Harry & Meghan

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

The members of the BRF who have the title of prince or princess include:

The Queen’s four children: Prince Charles, Princess Anne, Prince Andrew and Princess Edward.
The Queen’s grandchildren: Prince William, Prince Harry, Princess Eugenie and Princess Beatrice
The Queen’s great-grandchildren and children of future king Prince William: Prince George, Princess Charlotte, Prince Louis.

The Queen’s great-grandchildren including Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s son Archie, Princess Eugenie’s son August Brooksbank, Zara Tindall and Peter Phillips children do not possess the title of ‘prince’ or ‘princess’.

[Spud]

It's explained here

[Nearly Sane]

The members of the BRF who have the title of prince or princess include:

The Queen’s four children: Prince Charles, Princess Anne, Prince Andrew and Princess Edward.
The Queen’s grandchildren: Prince William, Prince Harry, Princess Eugenie and Princess Beatrice
The Queen’s great-grandchildren and children of future king Prince William: Prince George, Princess Charlotte, Prince Louis.

The Queen’s great-grandchildren including Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s son Archie, Princess Eugenie’s son August Brooksbank, Zara Tindall and Peter Phillips children do not possess the title of ‘prince’ or ‘princess’.

Have I been misgendering Edward?

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Have I been misgendering Edward?

Sorry didn't spot that. Clearly we have according to the Standard.

https://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/prince-princess-british-royal-family-archie-title-b923017.html

[Owlswing]

So you agree it is disgusting treatment?

That's all my OP was about.

Yes, I do.

I was actually posting about the way the press operated.

You seem oddly conflicted on the Royal Family yourself:

I have to agree with you. As far as I am concerned this episode has done more to blacken (no pun intended) the name of the Royal Family as a whole than anything that I ever expected to see.

Ever since the whole Diana divorce, I have lost almost any respect I ever had for Charles.

Owlswing

)O(

[ProfessorDavey]

The members of the BRF who have the title of prince or princess include:

The Queen’s four children: Prince Charles, Princess Anne, Prince Andrew and Princess Edward.
The Queen’s grandchildren: Prince William, Prince Harry, Princess Eugenie and Princess Beatrice
The Queen’s great-grandchildren and children of future king Prince William: Prince George, Princess Charlotte, Prince Louis.

The Queen’s great-grandchildren including Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s son Archie, Princess Eugenie’s son August Brooksbank, Zara Tindall and Peter Phillips children do not possess the title of ‘prince’ or ‘princess’.

But it isn't consistent is it.

Not all of the Queen's grandchildren are Princes and Princesses are they. Charles and Andrew's kids are, but Anne and Edward's kids aren't. So there doesn't seem to be a clear and set formula.

And mapping generation to generation Harry is the equivalent of Andrew, whose children are Princesses.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

Harry is the equivalent of Beatrice and Zara

Charles, Anne and Edward are the equivalent of Andrew. The HRH passes along the male line so Zara and her brother are not given the title Princess or Prince. As they started scaling down the monarchy, they agreed that Edward's kids would not get the HRH title.

I think Meghan as a seasoned actress is delivering her lines, and is currently playing a carefully scripted and staged role that she has practised many times before the cameras rolled. Cue tears welling up on demand.

I also don't buy the story about Kate and the flowers. People send flowers and apologise to be gracious and kind because they are the bigger person and someone has to make the first move. I have apologised first for my part in misunderstandings even where I felt the other person was more at fault than I was.  Meghan's selective memory means she left out the part where she accepted her flaws. She has admitted to having mental health issues - maybe she was depressed and crying and reacting because of her mental health issues rather than because Kate did anything particularly hurtful to someone who, if they had been a little less ' emotionally fragile' probably would not have cried. I guess that's actresses for you. Kate comes from a more stable family background and is probably less high-strung than Harry and Meghan.

Harry's and Meghan's unstable family history has meant they seem to not be mature enough to see that the whole world does not revolve around them and their needs so it is hardly surprising they feel unsupported and isolated if they keep torpedoing family relationships every few months by their actions. This soap opera they have created will run and run - it has to as their financial independence probably depends on it.

[ProfessorDavey]

Harry is the equivalent of Beatrice and Zara

Charles, Anne and Edward are the equivalent of Andrew.

No I am talking about the comparison generation to generation.

So as Andrew is to Charles (the next youngest brother to the primary heir of that generation), so Harry is to William.

So if Andrew's children are Princesses, why aren't Harry's kids also Princes/Princesses. It isn't consistent.

I'm a republican so in the broadest sense I don't give a damn, but if you are going to have a hereditary monarchy surely there has to be consistency in terms of which members of the family get a particular title and which get a different title. And that presumably is based on position within the family. So if Beatrice and Eugene are Princesses I can't see (if there is consistency) which Archie isn't a Prince, or the new sprog (apparently a girl) isn't a Princess - or at least will become as soon as Charles becomes King.

[Nearly Sane]

No I am talking about the comparison generation to generation.

So as Andrew is to Charles (the next youngest brother to the primary heir of that generation), so Harry is to William.

So if Andrew's children are Princesses, why aren't Harry's kids also Princes/Princesses. It isn't consistent.

I'm a republican so in the broadest sense I don't give a damn, but if you are going to have a hereditary monarchy surely there has to be consistency in terms of which members of the family get a particular title and which get a different title. And that presumably is based on position within the family. So if Beatrice and Eugene are Princesses I can't see (if there is consistency) which Archie isn't a Prince, or the new sprog (apparently a girl) isn't a Princess - or at least will become as soon as Charles becomes King.

Spud's link in his earlier post covers this


https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/08/why-meghan-harry-son-archie-denied-title-prince-mixed-race

[ProfessorDavey]

Spud's link in his earlier post covers this


https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/mar/08/why-meghan-harry-son-archie-denied-title-prince-mixed-race

I did read it but it didn't seem to make a lot of sense in terms of what has actually happened.

So from the article it would appear that Archie would automatically become a Prince when the Queen dies and Charles becomes King. However I didn't think that was going to happen from the reports.

Also under the rules Edward's kids would automatically become Prince/Princess - yet they aren't.

And again from the rules George, Charlotte etc wouldn't be Prince/Princess until the Queen dies as they are a generation too far removed. However they are.

So there seems to be a framework with a lot of tweaking, presumably under the decision making of the Queen.

[Owlswing]

I did read it but it didn't seem to make a lot of sense in terms of what has actually happened.

So from the article it would appear that Archie would automatically become a Prince when the Queen dies and Charles becomes King. However I didn't think that was going to happen from the reports.

Also under the rules Edward's kids would automatically become Prince/Princess - yet they aren't.

And again from the rules George, Charlotte etc wouldn't be Prince/Princess until the Queen dies as they are a generation too far removed. However they are.

So there seems to be a framework with a lot of tweaking, presumably under the decision making of the Queen.

It seems that the Rules on the titles Prince and Princess were laid down by KGV in a Letter Patent but later amended by a Letter Patent by QE11

I haven't read said Letters so I can't quote the exact details.

If and when I find the details I'll try and post them!

Owlswing

)O(

[Nearly Sane]

I did read it but it didn't seem to make a lot of sense in terms of what has actually happened.

So from the article it would appear that Archie would automatically become a Prince when the Queen dies and Charles becomes King. However I didn't think that was going to happen from the reports.

Also under the rules Edward's kids would automatically become Prince/Princess - yet they aren't.

And again from the rules George, Charlotte etc wouldn't be Prince/Princess until the Queen dies as they are a generation too far removed. However they are.

So there seems to be a framework with a lot of tweaking, presumably under the decision making of the Queen.

It covers and states that Liz intervened for Charlotte and Louis, and that George was a Prince as being in direct line.


Ed's kids were covered by Gabriella's comment that there waa a separate decision to slim down the monarchy.

Anne's, and indeed Anne, are covered by institutional sexism.


It's indeed piecemeal, and evolves, but in this case there should have been no expectation that Archie would he a prince, or princess if he chose to follow the approach of Princess Ed as per the Standard.

[Nearly Sane]

Mr Morgan leaves GMB

https://www.itv.com/news/2021-03-09/piers-morgan-to-leave-good-morning-britain-following-meghan-markle-row

[Owlswing]

Mr. Morgan leaves GMB

https://www.itv.com/news/2021-03-09/piers-morgan-to-leave-good-morning-britain-following-meghan-markle-row

I cannot say that I am sorry to see him go. He is one of my least favourite presenters and I am glad that all I know of him over the past few years comes from the Net where I did not have to ask someone else if they minded me switching him off.

And, if the gentleman doing the weather is to be believed, it is all because the lady dumped him!

Owlswing

)O(

[Aruntraveller]

Mr Morgan leaves GMB

https://www.itv.com/news/2021-03-09/piers-morgan-to-leave-good-morning-britain-following-meghan-markle-row

I reckon he's angling for a spot on the new Andrew Neil channel.

[ProfessorDavey]

It's indeed piecemeal, and evolves, but in this case there should have been no expectation that Archie would he a prince, or princess if he chose to follow the approach of Princess Ed as per the Standard.

No I still don't understand the position - I thought that Archie could expect to become a Prince once Charles becomes King - that seems to be the basic rules. Sure if he or his parents choose otherwise then that would be different, but that would be their choice, the default being that he'd become a Prince.

[Nearly Sane]

No I still don't understand the position - I thought that Archie could expect to become a Prince once Charles becomes King - the seems to be the basic rules. Sure if he or his parents choose otherwise then that would be different, but that would be their choice, the default being that he'd become a Prince.

so there is agree that Archie would not be expected to be a prince under those rules currently?

[ProfessorDavey]

so there is agree that Archie would not be expected to be a prince under those rules currently?

Sure, but nor would Charlotte (a Princess) or Louis.

But he would expect to become a Prince when the Queen dies.

Now I might be wrong, or we may be being fed misinformation, but I thought that Harry and Meghan had been informed that the palace had made a decision that Archie would not become a Prince - not just not now but not ever. So a decision away from the default and not in their favour. Meanwhile, again I may be wrong here, but I thought that the palace had made a decision that Charlotte and Louis would become Princess/Prince now (rather than on the death of the Queen). So a decision away from the default but in their favour.

Maybe I'm reading this entirely wrong, but that was my understanding of the defaults and the individual decisions.

[Nearly Sane]

Sure, but nor would Charlotte (a Princess) or Louis.

But he would expect to become a Prince when the Queen dies.

Now I might be wrong, or we may be being fed misinformation, but I thought that Harry and Meghan had been informed that the palace had made a decision that Archie would not become a Prince - not just not now but not ever. So a decision away from the default and not in their favour. Meanwhile, again I may be wrong here, but I thought that the palace had made a decision that Charlotte and Louis would become Princess/Prince now (rather than on the death of the Queen). So a decision away from the default but in their favour.

Maybe I'm reading this entirely wrong, but that was my understanding of the defaults and the individual decisions.

The link  and my comment covers Charlotte and Louis. 

[SteveH]

No I am talking about the comparison generation to generation.

So as Andrew is to Charles (the next youngest brother to the primary heir of that generation), so Harry is to William.

So if Andrew's children are Princesses, why aren't Harry's kids also Princes/Princesses. It isn't consistent.

Because they're a generation further down.

[ProfessorDavey]

Because they're a generation further down.

But that is only relevant on the basis of the George V ruling that all grandchildren (but not great-grandchildren) of the current monarch are offered the title Prince/Princess. Whether they take up the title is another matter, but they are offered it.

So under the rules Harry and Meghan's kids should become Prince/Princess once Charles becomes King as they will be the grandchildren of a current monarch. But my understanding (I may be wrong, but this has been reported again in the Times today) is that is isn't just that Archie isn't give the title of Prince now (which isn't required but the rules - but has been offered to Charlotte and Louis), but that he wont be when Charles becomes King either - which is not what the default position is.

[The Accountant, OBE, KC]

But that is only relevant on the basis of the George V ruling that all grandchildren (but not great-grandchildren) of the current monarch are offered the title Prince/Princess. Whether they take up the title is another matter, but they are offered it.

So under the rules Harry and Meghan's kids should become Prince/Princess once Charles becomes King as they will be the grandchildren of a current monarch. But my understanding (I may be wrong, but this has been reported again in the Times today) is that is isn't just that Archie isn't give the title of Prince now (which isn't required but the rules - but has been offered to Charlotte and Louis), but that he wont be when Charles becomes King either - which is not what the default position is.

Has the Times reported that this conversation happened or they have reported that Meghan thinks it happened? When people have mental health issues, as Meghan has said she has/ had, they do not always recall things accurately , and can interpret conversations and have perceptions differently from what was said or intended due to their poor mental health and emotional pain.

While sympathising with Meghan's emotional fragility, her emotional struggles also affect perceptions of her credibility in being able to accurately recollect events. Since we use our brains to recollect events, if our brain is not working very well because we have a mental health issue that makes us feel upset and depressed and isolated and helpless etc etc how accurate is our recollection going to be? 

ETA: There is also the issue of plans for a slimmed down monarchy, which may be another reason why William's children are Princes and Princesses but not Harry's. It's easy to frame everything as a personal attack and thereby cause chaos and conflict, especially if you run to the media if you don't get your own way. So much for not inviting Press intrusion. I said at the time they claimed they were stepping back as Royals to have more privacy that this was a money-making exercise to control access to them to make them more money and here they are with multi-million pound deals with streaming services Netflix and Spotify, inviting Oprah who was a complete stranger to their wedding, and now colluding with Oprah to make vague and damaging public accusations against Harry's family without having to present any actual evidence to back up their claims. I knew this was a money-making exercise from the start - Meghan's acting skills came in useful. 

[Spud]

Sure, but nor would Charlotte (a Princess) or Louis.

But he would expect to become a Prince when the Queen dies.

Now I might be wrong, or we may be being fed misinformation, but I thought that Harry and Meghan had been informed that the palace had made a decision that Archie would not become a Prince - not just not now but not ever. So a decision away from the default and not in their favour. Meanwhile, again I may be wrong here, but I thought that the palace had made a decision that Charlotte and Louis would become Princess/Prince now (rather than on the death of the Queen). So a decision away from the default but in their favour.

Maybe I'm reading this entirely wrong, but that was my understanding of the defaults and the individual decisions.

The Queen’s decree in 2012 (before the birth of George, whose sex presumably not known at the time) "ensures that if the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s eldest child is a daughter, she will be styled a Princess rather than a Lady."... "Just as George V's (sic) responded to popular concerns about the size of the titled royal family and George VI acknowledged his grandchildren’s place in the succession, Elizabeth II has equalized the titles of her future great-grandchildren to reflect the planned introduction of absolute primogeniture."
From this link
So not to do with favouritism but exercising the royal prerogative in response to popular concerns about the moarchy.
It would make sense that this rule only applied to William's children. George V's decree applied only to the first son of the son of the Prince of Wales, who was third in line and very likely to become king in the future. Apparently, though, "the Sussexes are claiming that there was an expectation that the Queen might change the protocol in a similar way as it had been for William's children." (even though Archie is very unlikely to become king). (quoted from this link)

[ProfessorDavey]

The Queen’s decree in 2012 (before the birth of George, whose sex presumably not known at the time) "ensures that if the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s eldest child is a daughter, she will be styled a Princess rather than a Lady."... "Just as George V's (sic) responded to popular concerns about the size of the titled royal family and George VI acknowledged his grandchildren’s place in the succession, Elizabeth II has equalized the titles of her future great-grandchildren to reflect the planned introduction of absolute primogeniture."

But that is largely about equality between male and female children in terms of position in line to the throne.

But surely if the approach was to "equalized the titles of her future great-grandchildren" then that would mean that all great-grandchildren would be treated equally, but they aren't being, with the current view being that Archie will not be offered the title Prince even when the Queen dies (which he would be under the George V rules, which have largely not been superseded by Elizabeth's. How can titles of great-grandchildren have been equalised if three of them are offered the title of Prince/Princess, while one (plus at least one more) aren't offered the same title even once the Queen dies.

As I've said previously I'm a republican so broadly I don't give a damn - however it does seem to me that the treatment of Harry and Meghan's kids is not the same as for the others of the Queen's great-grandchildren and that only George has been treated in accordance with the George V rules - Charlotte and Louis have benefited from amendments to that rule (becoming Prince/Princess on birth rather than on the death of the Queen), while Archie is suffering by amendments to that rule (if as is being reported he wont be offered the title of Prince when the Queen dies - which is what is expected to happen under the current rules).

[Gordon]

I have a solution: just get rid of this dysfunctional institution.