Titles and Styles of the Sussex Family 1

[Meee]

The Sun (so a pinch of salt until confirmed by the King) are reporting that the Sussex children will be Prince and Princess but without HRH.

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/198105...et-hrh-status/

I had expected them not to be HRH on the basis that their parents, including their Royal parent, had agreed not to use them as part of the arrangements when they left their roles and moved abroad.

It reads as though working Royals only will have HRH, which seems a good way of resolving the question of styles and titles. In this way, HRH can be stripped from those that are not working royals without that person losing the Prince or Princess title that they had had for all of their lives. Depending on how it was written it might resolve the issue of sexism in the titles as they stand (it could become all grandchildren of a Sovereign are entitled to Prince/Princess, if that is their/their parents’ wish) and HRH is conferred upon becoming a working Royal if not in the direct line of succession. That way if George were only to have one child for example, it could be granted to some of the children of Charlotte or Louis if William or George wished, without them all having it. It stands to reason that Royals further from the throne may become working Royals if there are fewer members in a generation (similar to the way The Queen had asked Alexandra to perform Royal duties.)

[wbenson]

I saw the same thing in the Mail (even bigger pinch of salt). If so, I guess it would be something like the recent Swedish rules.

[Tatiana Maria]

So, even though females are now equal to males in the order of succession to the crown in Archie and Lilibet's generation, they will remain unequal in regards to titles: Prince Harry's children will only benefit from royal titles because their royal parent is male.


Quoting the Sun's exclusive which was kindly shared by Meee (the Daily Mail is also simply quoting the Sun):

"Tense discussions have taken place while Meghan and Prince Harry are in the UK for the Queen’s funeral."

If true, it seems less than ideal to wait until such a busy and sensitive time to have "tense discussions" affecting the future of the monarchy.

A source said: “Harry and Meghan were worried about the security issue and being prince and princess brings them the right to have certain levels of royal security.

As was extensively discussed at the time of the Oprah interview, the anonymous source's claim that princes and princesses are automatically entitled to "royal security" is incorrect, as shown by the York princesses, the Michaels of Kent, etc.

“There have been a lot of talks over the past week.

“They have been insistent that Archie and Lilibet are prince and princess.

"They have been relentless since the Queen died.

The source's account seems consistent with the Duchess of Sussex's March 2021 interview with Oprah Winfrey:

Speaking to Oprah, Meghan recalled how, when she had been pregnant, 'They [the Royal Family] were saying they didn't want him to be a Prince or a Princess'.

She continued: 'You know, the other piece of that convention is, there's a convention – I forget if it was George V or George VI convention – that when you're the grandchild of the monarch, so when Harry's dad becomes King, automatically Archie and our next baby would become Prince or Princess, or whatever they were going to be… But also it's not their right to take it away.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...ave-costs.html

If the Duchess's and the anonymous source's statements are true, it would seem that Charles did not originally plan for his cadet-line grandchildren to be prince and princess, but capitulated to his daughter-in-law and son's "insistence" during the "tense discussions".

"His Majesty has agreed to issue letters patent to confer the prince and princess titles on his two grandchildren — who live with their parents in Montecito, California."

The part about "issue letters patent" cannot be the case, since the current George V letters patent have already conferred prince and princess titles on them as male-line grandchildren of the monarch. Perhaps the writer meant issuing letters patent to remove the HRH, although I cannot see why that would be necessary either. The January 2020 "family agreement" for the Sussexes not to use their HRHs could simply be extended to their children.

“But they have been left furious that Archie and Lilibet cannot take the title HRH.

"That is the agreement — they can be prince and princess but not HRH because they are not working royals.”

A spokesman for the King declined to comment.

I am not sure why the source would expect the Duke and Duchess of Sussex to be furious about their children not taking HRH. No Americans would care about the difference between an HRH Prince and a non-HRH Prince: the "Prince" is the badge of status. And surely the Sussexes, who do not use their own HRH, would not want to be outranked by their own children.

[Alison H]

One minute they didn't want them even to be the Earl of Dumbarton and Lady Lilibet, and now they're making a fuss over wanting them being HRH Prince and Princess? Is this really the time for "tense discussions"? And, as you say, the letters patent thing doesn't make sense, as the titles are automatic. It makes sense for them not to use the style of HRH, as their parents don't use it.

[Claire]

I have often wondered why this issue wasn't discussed and codified in a statement when the Sussex's were married and given their title. We have never had issue with the styling of the Philips or the Wessex's children. The conversation should have happened then and placed in writing to clarify any disagreement later.

However I have been told - clarification will be issued after the funeral. How far after the funeral is anyone guess. Whatever the decision it will cause issues on one side or the other - which should and could have been avoided.

[kalnel]

The push for titles would seem to be at odds with the push for security. I'd imagine the children would be much "safer" and less interesting to the media and public without titles.

[xenobia]

We really don't know anything about these discussions - not even if they are taking place at all right now. I'm taking all the "sources" with a big pinch of salt.

[Sionevar]

Existing LPs notwithstanding, I honestly don't see why the children should even have the title of Prince and Princess at this point in their lives. They are a baby and a toddler, aren't the children of the direct heir, are living outside of the UK, and are unlikely to ever serve as working royals. IMO, Charles should follow the Wessex example, leave them as Earl of Dumbarton and Lady Lilibet for the time being.

[HRHHermione]

Originally Posted by kalnel

The push for titles would seem to be at odds with the push for security. I'd imagine the children would be much "safer" and less interesting to the media and public without titles.

I agree with that. There’s no logical consistency here. If Archie and Lilibet are not titled and go to school in the U.S. there will not be much media interest in them which would make them safer and give them a lot more options for what to do with their lives. I would think Harry of all people would understand that and would look at his cousins Zara and Peter or even Lady Louise and Viscount Severn and recognize that they haven’t had to deal with the attention that he said was really negative for his mental health. It’s not like “HRH” status guarantees security either- Beatrice and Eugenie lost their security a long time ago and seem to be doing just fine.

Maybe it’s important to Meghan though, that the kids be titled? I’ve kind of given up trying to find any logic in what this couple seems to want.

[Gawin]

We have no idea whether the Sun's story is even true. I'm skeptical members of the RF would discuss this issue right now, with other pressing matters at hand. I suspect any talks will wait until after the Queen's funeral. Just my opinion, could be wrong.

[RoyalNight]

Did Archie and Lilibet automatically became Prince and Princess when Charles become the King? Or the King has to grant them titles?

[Sionevar]

Originally Posted by RoyalNight

Did Archie and Lilibet automatically became Prince and Princess when Charles become the King? Or the King has to grant them titles?

By the terms of existing Letters Patent, they automatically became HRH and Prince or Princess when Charles became King, because his accession made them male-line grandchildren of the monarch.

But there is now a view that certain perks - perhaps including the full HRH and Prince or Princess - should be available to working royals only. Which Archie and Lili are not currently, and will probably never be.

So, even though they could technically use the titles, there is a sense that Charles should confirm or give permission first.

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by RoyalNight

Did Archie and Lilibet automatically became Prince and Princess when Charles become the King? Or the King has to grant them titles?

Under the rules currently in force , they automatically became Prince and Princess the moment King Charles III ascended the throne. But it is unknown if they will actually use their titles or if the existing rules will be changed by the new King. That will be probably clarified in time.

[Blog Real]

I think the children of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex should have the title of Prince and Princess. But yes they should not be HRH, as they live abroad and Harry and Meghan are not active members of the Royal Family.

[Saragli]

I personally think the precedent set by Edward and Sophie shld have been set in stone with Letters Patent along time ago and this whole mess would have been avoided. But instead we're heading into a mixed bag system with the York's, Wessex's, and Sussex's.

[Archduchess Zelia]

Originally Posted by Sionevar

Existing LPs notwithstanding, I honestly don't see why the children should even have the title of Prince and Princess at this point in their lives. They are a baby and a toddler, aren't the children of the direct heir, are living outside of the UK, and are unlikely to ever serve as working royals. IMO, Charles should follow the Wessex example, leave them as Earl of Dumbarton and Lady Lilibet for the time being.

They already are Prince and Princess and became that the moment Charles ascended to the throne. Stripping them of their titles now because they don't live in the UK would be akin to stripping Eugenie of hers since she's moving to Portugal.

[Sunnystar]

Originally Posted by Claire

I have often wondered why this issue wasn't discussed and codified in a statement when the Sussex's were married and given their title. We have never had issue with the styling of the Philips or the Wessex's children. The conversation should have happened then and placed in writing to clarify any disagreement later.

However I have been told - clarification will be issued after the funeral. How far after the funeral is anyone guess. Whatever the decision it will cause issues on one side or the other - which should and could have been avoided.

My guess is that there was perhaps an assumption, at the time of the wedding, that Harry and Meghan understood their children would be styled the same as the Wessex children. I suspect there is a LOT that the "grey men" thought was understood by Harry, and Meghan by extension. I'm not sure where the breakdown in communication occurred.

Did Harry just dismiss the clear difference between the York girls and Wessex kids' styles/titles, thinking that the York model would apply to his kids? Or was he fine with the Wessex model and failed to have any conversation with Meghan about it, not realizing she felt differently? Or did the Queen think it was up to Charles to decide since the Sussex kids wouldn't get the HRH Prince/Princess style/titles until she was gone?

As it is, I think that an LP can be issued that makes sense based on working royal status.

Children and Grandchildren of the Monarch, Children of the Heir Apparent's heir who are either a) working royals that receive funding from the Sovereign Grant in support their activities on behalf of the Crown, or b) reached the age of retirement after serving as working royals that receive funding from the Sovereign Grant in support of their activities on behalf of the Crown for their entire adult lives, shall be styled as HRH Prince or Princess of the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland.

Children of Working Royals who are a) minors, b) completing their university education, or c) actively serving in the military shall be styled as HRH Prince or Princess of the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland.

All other Children and Grandchildren of the Monarch, Children of the Heir Apparent's Heir may be styled as Prince or Princess of the United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland if they so desire.

All other Great-Grandchildren of the Monarch may be styled as Lord or Lady if they so desire.

That way no one who is has a title/style right now loses it, for the most part. I'm sure that Eugenie, Beatrice, Louise & James don't care much one way or the other about the HRH. And, if Harry & Meghan find their way back into being working royals, well, their kids get upgraded to HRH. And, it gives Zara, Peter, et al the choice to "upgrade" or remain plain Mr/Mrs/Miss. And, it solves the gender bias issue.

[Meee]

Originally Posted by HRHHermione

Maybe it’s important to Meghan though, that the kids be titled? I’ve kind of given up trying to find any logic in what this couple seems to want.

That’s the only logic I can find. Charles started talking about slimming down back in the 00’s I believe, Harry must have been party to those discussions and happy with it himself (his children would be the equivalent to Beatrice and Eugenie, though I suppose it was easier when it was hypothetical children.) Some of his previous girlfriends likely would have preferred that had they married him.

As well as titles = more interest, surely it’s common sense that making yourself unpopular with the public when you are a parent could mean that the unhinged might be inclined to target your children to get to you, necessitating the security. If there haven’t been “tense discussions” at this time then The Sun should be ashamed of themselves.

Wasn’t the Yorks frequent travel abroad the major reason that their security fell into question? I’ve long thought Charles intended to remove HRH from his nieces but we’ll see.

When Archie not being allowed a title was mentioned and Earl not used, I simply concluded that it was regarded as not good enough. Perhaps hoping that refusing to use that style would mean being given HRH Prince/ss. I may be right, I may be wrong but that was my take.

[Sister Morphine]

If the Sussexes don't want to be working members of the BRF, that's their right. However, their children should not enjoy the benefits of having parents who are working royals. Title them like the children of a non-royal duke. So, Archie would be Earl Dumbarton and Lilibet would be Lady Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor. If at some point in the future, Harry and Meghan want to return to the UK and resume their former positions, if their kids are under 18, they stay titled as Earl Dumbarton and Lady Lilibet until they're adults. Afterward, they can have the HRH Prince/Princess.

Unlike a lot of people, I never had any opinion one way or the other about the two of them choosing to walk away and move to the U.S. However, if you walk away...you walk away. You don't get to pick and choose at the Royals a la Carte Restaurant what aspects of being a senior member of the royal family you want to have and what aspects of you don't.

[US Royal Watcher]

I know that sometimes I forget that the reason the Queen didn't style Archie and Lilibet as Prince and Princess during her lifetime is because their titles were contingent on Charles surviving her. If Charles had pre-deceased her, William would have been king and Archie and Lilibet would not have been eligible as nephew and niece of the king.

King Charles has probably already made a decision but won't formally announce it until after the period of mourning ends (a week after the funeral?). Personally, I don't think it make sense to style them as HRHs since they are being raised in the U.S.

Regardless, there is no double standard if Beatrice or Eugenie keep their titles, they received them as grandchildren born during the reign of the late monarch and lived in the UK at the time. This is very different from Archie and Lilibet's situation and the public mood has changed since the 80s.