down reminds me of a part in a new novel I started this weekend. “She smiled. She might look in a bad light like Camilla Parker-Bowles but she knew the effect that smile could have.” I can’t stop hooting and hollering at the snarky, cheeky shade of that author!😆

    🤔I wonder if Camilla or Charles know about this because it’s by a well-known British author whose book was the basis for a tv series.

  17. Pentellit says:

    I can’t fathom this cunning, old bag. I’ll puke if she ever becomes queen.

  18. Amy Bee says:

    This is just further proof that Harry and Meghan were saying the truth in the Oprah Interview. The family became jealous of them after the Australia tour. Camilla was one of the members who was jealous of them.

  19. tamsin says:

    Just a few odd bod comments and observations: I thought the photos of Meghan’s visit were first released by the NT?
    I don’t think Meghan had time to do any big projects for the NT like she did with Smart Works, and even Mayhew, not to mention Hub Community or the Commonwealth patronages. It was understood that she was in communication with the artistic director but no projects or big benefit had resulted yet. However, one of Meghan’s majors was Theatre, not film, and she performed in musical theatre in high school and university, so the patronage was a good fit. And if I remember correctly, the NT was the only patronage that commented that Meghan hadn’t done much of note for them. I think it might have been one of their Board members. I think Meghan’s main focus was going to be bringing a wider audience to what is often seen as elitist, and it seems to me she paid quite a bit of attention to their youth programs. Didn’t she privately attend and congratulate them on a performance?

    • Sid says:

      It seemed like she was going down the line and working on something for each of her major patronages one after another, and the NT would have been next up if she and Harry hadn’t had to escape from the Ratchet Royals and Rota. I recall reading that there were early discussions on what she and the NT could do.

    • Apple says:

      That person who said that is an idiot. Meghan was pregnant for most of the time during her stay in the UK. They never expected Kate to do anything when she was pregnant (attributing it to her morning sickness) but suddenly all the patrons expect Meghan to move mountains for them? While heavily pregnant with Archie nonetheless?? What a joke. The person who said that should never complain that they now have an adulterous hag as their patron. It’s what they deserve.

  20. jazzbaby1 says:

    Oh? Is she going to learn to act less like a ridiculous, boozy old twit?

  21. Margaret says:

    I find it so silly willy and Katie, oh and Charlie boy doing their things, of let hit harry and meghan by feeding the trolls with, giving out their patronages.
    Never mind Phillip’s, and andrews patronage. The more those clown show their hands, the weaker, pettier, and discussed I am. Such horrid, pitiful and lackluster people you will never find.

  22. Sofia says:

    I think this is one that should have gone to Edward. And if it’s true that Camilla wanted the patronage, I assume she must have went to HM about it and said something. But HM still skipped over Camilla in favour of Meghan which is interesting IMO.

  23. Rapunzel says:

    The fact this didn’t go to Kate just strengthens my belief that the family knows they cannot pin their future on her…perhaps because she’s being shown the door.

    I don’t think they gave this to Camilla to avoid the comparison between Kate and Meg. I think they did it cause they can’t rely on Kate to work.

    • Nic919 says:

      I do think it’s interesting that it went to Camilla as well. Especially when she was trying to angle for it back in March 2020.
      .

  24. Julia K says:

    I go back and forth on this woman. Her whole history and relationship with Charles is so complicated. At times I think I might have felt some sympathy for her, but now I think she is a narcissistic snob who is the original mean girl. Her treatment of other women is beyond awful, yet she speaks out against violence toward women and spousal abuse, hypocrisy in action.

    • Tessa says:

      I never felt pity for her. I do think she wanted what Diana had. She is probably like Kate in that she has no close women friends. The CNN special about Diana referred to Camilla inviting Diana to lunch was “mean girling” Diana making it known that she knew Charles “better” than his bride to be. Charles is just as culpable for allowing that to happen.

  25. NightOwl says:

    It’s astonishing how small and petty the royals in the UK are. To have so much privilege, opportunity, and access and to squander it in such a way is frankly baffling.

  26. tw says:

    serious question – what century are these people living in?

  27. Well Wisher says:

    The difficult task of erasure of the Sussexes has begun, initially with the Middleclass replacing the aristocrat in rugby. This time around, there is a worldwide audience. They are trading influence amongst themselves like a betting parlour.
    However the way this turns out there should be no tears, since it is generally understood that the house never loses.

  28. Tessa says:

    Now I’m wondering if there was some sort of “scene” between Camilla and the Susssexes. And that’s what’s bothering Charles, although he really was the one that Harry was bothered by.

  29. Likeyoucare says:

    @TAMSIN
    Perhaps their boad members were colluding with the BRF and making obstacles so that meghan cant do any project with them.

    Let’s remember that meghan didnt use the royals staffs for her cook book and smart work collection.