Titles and Styles of the Sussex Family 1

[Prinsara]

Philip didn't have to give up his titles to marry the heiress; he did it on the judgment of mainly his xenophobic-scarred Uncle Dickie that it was viewed as better Elizabeth should marry someone "British" (educated and military), rather than a "foreigner".

 

[Toledo]

We all know that security and titles aren’t really linked, but some people still think that. It’s possible that it is something Harry believes that he is entitled to because he’s never lost state-funded security until now. From that, it can be understood that he just takes things for granted and probably hasn’t considered that not all members of the BRF get security like he used to get.

That's a good point, Harry has been within the HRH protection umbrella all his life and he didn't know life outside of having bodyguards around. That came apparent when they moved to Canada and its government practically told them pay your own staff 'cause we don't cover satellite Royals over here.

Now in the USA playing the strange game of royal celebrities without royal duties they attract the news seeking drama to sell magazines or TV shows. So basically, they dug their own hole and can't get out. Maybe he equates a HRH added in for the kids, while living in the USA, includes an UK paid security for the family.

Had they only stayed at Frogmore I assume Archie and Lilibet would have been safer and, while their parents do royal duties around, stay with relatives like Grandpa Charles or Uncle William's home with their first cousins. Part of the titles drama for the children has to be with the distance plus the parents away from official duties to represent the UK or its King.

 

[FigTree]

Philip didn't have to give up his titles to marry the heiress; he did it on the judgment of mainly his xenophobic-scarred Uncle Dickie that it was viewed as better Elizabeth should marry someone "British" (educated and military), rather than a "foreigner".

Well…I think it was mainly the essentially German family that may have swung it. It was literally the end of the war.

 

[Prinsara]

Well…I think it was mainly the essentially German family that may have swung it. It was literally the end of the war.

But neither Greece nor Denmark were on the Axis side, were they...? Philip didn't have any German titles — and he'd just spent six years fighting for the Allies.

And I think this is getting a bit away from Archie and Lilibet. Philip giving up his titles has been argued in a few threads like British Titles and Styles already.

 

[Mbruno]

Well…I think it was mainly the essentially German family that may have swung it. It was literally the end of the war.

But Prince Philip's titles were not German. He was Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark.

 

[FigTree]

But Prince Philip's titles were not German. He was Prince Philip of Greece and Denmark.

The Nazi relations. The whole lot of it. His mother was German. That the actual title itself wasn’t German I don’t think mattered.

 

[Prinsara]

The Nazi relations. The whole lot of it. His mother was German. That the actual title itself wasn’t German I don’t think mattered.

His mother was the daughter of the First Sea Lord and was later given one of the highest honors Israel has for saving a Jewish family during the Holocaust and putting her life at risk.

But her father lost his job and titles for being German during the First World War, and her brother never got over it, and the second war triggered everything again.

Almost makes the Sussex kids look minor.

 

[FigTree]

His mother was the daughter of the First Sea Lord and was later given one of the highest honors Israel has for saving a Jewish family during the Holocaust and putting her life at risk.

But her father lost his job and titles for being German during the First World War, and her brother never got over it, and the second war triggered everything again.

Almost makes the Sussex kids look minor.

Yeah but it was 1947. I think it’s asking too much for people to have much perspective then.

Anyway Archie and Lili…doesn’t really matter but if Charles let’s them use them because he doesn’t want to annoy H and M then that doesn’t bode well for his future. You have to make the tough decisions and those decisions should be in line with the vision.

 

[American Observer7]

Yeah but it was 1947. I think it’s asking too much for people to have much perspective then.

Anyway Archie and Lili…doesn’t really matter but if Charles let’s them use them because he doesn’t want to annoy H and M then that doesn’t bode well for his future. You have to make the tough decisions and those decisions should be in line with the vision.

And just why should Charles not allow Archie and Lili to use their titles? He claims to love them then he needs to treat them right.

 

[HRHHermione]

And just why should Charles not allow Archie and Lili to use their titles? He claims to love them then he needs to treat them right.

I think it’s a very big mistake to conflate familial love with the obligations of the monarchy. Did the lack of title mean the Queen didn’t love Peter or Zara? Were Louise and James less valued than her other grandchildren?

Any decision made about titles for these kids will be made to align with what’s best for the monarchy. This has nothing whatsoever to do with a grandfather’s love.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

And just why should Charles not allow Archie and Lili to use their titles? He claims to love them then he needs to treat them right.

Did people think that when the King of Sweden took the HRH from most of his grandkids that he liked Victoria’s children more than the other grandchildren? No? So why should taking away the titles be equated with loving the children less? What has Charles done wrong? He hasn’t done anything regarding their titles at all. No one allows for titles to be given nilly willy these days. Also Harry complained about royal life, why should his kids have titles from an institution he claims gave him problems?

 

[Iluvbertie]

I'm asking a question that might seem silly, but I don't know the answer. Prince Phillip was a Prince of Greece and Denmark on his own, thus:
Can these Greek/Danish Princely titles be carried over the male line to Charles-->William & Harry and their respective children? In this thread's subject, to Harry's children?

I'm thinking of the Romanov tradition that after a certain generation the male line goes from Grand Duke + Romanov to Prince + Romanov surname.

Philip couldn't pass on Greek or Danish HRHs as he himself had already given them up before he was engaged. None of his descendants were ever able to use Prince or Princess of Greece and Denmark as a result.

He was Lt Philip Mountbatten for most of 1947 and that is actually what is listed on the wedding programme - the marriage of HRH The Princess Elizabeth to Lt Philip Mountbatten as being given the HRH Duke of Edinburgh styles and titles was done too late for that to be included on the programme.

 

[HenRach Dominion]

I think there would be a weird sort of symmetry with HM The King removing the HRH from Archie and Lilibet.

Unless I'm mistaken, the last time British titles were outright stripped from British Royal Family members (rather than just not given) was when several members had German sympathies (due to being German) while England was at war with them. They were seen as betraying England in a similar way that the Sussexes have constantly been accused of betraying the very foundation of the British Royal Family. Stripping Archie and Lilibet of their titles would be a blatant way to show that they, by association with their parents, betray the ideals that the BRF strive to keep, similar to their German enemy-of-war cousins.

Sure, HM The King could go the Lady Louise/Viscount Severn route where Archie and Lilibet have the styling HRH Prince and Princess yet never use it, since that would leave the same amount of people using HRH as before rather than increase it, but that wouldn't go far enough to punish The Sussexes for speaking out against the BRF as much as removing their titles would. No, Archie and Lilibet should experience the same fate as their distant cousins who actively fought against England.

 

[HRHHermione]

I think there would be a weird sort of symmetry with HM The King removing the HRH from Archie and Lilibet.

Unless I'm mistaken, the last time British titles were outright stripped from British Royal Family members (rather than just not given) was when several members had German sympathies (due to being German) while England was at war with them. They were seen as betraying England in a similar way that the Sussexes have constantly been accused of betraying the very foundation of the British Royal Family. Stripping Archie and Lilibet of their titles would be a blatant way to show that they, by association with their parents, betray the ideals that the BRF strive to keep, similar to their German enemy-of-war cousins.

Sure, HM The King could go the Lady Louise/Viscount Severn route where Archie and Lilibet have the styling HRH Prince and Princess yet never use it, since that would leave the same amount of people using HRH as before rather than increase it, but that wouldn't go far enough to punish The Sussexes for speaking out against the BRF as much as removing their titles would. No, Archie and Lilibet should experience the same fate as their distant cousins who actively fought against England.

This idea of removing titles as punishment seems equally ridiculous to me as the idea of giving them out of love.

There’s a middle path here and it’s one that is far more logical: we have known for a very long time that the monarchy would be slimmed down. Titles for Harry’s children (outside of their courtesy titles as children of a Duke) were on the fence when he was a working royal. Now that he’s not, it tips more towards the “no titles” side.

It’s not punishing the kids like Nazi relatives and it’s not a withholding of love. Decisions about this will be practical.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I think there would be a weird sort of symmetry with HM The King removing the HRH from Archie and Lilibet.

Unless I'm mistaken, the last time British titles were outright stripped from British Royal Family members (rather than just not given) was when several members had German sympathies (due to being German) while England was at war with them. They were seen as betraying England in a similar way that the Sussexes have constantly been accused of betraying the very foundation of the British Royal Family. Stripping Archie and Lilibet of their titles would be a blatant way to show that they, by association with their parents, betray the ideals that the BRF strive to keep, similar to their German enemy-of-war cousins.

Sure, HM The King could go the Lady Louise/Viscount Severn route where Archie and Lilibet have the styling HRH Prince and Princess yet never use it, since that would leave the same amount of people using HRH as before rather than increase it, but that wouldn't go far enough to punish The Sussexes for speaking out against the BRF as much as removing their titles would. No, Archie and Lilibet should experience the same fate as their distant cousins who actively fought against England.

A bit extreme.

George V removed HRH Prince from British as well as German cousins who didn't meet his criteria.

Parliament stripped the German traitors of their peerage titles ... and they had clearly committed treason by 'taking up arms against The King' which is one of the clear actions that constitutes treason in the UK.

Speaking badly about the royal family isn't treason under the act.

The idea of stripping HRHs isn't new, has been done before and will, not doubt be done again in time. Charles has been rumoured for about 30 years now of wanting to remove the HRHs from the York princesses and I suspect if he were to issue the LPs that did strip anyone he would include the York's as well as Louise and James.

 

[Sister Morphine]

And just why should Charles not allow Archie and Lili to use their titles? He claims to love them then he needs to treat them right.

"Treating them right" is the wrong phraseology here. It's implying that if he disallowed their using the HRH, he'd be treating them wrong. Which just isn't true. If they're spending the bulk of their lives in the United States, their titles and styles have no place here. No one here cares. Well, I mean, we watch things like funerals and weddings on TV because they're interesting, but we don't care in the sense that we don't think someone named Princess Whomever is inherently better than someone named Miss Whatever. It's not going to give them a leg up over anyone. Teachers won't give them better grades, employers won't hire them over someone else, they won't get dates because of it. Well, maybe that last one.

If their parents have no intention of being working royals again, much less living in the UK, then what's the point? So they can introduce their kids as Prince Archie and Princess Lilibet at the PTA meeting?

 

[Toledo]

And just why should Charles not allow Archie and Lili to use their titles? He claims to love them then he needs to treat them right.

A caring parent like Charles has been protecting his sons from everything and everyone that resembles the people that run the media and news organizations. Like the ones that hunted down their mother. Remember the photographers jumping on the remains of the car for a snapshot to sell? Those ones. Charles, or any good parent around, does not need to claim love for his kids, he just does.

With H&M living here in the USA there are other factors to add in his discretion to authorize any new titles to precede their names. Specifically, the Hollywood + Influencer + monetizing lifestyle to become financially independent. This effort I don't blame because is a way to show they can be self-sufficient like so many other extended members of the royal families are doing it.

The problem for H&M lays in the style carries obligations toward the UK and the King. If is stated only working royals can use the HRH style to differentiate family occupations, then H&M are out of luck.

So, I assume then the need to use that style on Lilibet and Archie is more to please the parents like here you go, I got two spare HRH to give you with no conditions. Queen Elizabeth set the example for King Charles to follow, the needs of the UK go before their personal inclinations. And having these toddlers get any more attention in the USA makes them a lightning rod to attract the worst the Hollywood lifestyle offers.

 

[SirGyamfi1]

People need to stop thinking that having an HRH and titles or not makes a member of the BRF more liked or less loved. This has absolutely nothing to do with love, but IMO an act of self-preservation and protection. What’s the significance of titles to children under 5 who don’t understand? No one should come and say anything to me about birthrights because that ship sailed ages ago, the age of deference ended the moment the Queen ascended the throne. Why should they accept titles from an institution that their parents said was toxic and unkind to them? That makes no sense, but maybe it’s just me.

 

[Toledo]

In my Edge browser/MSN news front page H&M and this quest for having Charles declare officially their children Prince and Princess appears daily as click bait. It's annoying but the fact some news agencies, like Dailymotion, create these click baits is a telltale how they manipulate opinions to get what they want, the next generation of royals to exploit in the tabloids.

 

[TLLK]

And just why should Charles not allow Archie and Lili to use their titles? He claims to love them then he needs to treat them right.

Please remember that Archie and Lilibet have had titles since birth but their parents opted not to use them. Their son would be the Earl of Dumbarton and their daughter would be known as Lady Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor. However the Sussexes opted to have their children be known as Master Archie and Miss Lilibet.

 

[Iluvbertie]

And just why should Charles not allow Archie and Lili to use their titles? He claims to love them then he needs to treat them right.

When Archie was born his parents said they wanted him to be Master Archie Mountbatten-Windsor. Charles is respecting their decision by continuing to refer to him, and his sister, according to the publicly stated wishes of their parents - Master and Miss.

He is treating them right. He is treating them according to the stated desires of their parents.

 

[American Observer7]

Please remember that Archie and Lilibet have had titles since birth but their parents opted not to use them. Their son would be the Earl of Dumbarton and their daughter would be known as Lady Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor. However the Sussexes opted to have their children be known as Master Archie and Miss Lilibet.

Maybe they did not want Archie having a lesser title than that of a Prince. Lady and Earl titles are not Princely titles.

Please remember that Meghan told Oprah Winfrey that it was not their decision for Archie (and now Lilibet) not to have a princely title that was his birth right. When he grew up or hold enough to understand that he (they) could decide whether to use the title of Prince and Princess or not.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Maybe they did not want Archie having a lesser title than that of a Prince. Lady and Earl titles are not Princely titles.

Please remember that Meghan told Oprah Winfrey that it was not their decision for Archie (and now Lilibet) not to have a princely title that was his birth right. When he grew up or hold enough to understand that he (they) could decide whether to use the title of Prince and Princess or not.

Prince is not a title but a style

Prince was NOT Archie's birthright. As a male line GREAT-grandchild of a monarch (other than via the eldest son of the Prince of Wales) Archie was entitled to two titles - Lord or Earl but not the style of Prince. Lili was only entitled to be Lady.

He only became entitled to it when The late Queen died. Protocol also states that it isn't done to change titles (other than for the monarch and heir apparent) until at least the end of the royal period of mourning.

It has been known for DECADES that Charles wants to reduce the number of HRHs including the idea of removing HRH from the York princesses - the children of the SECOND son of QEII. If Harry had half a brain cell (and I am not convinced he doesn't even have that much of a brain) he would know that his father's wish was that his children would have that right removed shortly after Charles became King along with removing it from his brother's children.

 

[Iluvbertie]

The Palace press release was the official request. It wouldn't have been put out otherwise or would have been countered immediately. There are a lot of checks and balances on palace press releases to ensure accuracy.

What Meghan told Oprah showed that she hadn't done any research as Archie was not entitled to being a Prince while the Queen was alive. She didn't know the rules around who is and isn't a Prince/Princess.

The 1917 and 2012 rules about who is and who isn't entitled to being HRH Prince/Princess:

1. Children of a sovereign of the UK

2. Male line GRANDCHILDREN of a sovereign of the UK. (Archie didn't meet this requirement until 8th September this year and so it wasn't his 'birth right' at all)

3. The children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales (2012 LPs extended that right to all the children while the 1917 rules only applied to the eldest son). Without the 2012 LPs Charlotte and Louis wouldn't have been born HRH Princess and HRH Prince but as Lady Charlotte and Lord Louis.

Meghan and Harry's lack of understanding of these rules - which any monarch can change at any time they like as they aren't the laws of the land - shows how poorly educated in these matters these two were and probably still are.

 

[Denville]

Please remember that Archie and Lilibet have had titles since birth but their parents opted not to use them. Their son would be the Earl of Dumbarton and their daughter would be known as Lady Lilibet Mountbatten-Windsor. However the Sussexes opted to have their children be known as Master Archie and Miss Lilibet.

strictly speaking Archie would not be Earl of Dumbarton. That title belongs to Harry but by custom, his eldest son could use it. However, the Sussexes chose not to use those titles

 

[Mbruno]

Maybe they did not want Archie having a lesser title than that of a Prince. Lady and Earl titles are not Princely titles.

Please remember that Meghan told Oprah Winfrey that it was not their decision for Archie (and now Lilibet) not to have a princely title that was his birth right. When he grew up or hold enough to understand that he (they) could decide whether to use the title of Prince and Princess or not.

At time of their births, Archie and Lilibet were not entitled to be Prince/Princess as they were only great-grandchildren of a Sovereign and not children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales. So I don't see why Meghan even raised that issue with Oprah (she was ranting about a "birthright" that her children did not have).

Most people think that they have now acquired the right to the princely title, as children of a son of a British sovereign, although a minority of media outlets, e.g. The Sun, disagree based on a different interpretation of the LPs of 1917, see yesterday's discussion.

 

[Marengo]

Closed for review.

 

[Alison H]

https://www.ok.co.uk/royal/prince-harry-childrens-titles-delayed-28140338

OK magazine's reporting that Harry wants Archie and Lilibet to be able to decide on their own titles when they reach 18, like Louise and James. That would avoid any immediate arguments, which might appeal given the row currently going on in Denmark, but wouldn't really resolve the issue of who is entitled to be HRH Prince/Princess going forward.

 

[Saragli]

https://www.ok.co.uk/royal/prince-harry-childrens-titles-delayed-28140338

OK magazine's reporting that Harry wants Archie and Lilibet to be able to decide on their own titles when they reach 18, like Louise and James. That would avoid any immediate arguments, which might appeal given the row currently going on in Denmark, but wouldn't really resolve the issue of who is entitled to be HRH Prince/Princess going forward.

Following a precedent set by the Wessex's AND issuing LP's stating that going forward only children of the heir, or heirs heir, will be titled appears like a really sensible compromise. Of course it kicks the issue of Archie and Lilibet's titles down the road, but I imagine by that time, reason will have kicked in and they will also follow the Wessex route and choose to not use those titles (but now that on the inside they still are HRH Prince/ss).

 

[Kataryn]

I read an article in todays Times that Buckingham Palace removed the HRH from Meghan and Harry on their website. They mentioned Meghan's was removed first.



https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/prince-harry-japan-sports-summit-2023-2qbhfh5bw