Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet

[Snog]

Do you think Prince Charles will bestow titles on Harry's children when he becomes king?

Archie can’t run for US president; he wasn’t born in the US.

@JustLyra

Duchess of Cornwall is part of the POW package. Kate will only be DUchess of Cornwall when she is Princess of Wales.

That’s incorrect.

the Duke of Cornwall title will go to William as soon as his father becomes King.

Its the Earl of Chester title that goes with Prince of Wales.

Well yes, technically true

But it will be fleeting, they will have him invested at the speed of light, to bolster ancient King Charles, I suspect

Surely their parents would refuse them? Surely they don't want any formal links for their children with that "racist" "bullying" family?

Charles could do something more useful by removing Beatrice and Eugenie’s titles. They don’t need them and keeping them means Prince Andrew yatters on about them being the only blood princesses (when Anne, Louise and Charlotte are too).

Their titles are just fancy names. They don't entitle them to anything else or increase their cost to the taxpayer. By all accounts they would like to be working royals but aren't wanted.

Removing their titles just draws attention to the ridiculousness of the whole notion of hereditary monarchy, and that we don't get to choose this family.

The whole system is literally about entitlement and they are entitled to their titles, and to use them. Either you have this bizarre system with its titles and precedence and order of succession or you don't. Worthiness doesn't come into it, that's the point.

She complained from start to finish in that interview. It made me chuckle as she had been saying all along she didn’t want them to have titles…yeah right lol!

No idea why you are being snippy. You’re the one that said I was incorrect as it’s “part of the POW package” when it’s not…

He won’t do that. Imo for the same reason he’ll never remove Andrew’s titles, or push for the ones that need parliament to approve removal of.

It does none of them any favours to highlight to the public that it’s relatively easy to do. They don’t know when the next time it’d be them, or their child, in the firing line.

Charles would have lost his titles over Diana if it was down to public wishes at the time. He knows that, and they know that once they start playing about with that sort of thing it’s a slippery slope to losing their status as a whole and without that they’re finished

I’m not being snippy!

Chill out.

In practice I think they’ll be P&PW v swiftly, at which point it becomes part of their package

Saying “We’ll yes, technically true” to something which you’d said was incorrect is snippy.

most people apologise when they pull up someone and are wrong. Not pretend like their opinion makes it correct

Oops. Would be interesting if he became Queen!!
Prince of Wales isn’t automatic. Charles wasn’t given it until 1958.

I loved your type @JustLyra 😁It would certainly put an interesting spin on things!

I know Charles was invested as Prince of Wales when he was 21(?) I didn't realise it wasn't an automatic thing for the Heir to be, I guess I just assumed it was and the investiture was part and parcel of that.

It would be very modern 😁

He became PoW in 58 and the investiture was much later. Not all POW’s have an investiture. His was the first for many years.

so neither the title nor the investiture is automatic.

You are taking this way too seriously, it’s just fluffy stuff.

I don’t think they’ll be DD of C for any length of time, you do, that’s cool. No one needs to apologise to anyone.

I can't see the point in Harry, Charlotte or Louis' children having royal styles when they will be as irrelevant to the family as Beatrice and Eugenie.

Less so in the case of Harry’s children. Once Charles died - which could easily be before Archie and Lilibet reach adulthood - they won’t even be the sovereign’s grandchildren; they’ll be his nephew and niece. They’ll be essentially on the same level as David Linley and Sarah Chatto, who a lot of people couldn’t pick out of a line-up.

I had this argument with a rabid Meghan defender who was horrified at a GREAT-GRANDSON OF THE QUEEN not being made HRH, and how it was obviously racism at work. Yet in another of her posts, she’d complained about ‘hangers-on’ like the Kents and Gloucesters being HRH when Archie wasn’t - even though they are all grandchildren of a British monarch, and therefore entitled to the title when Archie isn’t.

I haven’t voiced any opinion about timescales…

He became PoW in 58 and the investiture was much later. Not all POW’s have an investiture. His was the first for many years.
so neither the title nor the investiture is automatic.

Thanks for that info @JustLyra.

Charles is keen on reducing the monarchy as-is to immediate heir lines only. I also very much doubt George will be anything more than a token King in name, and William will be the last true head of state.

Yes that is correct, but A will be Duke of Sussex when Harry dies and will pass that on to his eldest son if he has one, minus the HRH. Or to put it another way it will cease to be a royal dukedom at that point and become a 'normal' one.

It is interesting to think that Sarah Chatto is the granddaughter of a king.

Indeed. Like the Kent and the Gloucester dukedoms.

I read that it's already been suggested, but they resisted. I agree with you about Andrew, though!

I know - it seems like a poisoned chalice, but they need to remove that title from its Diana connection now.

Once Charles died - which could easily be before Archie and Lilibet reach adulthood - they won’t even be the sovereign’s grandchildren; they’ll be his nephew and niece. They’ll be essentially on the same level as David Linley and Sarah Chatto, who a lot of people couldn’t pick out of a line-up

Not quite -

• they'll still be the grandchildren of a sovereign, as their grandfather was king. it doesnt expire on the death of a king
• Lord Snowdon (as he is now) and Lady Sarah Chatto are in the female line, and so do not have royal titles. The ones essentially on the same level as them are the Princess Royal's DC, who have no royal style (and also no title, because unlike Lord Snowdon, Mark Phillips did not accept one on matrimony)
• The pattern for the Sussex offspring would be like the Dukedoms of Kent or Gloucester. So when Prince Harry is idc son of a king, his DC, as grandchildren of king become HRH prince or HRH princess. Any future children of theirs will have neither HRH nor prince/ss. Archie's DC will have the styles of the children of a duke (Lord or Lady, (like Lord Frederick Windsor and Lady Gabriella Windsor) with option for eldest to use one of the father's subsidiary titles they wish) And Lily's DC would be have none, like James Ogilvy and Marina Ogilvy
• They don't have to use their royal styles at all - Prince Edward's DC are examples of those who could be HRH Prince/ss but have opted instead not to use them, instead having the styles on the usual pattern of an Earldom