top of page
  • Writer's pictureAdmin

My solution to the "slimmed down monarchy" that no one asked for

So, it's not really a secret there have been endless conversations about a "slimmed down monarchy" for decades now in the British Royal Family. We are seeing that concept put into practice with changing or removing titles from non-direct heirs in both Sweden and Denmark. It's a popular idea now as it helps to cut costs and makes it abundantly clear where the future of the monarchy lies. It also helps since most of the general public aren't able to/aren't interested in keeping up with massive extended families.

But there are also endless debates about how to go about "slimming" down a monarchy. Obviously, in Denmark, there's been a fair bit of drama about the Queens decision. But in Sweden, everyone in the family seemed to support the King's decision, at least publicly. In the U.K. there have been debates and arguments about it for years.

The first I remember ever hearing about it was in 2010 when the York Princesses security was removed since they wouldn't be "working royals". In 2012 the letters patent issued by Queen Elizabeth II were very carefully worded to only extend titles to the children of the "eldest son" of the Prince of Wales.

"The Queen has been pleased by Letters Patent under the Great Seal of the Realm dated 31 December 2012 to declare that all the children of the eldest son of The Prince of Wales should have and enjoy the style, title and attribute of Royal Highness with the titular dignity of Prince or Princess prefixed to their Christian names or with such other titles of honour."

The conversation was ignited again in 2019 ahead of Archie's birth when the media speculated if another letters patent would be issues to grant titles to the Princes of Wales second son. Following the accession of King Charles III which saw William & Catherine's titles change to become the Prince and Princess of Wales (and subsequently their kids titles changed) there have been debates about other members of the family and whether or not they would now receive titles or not.

As of now, that question has not been answered but I have a proposition to make this entire matter as easy as possible (as easy at titles cane ever be that is) and it looks like this:

Okay, but this still looks confusing. What do the colours mean? What's with the clipart? What is happening? Allow me to explain.

This is a look at what the British Royal Family could look like 20+ years from now (hence the clipart meant to symbolize future spouses/kids) and I think the best way to handle "slimming down" is to make it clear right now where everyone stands so that there aren't endless debates and confusion in the future.

So what do the colours mean? The first two categories are easier: Purple and Blue

Purple - the monarch and their direct heirs which means they either are, or are expected to be sovereign one day. Therefore, they are titled either Prince/Princess from birth and they are (or will be upon reaching adulthood) working royals. They receive funding from the sovereign grant to support their work.

Blue - Consort or partner of future monarch. They are titled to match their partner and they are working royals who receive funding from the sovereign grant to support their work.

Green, Red, and Black is where it gets a bit more complicated but bear with me and I'll do my very best to explain my plan.

Green - Children of the monarch or direct heir. These are royals who are (in all likelihood) are never going to be monarch and are going to spend a lot of their life slipping further through the line of succession. But their parent and their sibling are expected to be monarch and therefore they are still relevant and here is what I propose:

At a predetermined time (maybe around 30 years old but definitely before marriage) they are able to opt-in or out of working royal duties. The decision they make will obviously determine status for their spouse as well and will impact funding and titles for their future in line with their decision.

If they decide to be working royals, they can receive funding from sovereign grant and they can retain their current titles or be gifted new titles upon marriage (as was the case with William & Catherine). They can continue as working royals until they are ready to retire (maybe pre-determine this as well and say 70?) and their retirement will (in all likelihood) coincide with the next generation of Royals stepping up.

If they opt out of working for the firm then they do not receive funds and do not represent the monarchy or sovereign in any capacity. If they opt-out they can still obviously attend family events but no governmental, military, official events. Essentially, they become private individuals which also means their titles are either downgraded or put into abeyance at the time and are no longer used (which they will obviously know and understand when they make that decision). This way, non-working royals do not have titles in equal or greater status to working royals and they are able to live their lives with the freedom that being title-free affords. It also protects the Crown from a lot of non-working royals running around with titles.

Allowing them opt-in or out at a predetermined time is done with the goal of avoiding any messy exits or misunderstandings about their role in the working portion of the family. Obviously, regardless of what they decide, they are still an important part of the personal family.

Red - Non-direct line grandchildren of Sovereign. These are Private citizens and do not receive funding from sovereign grant and are not titled Prince/Princess. If their parents want, I see no issue with them using a lesser subsidiary title as a child of a Duke or Earl (similar to how Lady Louise and James, Viscount Severn are titled). But this is a decision parents have to make when the child is born in order to avoid the whole issue of letting them pick when they turn eighteen or something.

If these kids are given a subsidiary title at birth they can elect to drop it when they are adults should they want to but the key here is these titles can't be upgraded later. One other addendum on this, if the grandchildren's parents have opted out of working duties (which would happen before marriage in my solution as pointed out under the "green" category) then no titles are available since their parents titles would have already been downgraded or removed. Hopefully this is all making sense so far.

Obviously, grandkids can still attend and are welcome at family events (weddings, funerals, christmas, etc.) but they do not attend any governmental, military or otherwise official royal events not designated for family.

Black - Children of Sovereign who opt out of Royal Duties. In my solution this decision would be made either at age 30 or definitely before they are married but they are now private citizens. This would mean they receive no public funds and their personal work/life do not represent the monarchy in any capacity. Their titles would also be downgraded or put into abeyance when they made the decision to opt out, per the green category. They are obviously attend family events but no governmental, military, or other official royal events.

So does that make more sense now?

Essentially the goal here is to try to lay out a protocol that is clearer and less sudden than what we've been seeing with Royal Houses while giving royals further down the line of succession the most choice possible and support to live a fulfilling life either working with the firm or determining their own path. The biggest key is that the that all parties have the most amount of time to prepare and adjust as possible with clear parameters about the ramifications of the decision that they make.

Hopefully that answers any and all questions about that graphic and about my solution but if you have questions or comments, let me know! Do you think this could work or do you think I'm being too optimistic?

bottom of page