It was “, 'a bit naughty' to imply Archie 'couldn't be a prince because of the possible colour of his skin' when it was due to strict rules,...”

[RickiTarr]

Hugo Vickers made me laugh with his phrasing. So British to say “a bit naughty”.

Also, seriously high lights how many people don’t understand the rules or can’t explain the rules well, and no American has a hope of grasping our quaint & complicated rules and institutions, really.

Sorry, it’s the Daily Fail, but funny.

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9340545/Why-Meghan-Markle-bit-naughty-referring-Archies-skin-colour-prince-discussion.html

The Queen has nine great grandchildren and two more on the way. Only three of them are Prince/Princess. None of the others have titles although I think Archie could have been a Viscount as Harry is an Earl? But they decided not to use it.

@JustLyra

All the children of the Battenberg’s went from being Prince’s to Lords.

They had a big fancy house, but were apparently skint. Be interesting to know what their definition of skint was. I imagine it wasn’t the same as mine!

Similar to Sophie Wessex’ notion of her DC “working for a living”, I would guess.

I mean there is renting in a shared house while you save a deposit and climb the rungs at work and then there is being a Princess who doesn’t use her title.

I don’t imagine Archie will ever struggle, either.

@halcyondays

The Queen has nine great grandchildren and two more on the way. Only three of them are Prince/Princess. None of the others have titles although I think Archie could have been a Viscount as Harry is an Earl? But they decided not to use it.

He could have been Baron Kilkeel. Harry’s Earl of Dumbarton title is one he uses in Scotland so Archie couldn’t have that.

Similar to Sophie Wessex’ notion of her DC “working for a living”, I would guess.

I think it’ll be interesting to see what they do.

I hope they can remain out of the spotlight as much as they currently do. There are horrendous comments online whenever pictures of them are posted and people often seem to think that being royal means Louise won’t care about the comments on her appearance due to her eye issue.

Hopefully they’ve been well set up emotionally by their parents.

I wonder about the whole slimming down the monarchy thing. If there are currently the Queen, PC, the D of C, the Cambridges, Princess Anne, PE and C of W (don't know how much they do tbh), and up till recently PH and briefly D of S, how the hell are William and Kate going to manage when it's just them and their possibly still minor children?

Countess of Wessex carries out quite a few duties I think. She came to something my DS was involved in and ended up speaking to him.

Princess Anne has always carried out many duties but usually without a lot of publicity

Prince Edward has taken over quite a lot of Prince Philip's things (the Duke of Edinburgh award off the top of my head, but there's definitely more) as well as carrying on with his own charities etc., and Sophie seems to do a lot without much fuss (lots of women and children things I think).

Princess Anne does more than anybody else.

I don't know how they'll do everything with it very slimmed down either.

In 2019 there were 16 working royals (though really it was 15 as Philip only did a few engagements).

Queen, Philip, Charles & Camilla, William & Kate, Harry & Meghan, Andrew, Edward & Sophie, Anne, Duke & Duchess of Gloucester, Duke of Kent and Princess Alexandra. They covered nearly 3500 engagements.

Going forward Edward and Sophie will still do a lot. They especially pick up all the foreign weddings, and often funerals, and I think they'll continue that. They're both 56 so in royal terms they've probably got another 20 years full time and then another 10 part time years left in them (at least). They'll be full time royals into William's Kingship I think.

Princess Anne is 70 so going by her work ethic and family longevity she's probably got another 10/15 years of full time work going. Then it'll be health dependent.

Princess Alexandra and the Duke of Kent are 84 and 85 respectively so their engagements are going to drop away to very few soon enough. The Gloucesters are 10 years younger at 74 so they'll likely pick up a few for another 10 years or so.

William is King it'll be him, Kate, Edward, Sophie and a couple of very elderly relatives really.

I've said from the beginning one of the reasons I think William is so angry/upset at Harry's decision is it basically guarantees that (assuming the monarchy stays as it is) George, Charlotte and Louis (especially George) will not have the luxury of being minor part-time royals until their 30s like Harry and William. They'll be full time as young adults as unless there is a massive drop in engagements they'll be needed.

Stats on engagements for 2019 and 2020 just in case anyone fancies a look. It's quite surprising how many engagements Alexandra, Duke of Kent and the Gloucesters actually rack up.

Also it's Charles who tends to do the most engagements over the year, though Anne works the most days.

writeroyalty.com/2019-by-the-numbers-royal-work-round-up-part-1/

writeroyalty.com/the-oddest-of-royal-work-year-in-charts/

@MrsTabithaTwitchit

The more I think about it the more I think the skin colour story is their meal ticket. Whether it happened , how it happened doesn’t matter they have thrown the accusation in . They will now do a deal , annual security allowance in exchange for their silence . And when they want more money ....

I think it’s possible that the comment was made in the context of ‘ is M really up to this, is she sure, the tabloids can be brutal etc , how will she cope if there are comments about your children etc etc

All very sad .

Reported .

“I've said from the beginning one of the reasons I think William is so angry/upset at Harry's decision is it basically guarantees that (assuming the monarchy stays as it is) George, Charlotte and Louis (especially George) will not have the luxury of being minor part-time royals until their 30s like Harry and William. They'll be full time as young adults as unless there is a massive drop in engagements they'll be needed.“

That’s make sense. I just watched the crowd, didn’t they get upset that Elizabeth’s uncle gave up the throne and left all the responsibilities to them? I can imagine it would be the same feeling. Or the same feeling where one brother goes off to California while the sister stay and care for her parents full time.
Maybe Meghan and Harry are fine some of the responsibilities, but some things just isn’t working out because of some restrictions

I think England, the UK is a great place to live, as a BAME; Acceptance and embracing of diversity is both growing and evolving... The Megan and Harry interview with Oprah, can be seen as a constructive step in this evolution; Labelling the Royal family, or the UK for that matter as racist, is not correct; some actions may align to racism, but they can be seen as rooted in ignorance; airing out misunderstandings through communication, will stop racist actions and words which will not have been uttered had there been appropriate education and enlightenment; Young people of today, have this education and are accepting, empathetic and indeed enjoying diversity; Testament to this is the marriage between Megan and Harry; -The Royal family and The Firm need to follow behind this young evolved couple.

I often find Grand-parents, The Queen in this instance, understand the young, their grand-children, better than their parents. No doubt this comes from The wisdom of age. I, for one, am so looking forward to seeing how this is going to further evolve for The Good, of mankind Aka Womankind!

The idea of making little Archie a prince seems lovely now, but long term he's too far away from the throne.

Archie's uncle will be king, and then Archie's cousin will be king.

The queen's nieces and nephews and cousins are not household names and are certainly not working Royals. Margaret had two children Lady Mary Chatto and Anthony Armstrong Jones, Earl of Snowdon. He makes furniture she is a painter.

So whilst they could have changed the rules, long term it would have been a backwards step in keeping the royal family small.

It would mean that all of Charlotte's hypothetical future children would have the title, as would Louis children.

@Babyboomtastic

The idea of making little Archie a prince seems lovely now, but long term he's too far away from the throne.

Archie's uncle will be king, and then Archie's cousin will be king.

The queen's nieces and nephews and cousins are not household names and are certainly not working Royals. Margaret had two children Lady Mary Chatto and Anthony Armstrong Jones, Earl of Snowdon. He makes furniture she is a painter.

So whilst they could have changed the rules, long term it would have been a backwards step in keeping the royal family small.

It would mean that all of Charlotte's hypothetical future children would have the title, as would Louis children.

Unless there are changed Archie will be a Prince when Charles becomes king. His grandfather will be King, he is of the male line so he will be entitled to the title at that point.

As a male son of the King Louis’ children, as grandchildren on the male line will all, again unless there are changes, be titled.

Charlotte’s children will not be titled unless she marries a man with a title because any children of hers will not be of the male line.

In 2019 there were 16 working royals, among them were several of the Queen’s cousins - The dukes of Gloucester and Kent and Princess Alexandra. Along with the Duchess of Gloucester.

Thanks Lyra. I was aware Princess Anne did quite a bit, wasn't sure Andrew did much before his current low profile, and wasn't sure about PE and Sophie either - are they considered senior royals? Full time working royals? Knew the Queen's cousins did quite a bit too. Just don't see how W&K will manage it all in 20-30 years time, with just PE and Sophie and their own three children. Even if H&M hadn't left, it's a serious reduction in numbers.

I assume the number of engagements will possibly reduce over time

@Apileofballyhoo

Thanks Lyra. I was aware Princess Anne did quite a bit, wasn't sure Andrew did much before his current low profile, and wasn't sure about PE and Sophie either - are they considered senior royals? Full time working royals? Knew the Queen's cousins did quite a bit too. Just don't see how W&K will manage it all in 20-30 years time, with just PE and Sophie and their own three children. Even if H&M hadn't left, it's a serious reduction in numbers.

The number of engagements will have to drop overall. William and Kate will also likely have to massively increase their number of engagements, Kate in particular.

Edward and Sophie did over 500 engagements between them in 2019. I imagine they may also bump their numbers up once their children are older.

I think a lot of organisations that currently have royal patrons in the Queen's cousins or Princess Anne may find they don't get new ones once their one retires or passes on. The family will have to be a bit more selective about which get passed on, which I think is why the Queen has been passing some on over recent years.

Losing the capacity for Harry and Meghan to take on more of a full time role, and Andrew as a full time role, has diminished considerably how many engagements can be done. That's potentially 900 engagements a year that won't able to be done.

That's potentially 900 engagements a year that won't able to be done.

It seems odd - why the push to slim it down if these engagements and patronages are important?

@Apileofballyhoo

That's potentially 900 engagements a year that won't able to be done.

It seems odd - why the push to slim it down if these engagements and patronages are important?

I think the slimming down would have been substantial, but not as drastic as it now will be.

If you think that when these discussions were happening you'd have had - Queen, Philip, Charles, Camilla (maybe not at the beginning), Anne, Andrew, Edward, Sophie, Alexandra, Gloucesters X2, Kents x2 and Margaret. Plus maybe QEQM depending on the timing.

So the slimming down was primarily about the potential additions in the future - William, his wife, Harry, his wife, Beatrice, Eugenie, Louise, James, his wife and potentially any other children had by Andrew/Edward.

I think the "slimmed" monarchy when Charles took the throne would have been Charles, Camilla, William, Kate, Harry and Meghan as the main line full-time royals. With Anne, Andrew, Edward and Sophie has the outlying workers. So a drop from 15/16 to 10. With William's children replacing the 4 outlying ones in time and Harry and Meghan eventually becoming outlying royals.

Whereas now because of the various situations it'll be Charles, Camilla, William, Kate, Anne, Edward and Sophie.

The York Princesses have a few patronages each, but I don't know how that fits in with everything. Presumably they do that semi-independently?

Their patronage’s are independent in the sense that they are not appointed to them by the Queen, the organisation has approached them directly . Possible exception is the Royal Orthopaedic Hospital who requested Eugenie for obvious reasons

Interesting article in Guardian www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/09/harry-and-meghan-interview-this-is-not-just-a-crisis-for-the-royal-family-but-for-britain-itself

And this article is an eye opener...

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2021/mar/10/monarchy-british-empire-history-meghan-racism

This is all a massive red herring.

Harry, Meghan, Archie and his siblings are at heightened risk because of who they are. They are prime targets for kidnap or assissination because one or all of them are Royal/famous/rich/privileged/mixed race +++

They need security, whether or not Archie is officially a Prince.

@Darker

This is all a massive red herring.

Harry, Meghan, Archie and his siblings are at heightened risk because of who they are. They are prime targets for kidnap or assissination because one or all of them are Royal/famous/rich/privileged/mixed race +++

They need security, whether or not Archie is officially a Prince.

Ok so then why didn't they just pay it themselves if its such a massive deal? Nope they expected his dad or the British taxpayers to fund it!