Prince Archie & Princess Lilibet?

[susan12345678]

Surely not?

I look forward to Harry's announcement explaining that they will decline prince and princess titles for their DC, in keeping with their decision to stand down as senior royals and live private lives in the US.

Anything less under the circumstances would be rank hypocrisy

I think it means that there will be fewer charities with a Royal patron, and some of the activities (which increased as the late Queen had 4 DC to occupy) will be scaled back.

Some charity patronages might get redistributed to largely non-working royals (they already have a few) but I don't think there's scope for many to go that way, and it only works if there's a fairly obvious matching of interests.

Having only direct line grandchildren as HRH prince or princess is in line with what most European monarchies are doing though.

And I don't think making such a move would be risky. I think it would be quite popular.

My guess is that Charles expected Harry and his wife (whoever she was) to do what the Wessexes had done and 'agree' not to use titles for their children. Maybe that is what will happen. This would be a lot less 'dramatic' than issuing Letters Patent, but who knows?

I do think the queen should have sorted this out in her own reign however, much as Margaret is now doing. Otherwise, it puts the next king in a rather sensitive position.

Yes, I suspect Margethe is trying to prevent her heir from having to make the awkward decisions after she's gone.

It's not really though. Margarethe is following the Scandinavian changes, but they are not Europe wide.

In Sweden they've removed the HRH, but not the Prince/ss titles or the Duchies from the grandchildren not born to CP Victoria.
In Norway Sverre Magnus is HH Prince rather than HRH like his sister.

Nowhere else has made changes removing titles. In Luxembourg all of the grandchildren so far are Prince and Princesses. Even the two that were born before their parents married were created as Princes.

In Belgium all of the grandchildren of the former King (the current one doesn't have any yet) have retained their Princely titles. In fact in 2020 the newly recognised illegitimate daughter of the previous King was granted the title of Princess of Belgium and her two children are now Prince and Princess.

In Spain there will be no need for changes as the future Queen only has a sister, same as her father only had sisters, so children of Sofia will have the 'y Bourbon' surname added same as her Aunt's children.

It may be that Charles making that move now would be popular, because he is currently more popular than Harry and Meghan, but there's not a chance that would have been in the planning originally because he wasn't more popular than them.

The fact the Queen didn't make those big changes in her reign says to me that there was never any plans to make them. The numbers will slim naturally. The big changes were with the children of Andrew and Edward. Particularly Andrew imo. Making the decision years ago that they wouldn't be working royals is where the slimming talk is from imo. Time shall tell.

I think she's trying to prevent further deterioration in the relationship between her two sons. It's well known her daughters-in-law aren't best of friends.

Doesn't seem like this has worked to plan.

In Norway Sverre Magnus is HH Prince rather than HRH like his sister

But he is the son of the heir, so same position as Louis, not Archie.

It may be that Charles making that move now would be popular, because he is currently more popular than Harry and Meghan, but there's not a chance that would have been in the planning originally because he wasn't more popular than them.

That's why I think the original plan was for Harry and his wife to 'agree' not to have titles for their children, like the Wessexes, which may still happen. But I can't see Charles risking a Prince and Princess of Montecito, especially given relations between him and the Sussexes. That would be a much riskier move in the long term than issuing letters patent.

The fact the Queen didn't make those big changes in her reign says to me that there was never any plans to make them.

Not by the queen, no. But she's never been one for removing titles, has she?

Even so, her youngest son 'agreed' that his children would not have titles. How much this was his and Sophie's initiative, or how much it was 'suggested' to them, we can't really know. But I would see this as indicative of how much had changed since the birth of Andrew's daughters, and how much more has change since then. I do not believe that limiting royal titles to those directly in line would be an unpopular move. Quite the contrary.

No, it seems the way communications have been managed is very poor.

Prince Joachim has said that he was told in May that he was told that the plan was the titles would be lost by the time his children turned 25 (the oldest is 23 - who knows whether that meant they would each only be a Prince/ss until they turned 25, or that when the oldest turned 25 that was it for all of them?). Anyway, Joachim said he asked for the opportunity to give feedback on this, with a view to the changes being announced in the New Year, but then was surprised yesterday by an announcement with no notice.

(I note though if he said in May he wanted to provide feedback, well - it is practically October now. When was he planning on providing his feedback so this could be worked out?).

Also, the oldest grandchildren have said they haven’t spoken to their grandmother about this, just one of her courtiers.

I wonder what the reason for the rush was?

It's always good when different opinions can be aired in a pleasant way 😀

I don't think Charles would have limited his grandchildren's titles. He was never going to have that many with him just having the two sons. Only one of Harry's would have a titled to pass on.

I think the decision for Edward and Sophie's children was as much about their own titles and the decision at the time that Sophie wouldn't be a full time working royal.

That currently balances up with Harry and Meghan not being working royals, but that was certainly never in Charles' plans.

I think whilst the Queen was never big on removing titles she was also aware that Charles wasn't as popular as her so would have given serious consideration to making any risky changes in her reign.

I also think part of the Queen's reluctance to remove titles was likely because it's not good for the royals if the public begin to realise that actually it can be done, and it's not that difficult. They're all aware that they could be the next unpopular one - I mean Charles himself would not have been in a good position in the late 90's if removing titles was a thing!

No, it seems the way communications have been managed is very poor.

On the back of Marie telling a magazine that the decision to stay in France full time after Joachim's blood clot wasn't entirely down to them it really does suggest there's something behind the rush.

It's always good when different opinions can be aired in a pleasant way 😀

Yes it is!

I think whilst the Queen was never big on removing titles she was also aware that Charles wasn't as popular as her so would have given serious consideration to making any risky changes in her reign.

Perhaps, but as I say, I really don't think limiting titles to those directly in line would have been risky. I think it would be popular. It's more awkward now, given that the children are 'technically' already prince and princess, so the titles would have to be removed rather than just not given in the first place. But I still think it would be preferable to having a prince and princess of the United Kingdom growing up in California, estranged from the royal family. If need be, I think Charles might take moves to ensure that, even if that hadn't originally been what he wanted. Certainly he cannot allow them to be HRH, at the very least.

I guess we'll find out soon enough.

I also think part of the Queen's reluctance to remove titles was likely because it's not good for the royals if the public begin to realise that actually it can be done, and it's not that difficult.

Yes, I agree with that. I read a comment along those lines yesterday, in response to saying that the Danish move was good for the monarchy. If you're a prince or princess one day, but not the next, for no reason other than that your grandmother said so, then what do these titles really mean? What is the point of them at all, if they can just be granted and removed on a whim? And when you put it that way, what is the point of monarchy at all?

Perhaps, but as I say, I really don't think limiting titles to those directly in line would have been risky. I think it would be popular. It's more awkward now, given that the children are 'technically' already prince and princess, so the titles would have to be removed rather than just not given in the first place. But I still think it would be preferable to having a prince and princess of the United Kingdom growing up in California, estranged from the royal family. If need be, I think Charles might take moves to ensure that, even if that hadn't originally been what he wanted. Certainly he cannot allow them to be HRH, at the very least.
I guess we'll find out soon enough.

That's why I think it was never Charles' plans to have Harry's children as untitled.

When the LP's were issued for children of the Cambridge marriage everything had just changed because of the primogeniture changes. William and Kate were married, she was pregnant, and Harry was single. It was the perfect time to make 'streamlining' changes if they were wished.

They could have titled all of William's children, made the announcement about Harry's potential children (far better to remove titles from as yet unknown children than "he took Archie's title away") and everything could be done and dusted. The fact it wasn't done then, in fact even the original 1917 LP's weren't changed at all so the issue will still rear it's head again if George has a daughter suggests to me that they still plan to keep things as they are. Just that H & M's decisions have thrown that up.

I actually don't think he'll do anything. Atm it's been left as Harry and Meghan have to let them know their plans - that puts them in the position of being seen as the bad guy. If they do anything other than "the children have the titles but we won't use them and they can decide at 18" like the Wessexes have done they'll look like they're cashing in on the Queen's death and it'll be their popularity that suffers.

What is the point of them at all, if they can just be granted and removed on a whim? And when you put it that way, what is the point of monarchy at all?

Yep, exactly that.

And if your titles can be removed by your father or grandfather because you're not popular with him then surely the public not liking someone should have an impact because they're our monarchy?

If they start that game then they'll put themselves in an even more precarious position.

why is Edward an Earl not a Duke?

Because the expectation is that he will be made Duke of Edinburgh now that Charles is king.

Samcro it was reported that they were offered to be made the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, but Edward had seen and enjoyed Shakespeare in Love, and asked to be named Lord Wessex after Colin Firth’s character in the film. The Queen did do, creating them the Earl and Countess of Wessex. It was also suggested around the same time that they would in due course be created the Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh (though both Prince Phillip and the Queen both had to be dead before that would be possible). No-one knows if that is still the plan.

@Serenster according to Joachim the plan as it was presented to him was that the change would come into effect separately for each individual at the point of turning 25.

according to Joachim the plan as it was presented to him was that the change would come into effect separately for each individual at the point of turning 25

Much is being made of the suddenness of the decision, but as I understand it, this has been on the cards for some years - and Joachim knew it was definitely happening back in May.

I'm wondering whether the fact that they went ahead with the announcement without his approval is because he'd been pushing back against it behind the scenes since May. If he's not going to agree to it, they may as well just announce and be damned. The queen having covid probably provided fresh impetus to hurry things along.

I'm also wondering whether the 'turning 25' idea was his - it's a rather odd idea and doesn't make a lot of sense, but while the older 2 boys are almost at that age now, the younger two have at least a decade to go. He specifically mentioned that his daughter wasn't 11 yet. Perhaps he/his wife felt it was unfair that the older 2 had opportunities to be princes into early adulthood and the younger two didn't.

Edward had seen and enjoyed Shakespeare in Love, and asked to be named Lord Wessex after Colin Firth’s character in the film. The Queen did do, creating them the Earl and Countess of Wessex

Is this seriously true?? Priceless 😂😂

It would be highly effective I think in terms of stream-lining the monarchy to stop making royal sons Dukes on their marriages. Let the royal children be Prince/princess, but let that title die with them and go no further. A dukedom goes on for ever (or until the heirs run out)

also, it is bloody unfair on the girls currently

I think that one is the tricky one because of the expectation that the wife of a Prince will take a title.

It'll highlight further the sexism in titles if we end up with Princess George and Princess Louis knocking around. Especially if the wives are expected to be full time working royals.

Future Dukedoms are going to need to be a bit creative though as two very traditional royal Dukedoms will become non-royal pretty soon and won't become available for re-use.

Perhaps he/his wife felt it was unfair that the older 2 had opportunities to be princes into early adulthood and the younger two didn't.

I wonder if that's something that's being seen a snub toward his wife.

His older children have been titled until adulthood. His ex wife was given the right to continue using the Princess title unless she remarried (which she has), she was put on the civil list for life even if she remarried (she renounced that right when her youngest turned 18) and was given the Countess title for life.

Whereas Marie's children have had their titles removed whilst they are still young and they've been "encouraged" to live full time in France.

Whereas Marie's children have had their titles removed whilst they are still young and they've been "encouraged" to live full time in France

It definitely suggests some sort of family feud behind the scenes. I'm getting vibes that Joachim and his wives perhaps weren't 'staying in their lane' to the satisfaction of his brother and Mary.

There's also no question that the older boys were monetizing their connections quite brazenly. Look at this ad for Raffles - there's even a fake 'royal family' featured in it

www.instagram.com/p/CVU-1T4qR5P/

On balance, it does seem unfair - especially to the younger children, which makes me think something dramatic has been going on behind the scenes.

Either that, or Margrethe is extremely capricious!

I wonder if the combination of Joachim’s blood clot in 2020 and then Margarethe having covid after returning from the funeral just increased the urgency?

With the family living in France atm then perhaps also an easier sell to the Danish public as well?

Maybe even a hope from Fred & Mary that when he finishes his stint in Paris they’ll decide to just settle there for good

@susan12345678 No there has been an understanding for a long time that the Monarchy would be need to be streamlined in terms of working/paid royals, but not to this extent. The specific proposal to remove the grandchildren’s status as princes and princess was presented to him in May, and was presented as being a gradual transition, over quite a number of years, for each of the children. I think that makes sense - as the children already are princes and princess, and since there is such disparity in their ages, the fairest way to proceed would have been to pick an age where they are well into adulthood, have had some time to study/find themselves, and have each been treated equally, and then let the title fall away at that given point.

There had been no prior indication that it would all be done in one fell swoop.

It’s certainly a problematic situation and should have been handled more diplomatically IMO.

Yes it could be that with both older boys taking up quite markedly non-Royal careers where monetisation might be rather more of a sticky issue, it was felt that something needed to be done sooner rather than later. They had both started at Military college, I guess you could call it, after graduating from high school equivalent but both dropped out pretty quickly.