Archduchess Zelia
Heir Apparent
- Joined
- Jun 12, 2009
- Messages
- 3,639
- City
- Copenhagen
- Country
- Denmark
William and Harry are working royals. Eugenie and Beatrice are not. So not sure that comparison holds much weight. Now if they were working then I could buy that argument. And frankly Harry should be compared to the likes of Charles's siblings while William to Charles. They both should be working way more than they are but that is a topic for a different thread.
And they are working royals why? Because they're expected to be working royals as the sons of the future monarch. That's my argument. That when you're close family to a future king, there will be different expectations of you. I'm not trying to start an argument about working royals. You and @Fijiro were arguing that Archie's situation should be compared to that of Peter and Zara's children because he isn't the grandson of the monarch right now and I'm saying that that just isn't how the monarchy works. Hence my example with Beatrice and Eugenie.
And yes, by all means, let's compare Harry to Charles' siblings. Because with those comparisons, Archie should, as I'm arguing, be compared to Peter and Zara rather than Savannah and Mia. I don't disagree that people are making mountains out of molehills (I mean, the world doesn't stop turning just because we don't know who his godparents are), but justifying Harry and Meghan's decision by arguing that we also don't know Savannah and Mia's godparents just doesn't work.
Last edited: