Prince Charles to alter the Letters Patent - Sussex Children won't become Prince/Princess

[Comeinoutoftherain]

Apologies for the Daily Mail reference, but it's all I have so far.

Apparently PC told H&M shortly before the Oprah interview that his intention was to amend the Letters Patent so that only the children in direct line to the throne (aka William's children) would receive the Prince/Princess title.

So neither Archie nor Lilibet were going to be "upgraded" to Prince/Princess on the Queen's death.

That explains that slightly vague comments made in the OW interview about Archie not being made a Prince; and why relations between PC and H&M were clearly very fraught.

If this is true (and I accept it's hard to see the wood for the trees with the constant press briefings from both sides) I can see it from both points of view.

Harry is in Prince Andrew's position (as a royal, not as a person) which makes Archie and Lilibet on a par with Beatrice and Eugenie. As they get older, and William's children start their own families, the Sussex children drop down the pecking order pretty quickly.

I think Charles has it right that the British Public don't want to keep paying for an extended royal family, you can see that playing out in Europe at the moment. So even if H&M were working royals, their children likely won't be; and I can understand why he wants to present a limited number of royals to the public.

From Harry's perspective, it must feel like a downgrade. It must be difficult being the second (and only other) child in a hierarchical monarchy; being aware from the beginning of all that William is to inherit. Having his children lose something that is currently their birthright must sting a bit.

This should probably have been considered before William and Harry had kids. I doubt it would have been as big a deal when you are not considering actual children, just abstract ones. Or at the very least, it should have been done when the Letters Patent were altered for George, Charlotte and Louis.

It's clearly added to an already tense atmosphere and won't help family relations get back on track.

They’ve certainly modernised since the King’s sisters weren’t anywhere in the line of succession as they were girls, and since the King’s Uncle was unable to marry for decades in case he was needed as regent (marrying a commoner at that time saw you kicked out the Swedishline of succession for an “unsuitable marriage”) due to the current King becoming 2nd in line at 9 months old, then heir at 4, due to the death of his father.

@JustLyra

They’ve certainly modernised since the King’s sisters weren’t anywhere in the line of succession as they were girls, and since the King’s Uncle was unable to marry for decades in case he was needed as regent (marrying a commoner at that time saw you kicked out the Swedishline of succession for an “unsuitable marriage”) due to the current King becoming 2nd in line at 9 months old, then heir at 4, due to the death of his father.

Well perhaps this crisis in the U.K. might similarly focus the British RF to reflect on a number of outdated protocols.

@DeRigueurMortis I doubt it tbh. Especially as there is no automatic entitlement to taxpayer cash in the UK.

That’s been the major push in changes in Sweden over the years.

Given how the British press reacted to Kate and Meghan, the latter especially, I can’t even imagine the conniptions they’d have had over Sofia...

This conversation about slimming down the monarchy has been going on for years. Anyway, why are titles so important to Harry & Megan when they've left the institution and can't say a good word about it?

Given how the British press reacted to Kate and Meghan, the latter especially, I can’t even imagine the conniptions they’d have had over Sofia...

😂😂😂

Yes - remember the hoo ha about Koo Stark?

The Swedish RF have come a long way in the matter of commoners marrying in. Carl Gustav had to wait until he was king to marry Sylvia. His children seem to have made successful marriages to commoners, and Daniel and Sofia appear to have benefited from Prince/Princess school in that they seem rarely to put a foot wrong.

@SenecaFallsRedux

The Swedish RF have come a long way in the matter of commoners marrying in. Carl Gustav had to wait until he was king to marry Sylvia. His children seem to have made successful marriages to commoners, and Daniel and Sofia appear to have benefited from Prince/Princess school in that they seem rarely to put a foot wrong.

I think it’s unlikely he’d have married her any sooner, he became King only 12 months after they met, but it’s interesting that he used the King’s prerogative to make the marriage acceptable.

I think the changes to his role made shortly after his accession (they were already being out in place while his Grandfather was still on the throne) made the big difference. He became more of a ceremonial figurehead than a man of any power.

I find the fact their marry-inners are titled in their own right fascinating. It’s quite a little technical quirk.

They all seem to have learned a lot from Bertil and Lilian.

The Norwegian royals are interesting. The Crown Prince has a stepson with no title, a daughter who is HRH Princess and is the heir and a son who is HH Prince (not HRH). All in one family

Seneca yes! Sofia what a transformation, she is quite popular now.

The Telegraph is reporting this morning the Sussexes rejected the Earl of Dumbarton title for having 'dumb' in it, as well as the money stuff.

It’s interesting that it is also reiterated in that that Harry did not want titles at all for his children but seems to imply that he thought they would be Prince or Princess when Charles ascended the throne. Surely it would be a bit mind bending to go from being untitled to a Prince of the realm overnight 🤷‍♀️

If that Dumbarton/'dumb' story is true, it could be considered insulting towards the people of Dumbarton & Scotland coming from a Prince of the United Kingdom. So I wonder who leaked that little gem?

@SpindleWhorl

The Telegraph is reporting this morning the Sussexes rejected the Earl of Dumbarton title for having 'dumb' in it, as well as the money stuff.

What the actual fu…?

I can't do a link @SnottyLottie but here's the headlines:

Telegraph Exclusive: Harry and Meghan rejected Earl of Dumbarton title for Archie for containing word 'dumb'
Sources reveal they declined to use the title as they feared their son would be bullied or attract unfortunate nicknames

So why not opt for Baron (Lord) Kilkeel, then?

True confession: I always thought it was a fairly rubbish subsidiary title for that reason .

(I don’t live anywhere near the real Dumbarton though, so it’s not a normal place name for me. And I did see some comments from overseas people at the time of the wedding when they were given the Duke and Duchess of Sussex titles, saying “WTF?? Duchess of Sus SEX ?? Are they mad??” etc etc. When anyone living in the UK wouldn’t even think that’s an issue as it’s just a perfectly normal, well-known name here. So my response is definitely on me, not the choice of Earldom).

It's actually derived from 'Dun', an ancient place-name meaning fort. It's quintessentially Scottish and in that sense, very much a piece of the history of the United Kingdom over which the Queen reigns.

All titles are bonkers anyway.

I love the Scottish titles. They remind me of Macbeth. I think this illustrates why a title of any sort is inappropriate when you remove yourself from the country they belong to. The cultural link is often misunderstood. Sussex and Wessex are ancient areas of England but that would be lost on the Americans 😂

www.telegraph.co.uk/royal-family/2021/06/23/exclusive-harry-meghan-rejected-earl-dumbarton-title-archie/?utm_content=telegraph&utm_medium=Social&utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_source=Twitter#Echobox=1624482281

Ha! I knew it!

So Dum is Dumb but they don't have anything to say about 'Sex' in Sussex?

There is one person I'm that family who is very dumb and it's not Meghan or her kids.

The Dumbarton thing is daft.

Harry used it while in Scotland so he could have just said he wanted to keep it to use in Scotland and had Archie use the Kilkeel title.

There are a couple of titles with Dum in Scotland, Earl of Dumfries is one.

@JustLyra

The Dumbarton thing is daft.

Harry used it while in Scotland so he could have just said he wanted to keep it to use in Scotland and had Archie use the Kilkeel title.

Even though he had used it in Scotland, he could still have assigned it to his firstborn - same pattern as Duke of Kent assigning the Earl of St Andrews, or the Duke of Gloucester assigning the Earl of Ulster.

Like @JustLyra says, Harry has already used the title in Scotland. It makes them sounds so shallow to now reject it - as I'm sure the source of the story knows.

His prior use is no more relevant than it was to the Kents or the Gloucesters.

It's not 'shallow' to follow the established pattern, and entirely his choice as to whether to assign that title to his DS, or to use the style Lady for his DD. He's simply chosen not to, which is his prerogative.