The Heir, The Spare and the “Baby Brain” -The Prince Harry and Meghan show rumbles on…

[Parsley Sage]

I think Coronations are only celebrated on major milestones like Silver, Golden, Diamond, Sapphire and Platinum Jubilees.

 

[once_upon]

I think the discussion of Archie's BD and Coronation is kind of silly. Unlike QE's Coronation celebrations that could be planned out in terms of all the moving pieces, King Charles Coronation dates had too many moving parts.

Could it have been any other date, sure/maybe/I don't know, but it only makes a difference in the future if someone makes it that way. OR..it could be presented as "Pappa King chose YOUR birthday to have this special thing happen. Isn't that super cool."

In the end, Charles gets crowned. Harry will be present. Archie will have a lifetime of birthdays - how many people share a birthday with his grandfather's Coronation

 

[kwanfan1818]

I was in London in the summer of 1977 during the Queen's Silver Jubilee, and London seemed to be in full swing celebration mode, with plenty of souvenirs yet to be sold. According to this article:

The actual anniversary of The Queen's Accession on 6 February 1952 was commemorated in church services throughout that month. The Queen spent the anniversary weekend at Windsor with her family and the full jubilee celebrations began in the summer of 1977.

According to the Wikipedia article, Coronation Day for Queen Elizabeth II was 14 months after ascension, on 2 June 1953. The Jubiilee was from the date of ascension, not the coronation. (ETA: I didn't know that and hadn't realized how long it was between ascension and coronation. I'd always thought it was a week later )

The article also said that there on 4 May 1977 there were parliamentary addresses of loyalty, on 17 May she embarked on a big tour, on 6 June there was a big bonfire, and on 7 June she rode The Gold State Coach to a Service of Thanksgiving at St. Paul's cathedral. So not exactly on the 24th anniversary of the coronation.

The Ascension month for Charles III would be when he officially became King, September 2022, and his Silver Jubilee year would be 2047, when Archie will be in his 30's . And, yes, Charles III will be in his '90's in 2047, but considering how long his parents and maternal grandmother lived, he may be celebrating it!

 

[airgelaal]

In fact, I can only think of a few personal reasons that are important enough to say: not on this day. And any birthdays are definitely not included in this list.

 

[taf2002]

Ok, y'all are going to think I'm a H&M uber but consider this. Charles made it clear that Spare should not have any criticisms of Camilla. So Harry had to know he was burning bridges with that book. The day after the book came out Charles ousted H&M from Frogmore. Coincidence? And maybe petty? Or deserved? YMMV

The date chosen insured that both Harry & Meghan couldn't come to London since they couldn't get the kind of security they needed to keep their kids safe. IMO Archie & Lilibet should be considered at the same level as Charlotte & Louis. None of the 4 are going to be king or queen & all are grandchildren of the king. But Archie & Lilibet are more in danger than William's kids because AFAIK they don't get death threats. But obviously Charles doesn't want to keep them safe, even in order for their parents to come to his coronation. I'm sure they are all delighted that Meghan isn't coming even though she didn't write that book.

 

[kwanfan1818]

The date chosen insured that both Harry & Meghan couldn't come to London since they couldn't get the kind of security they needed to keep their kids safe

But that would have been any date.

 

[taf2002]

But that would have been any date.

Not if Charles ok'd the security that Harry was willing to pay for.

 

[kwanfan1818]

Not if Charles ok'd the security that Harry was willing to pay for.

Why is that date-specific?

 

[taf2002]

Why is that date-specific?

It's not. But I still think the May 6 date is deliberate. They couldn't find a date within 8 months that worked?

 

[airgelaal]

Ok, y'all are going to think I'm a H&M uber but consider this. Charles made it clear that Spare should not have any criticisms of Camilla. So Harry had to know he was burning bridges with that book. The day after the book came out Charles ousted H&M from Frogmore. Coincidence? And maybe petty? Or deserved? YMMV

As if Harry allows any criticism of Meghan. Like father, like son

 

[mattiecat13]

I get the security concerns, travelling with little kids, maybe even that Harry and Meghan think it might be overwhelming for them, but at the same time, it was just 5 years ago that Charles was the one who walked Meghan down the aisle on one of the most important days Harry and Meghan's lives, such a wonderful moment, so it's just sad to me that she won't be there for the coronation.

I don’t believe it’s “security concerns” that are keeping Meg and the kids from going to the coronation. There is no way the royal family and their security would allow something bad to happen to the King’s grandchildren, whether their parents are working royals or not. If Harry and Meg wanted her to be there with the kids, they would go. That they don’t is fine (personally, I think Meg’s been unfairly blamed for a lot of the rancor) and their choice.

The entire situation is truly sad and unfortunate for all involved.

 

[canbelto]

They were offered a place to stay in Buckingham Palace, which definitely has round the clock security.

 

[becca]

I don’t think Charles picked the date to ensure Meghan and Harry didn’t come if anything I think he picked the date hoping they would bring his grandkids. I don’t think the grandkids were wanted at the ceremony but I do think there are plenty of events that Charles would have wanted him at.

Also I think the date was mainly picked because it was the best date coincides with another Bank holiday? good weather etc.
It’s probably for the best Meghan isn’t coming way to much drama

 

[MacMadame]

This opinion piece has a different perspective on all of this:

Opinion | Harry in London, Meghan in California: The ugly coronation compromise​

https://wapo.st/3GPGEsy (gifted)

 

[morqet]

Not if Charles ok'd the security that Harry was willing to pay for.

How many times, it's not up to Charles to decide who gets armed close protection security, it's up to the Home Office, and it's only for the most senior royals, very senior politicians (i.e a normal MP doesn't get anything) and senior overseas diplomats. No one else, even if they are willing to pay, can have armed guards.

But as others have pointed out, at official engagements like the Coronation and when staying at Royal residences, Harry (and Meghan & the children) would have full protection.

 

[ballettmaus]

Have Harry and Meghan actually said that he's coming alone because of security or is that speculation?

 

[Mugs]

It depends on how often the coronation is celebrated. If it's every year, then, yes, it's unfortunate. Because Archie won't remember this birthday. But if every year most of his relatives are too busy to celebrate his birthday because it's Coronation Day, then over time he could become resentful.

My mother was born in Dec and it still upsets her that everyone always would combine her birthday and Christmas presents and that her family was too busy to give her the kind of birthday her siblings got. And she's in her 80s.

I had a friend growing up who's birthday was right before Christmas. Her parents decided to begin celebrating her "half birthday". So instead of December 15, her birthday was celebrated June 15. Better weather, not quite as busy a time of year and only an occasional conflict.

 

[Mugs]

Ok, y'all are going to think I'm a H&M uber but consider this. Charles made it clear that Spare should not have any criticisms of Camilla. So Harry had to know he was burning bridges with that book. The day after the book came out Charles ousted H&M from Frogmore. Coincidence? And maybe petty? Or deserved? YMMV

The date chosen insured that both Harry & Meghan couldn't come to London since they couldn't get the kind of security they needed to keep their kids safe. IMO Archie & Lilibet should be considered at the same level as Charlotte & Louis. None of the 4 are going to be king or queen & all are grandchildren of the king. But Archie & Lilibet are more in danger than William's kids because AFAIK they don't get death threats. But obviously Charles doesn't want to keep them safe, even in order for their parents to come to his coronation. I'm sure they are all delighted that Meghan isn't coming even though she didn't write that book.

But your logic doesn't make sense:

• H&M, along with the kids, came to England for QE's jubilee. Why was the appropriate level of security available for the jubilee but not available for the coronation?
• The family stayed at Frogmore for the jubilee. Even if Frogmore isn't available for the coronation due to lack of furniture/creature comforts or poor timing, H&M+kids could have stayed at Buckingham, Kensington or Windsor castle.
• The children of the direct heir are treated differently than children of non-direct heirs. That's not to say one grandchild is loved more than another; it's just that way it is with royals. Think about how William and Harry were always in the spotlight but Beatrice and Eugenie, not so much.
• Harry is a secondary royal. That status was partially imposed upon him when William and Kate started having kids. That status was solidified when H&M walked away from royal duties. Harry needs to accept his status, and the bad and good that status comes with (the bad - he doesn't have many "royal benefits"; the good - he had the freedom to walk away from a life he found suffocating).

 

[Tesla]

I had a friend growing up who's birthday was right before Christmas. Her parents decided to begin celebrating her "half birthday". So instead of December 15, her birthday was celebrated June 15. Better weather, not quite as busy a time of year and only an occasional conflict.

My husband wanted to do this for our daughter, who was born just after Christmas, but I don't like this idea. Birthdays are special days. Every year, I make sure her birthday is special and separate from Christmas.

 

[Jenny]

Well the Queen celebrated her official birthday in June, not her actual birthday in April, and apparently Charles will do the same, celebrating in June instead of November. I just read that it's a tradition going back to the 1700s, and it's literally just to allow for better weather for a parade!

Perhaps a more convenient date that doesn't interfere with the Coronation can be selected for Archie's official birthday.

 

[MacMadame]

Have Harry and Meghan actually said that he's coming alone because of security or is that speculation?

Harry and Meghan haven't said anything as far as I can tell.

 

[becca]

I have the same birthday as my grandma. Always we would have a big birthday party for her. I was the secondary after thought.

Poor me- actually not poor Me. My Aunts and Uncles would be like oh it’s your birthday here is some money.

So I got money for my birthday my brothers got nada.

Sharing a birthday was great!

I don’t think every birthday is going to be coronation. And now far more people will remember Archie’s.

It’s not necessarily a bad thing folks think it is.

 

[MLIS]

Birthdays are a little different because you generally can't choose the day you're born, unlike the coronation date. But I share a birthday with my grandmother, and it has always been the greatest joy for both of us. Makes it much more special and we always try to spend it together. My aunt has always resented on my grandmother's behalf that she "has" to share her day with someone else and often tries to arrange special things "just for" my grandmother (her mother), excluding me. My grandmother
always takes me aside and whispers how much she loves sharing a birthday with me.

I have a friend whose birthday is right after Christmas, and it was always celebrated as an afterthought, and she is now hypersensitive to any perceived "lessening" of her birthday, insists on a big, expensive celebration every year, and is obsessive about no combined gifts, ever, there must be separate Christmas and birthday gifts that were purchased at different times and have nothing to do with each other. The amount of energy she expends on this every year is exhausting. My kid's birthday is just before Christmas. We have always made sure to celebrate it separately, but played up the joy of the time of year and now they love having their birthday at Christmas time.

Like anything in life, it's what you make of it (or in this case what Archie's parents make of it, since he is too little). They can present it to him as a special bond with his grandpa, or they can present it to him as an insult. He'll grow up believing whichever interpretation they tell him. The anniversary of the coronation won't be celebrated every year the way a birthday will, it'll just be the big jubilee years (I think the first one the Queen celebrated was her 25th? In 25 years Archie will be a grown man and presumably able to understand that more than one thing can happen on a day).

 

[airgelaal]

I don't celebrate my birthday and didn't celebrate it even as a child. I don't even like being congratulated. All people are different.

 

[On My Own]

The birthday industry is truly a capitalist ploy.

 

[Karen-W]

The birthday industry is truly a capitalist ploy.

Like Valentine's Day, Mother's Day, etc, lol.

 

[taf2002]

I saw an article today blasting Prince Harry because he's "dissing King Charles" for leaving the UK immediately after the coronation. The same tabloid has made it very clear that Harry is not invited to any of the other festivities. He's not in the parade or the balcony or any of the parties. So why should he stay? But leaving is "disrespecting" the king. And Meghan is being blasted for not going at all, after this tabloid made it clear she wasn't wanted. They can't win.

 

[Andora]

This opinion piece has a different perspective on all of this:

Opinion | Harry in London, Meghan in California: The ugly coronation compromise​

https://wapo.st/3GPGEsy (gifted)

Thank you for sharing.

It reminds me of what I've read in the past that William & Charles (in particular), being spoiled narcissists imho, weren't fond of H&M's popularity. Word was William wasn't comfortable with Catherine's popularity early in their marriage, which changed when the palace could showcase her more to combat positive press for H&M.

I think Meghan staying home is good for all involved, but it's not necessarily out of anything magnanimous on either side.

I had a friend growing up who's birthday was right before Christmas. Her parents decided to begin celebrating her "half birthday". So instead of December 15, her birthday was celebrated June 15. Better weather, not quite as busy a time of year and only an occasional conflict.

As someone with a birthday on December 18th-- and a brother with a June birthday, the prick-- that sounds wonderful.

My husband wanted to do this for our daughter, who was born just after Christmas, but I don't like this idea. Birthdays are special days. Every year, I make sure her birthday is special and separate from Christmas.

Eh - birthdays are special but Christmas certainly takes it out of everyone. And I doubt people in her life will hold the same space for her. At least it's after Christmas, so gifts can be got on Boxing Day sales.

Like Valentine's Day, Mother's Day, etc, lol.

What on earth. Sure, birthday celebrations can go overboard thanks to big bad Halmark, but how on earth is it comparable to holidays literally devised by others?

 

[Judy]

I can understand Meghan not attending. People need to realize how extremely dysfunctional this “family” is. I would personally hate it. Money does not buy happiness.

I always think what if I didn’t have freedom to choose a career or whatever you wanted to do. Or the simple decision if I wanted to stay in for a weekend. Or being under a media spotlight ? or omg you’ve gained a few pounds. No freaking way for me.

 

[airgelaal]

After the book and all the interviews, I can assume that the family will not be very happy to see either Harry or Meghan. Not everyone likes it when everyone around discusses your family's dirty laundry. And many people will like it even less that what you said later can be read in a book.
If the family is so toxic, then why do children need titles? And they didn't give up their titles either. How convenient...