Girl Power

Tags

Great Kate Wait, Kate, Prince William, Princess, Princess Anne, Queen Elizabeth, Royal Baby

As the Great Kate Wait of 2015 drags on, giving a whole new meaning to Kate’s somewhat unfair nickname of the noughties, “Waity Katie,” bets on the arrival of a new baby a girl continue to be placed at a feverish rate. As of today, 70% of those laying down their hard earned cash are convinced the world is on the verge of welcoming a new princess.

I suspect different parties are hoping for a girl for different reasons. Based on the so called “Kate Effect” and subsequent “George Effect” the great British High Street is no doubt salivating at the prospect of record sales should HRH Princess (fill in the blank) of Cambridge be spotted in one of their outfits. As one headline blared this week, “Baby Girl Could be Worth $1.5 Billion to the Country.” Magazine and newspaper editors are well aware of the dramatic rise in sales when a royal baby hits the cover, especially a little girl. And then there’s Disney, which will always appreciate princesses in the zeitgeist, but as with all things relating to the monarchy, there is also a far greater historical significance should a baby girl arrive.

There have been thirty-four kings and only six queens over the course of the British Monarchy’s thousand-year history, and yet some of the nation’s most enlightened times have occurred during periods of queenship. Elizabeth I led the country through the Golden Age, and Victoria and Elizabeth II – the two longest reigning monarchs – both made their mark with perhaps the most illustrious and progressive legacies of all. While it is unlikely this child will ever be crowned, as the daughter of the second-in-line to the throne, her role will be significant. Prince Charles has made no secret of his desire to slim down the monarchy, but in looking at his family’s immediate bloodline – William, Harry and George – it stands to be a heavily male dominated one. In an institution viewed by some as archaic and out of touch, it is imperative to have a strong female presence.

Princess Anne – Baby Cambridge’s great-aunt – grew up with three brothers, and was once described as, “The greatest king the country never had.” She is patron of more than two hundred charitable organizations and carries out approximately five hundred public engagements per year. A notable equestrian, she won two silver medals and a gold at the European Eventing Championships, and she was the first member of the Royal Family to compete in the Olympic Games. More importantly she has supported her mother throughout her reign, flown the flag for Britain and promoted brand Windsor around the world. As the only girl born to Elizabeth and Philip, she has matched and often surpassed the accomplishments of her brothers.

Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie, also true blood princesses, are not “working members” of the royal family and generally only roll out for State and Ceremonial occasions. So, yes, it would be nice for the baby to be a girl so that we can all ooh and ah over poufy dresses, fairy wings and ballet shoes (although as a Windsor she’s more likely to be mucking out stables and shooting pheasant), but in truth the birth of a girl matters on a far deeper level. The monarchy needs a baby girl to fill the female void of future generations.

The twentieth century was ushered in by Queen Victoria and the twenty-first by Queen Elizabeth II. Should George live to eighty-seven he will be the first monarch of the twenty-second century, but as I have said before the British monarchy is anything but predictable. If punters are right and William and Kate do announce the birth of a baby girl the true and rightful “spare,” it’s certainly possible that a seventh Queen may ring in the year 2100.

In the event the couple welcomes a boy, however, I sincerely hope there won’t be a collective groan of disappointment heard around the world, after all on the few occasions we have seen Prince George he has been a veritable treat.  The birth of any baby is cause for celebration regardless of gender, race, religion or indeed status, and as Prince Harry, the world’s most eligible bachelor has shown, naked billiards sells magazines too!

Di-nastically Speaking

Tags

Baby Names, Diana, England, Kate, Princess of Wales, Queen, Royal Baby, William

Much like ardent young royal watchers of today, enamored by the Duchess of Cambridge’s very being, I was similarly enamored by Diana, Princess of Wales when I was a youngster. She was a rare breed. Stunningly beautiful, immediately accessible, witty, charming and endearingly mischievous; she was a one in a million. Of course that was long before the, “There were three of us in this marriage, so it was a bit crowded,” type interviews and tell-all books alleging suicide attempts and acts of betrayal, but back then I was unaware of her more scandalous infamy. I quite simply adored her…I still do.

Now, as the world awaits the impending birth of William and Kate’s second baby, potential names have become the topic of rampant speculation and heated debate. More accurately, girl’s names are causing the biggest stir as there seems to be a worldwide assumption that the couple are expecting a princess. If assumptions are indeed correct she will be the first Princess of Cambridge born into the royal family in 182 years. The birth of any baby is cause for celebration, but given the recent changes in the Laws to Succession, her arrival would be a historical one.

In choosing a name, titled royals tend to turn to the family tree, as opposed to 100,001 Best Baby Names. Traditionally they pick dynastic names, and there are in fact a wide variety to choose from. Elizabeth, Alice, Victoria and Charlotte have all been frontrunners, but the sentimental favorite among punters remains…Diana. In a Today Show poll 32% of Americans predicted the name was a shoo-in, and in the UK the bookies’ odds of a baby named after her late-Grandmother change almost daily as Diana becomes an increasingly popular choice. That said, in the event the couple do welcome a baby girl, it is my hope that they do not name her Diana.

Today Diana’s name is as divisive as the very institution of monarchy itself. While some have virtually sainted her, others have been vehemently critical, accusing her of being childish, unhinged and self-serving. Contrary to popular belief the Queen was very fond of Diana, but should her name be bestowed as a first name upon the baby, it would be perceived as a slap in the face to the monarchy. In the years since Earl Spencer’s scathing attack on the Windsors at Diana’s funeral, the nation has moved on and Diana’s legacy has been celebrated. She has become a part of royal history. Her memory has been preserved, and the royal family is once again enjoying a renewed sense of popularity. Out of respect to the Queen, Charles, Camilla and the baby herself the couple simply wouldn’t do it. Diana’s name conjures up both positive and negative responses the world over, and whichever side of the fence you’re on the moniker seems to me an almighty burden for a newborn baby to carry.

Since Diana’s death almost eighteen years ago, William has honoured his mother’s memory in a private and personal fashion. He has taken on many of her patronages and continued to champion her causes. At his wedding in 2011 the Bishop of London The Rt. Rev. Richard Chartres, a close friend of Diana and executor of her will, gave the address. He also conducted Kate’s confirmation at The Chapel Royal, St. James’s Palace, where Diana’s coffin rested in the week following her death. The hymn Guide Me O Thou Great Redeemer, which was sung at both Diana’s funeral in 1997 and at the memorial marking the tenth anniversary of her death in 2007, was chosen for the royal wedding. Julia Samuel, also a close friend of Diana, was asked to serve as a Godmother to Prince George. William chose Kensington Palace, his own childhood home, to be the primary residence for his family, and perhaps in the most public acknowledgment of his mother’s memory, he gave Kate Diana’s engagement ring. William doesn’t need to name his second-born child after his mother in order to honour her; he does so by being a good husband and father.

I still miss Diana. She was a one-off, and I don’t believe the world will ever witness another quite like her. Daily comparisons to her late mother-in-law are already Kate’s cross to bear. Shouldn’t a baby girl be spared the same fate? Diana’s tragic, untimely death and iconic status will ensure her memory is kept alive for generations to come. She wouldn’t want her granddaughter to languish in her shadow. She would want her to go out into the world, to make her own mark and help those less fortunate, to enrich the lives of others and to carve out her own unique identity…possibly as Alice, Elizabeth, Victoria, Charlotte or my own personal pick – Alexandra.

Heirs and Spares

Tags

Abdication, Baby, Britain, Buckingham Palace, England, George V, Henry VIII, Prince William, Queen Elizabeth, Royal, Royal Baby

It’s been a while since I have blogged as I have been hard at work writing a book on the Queen for the Pocket Giants Series soon to be published by The History Press.  But now, on the eve of the Queen’s eighty-ninth birthday, as my focus shifts and the world awaits the impending arrival of her fifth great-grandchild, the spare to William’s heir, we are reminded once again that we are all a witness to living history.

Throughout the British monarchy’s thousand-year history, the role of the “spare” in relation to the heir has been a tricky one. Some spares have revolutionized entire eras, while others have irrevocably tarnished the family name. Free of the burdens of impending sovereignty, spares have long been able to benefit from the trappings of royal life, but without a definitive constitutional role, it has been hard for many to carve out a worthwhile existence in which their own achievements could be recognized.

Henry VIII was perhaps the most notorious of all royal spares. He assumed his place as heir apparent in 1502 upon the death of his elder brother Arthur, Prince of Wales, who passed away from an unknown illness five months shy of his sixteenth birthday. Although famed for having six wives, two of whom he had executed, Henry’s kingship continues to have a lasting impact on modern British life. His squabbles with the papal authority led to the separation of the Church of England from the Roman Catholic Church, whereupon Henry installed himself as Supreme Head of the Church of England – a position the reigning monarch continues to hold today. Recent amendments made to the Laws to Succession – brought before Parliament in 2013 – now allow members of the royal family to marry a Catholic without sacrificing their place in line, but a Roman Catholic monarch remains forbidden.

King George V, the current Queen’s grandfather, was the second-born son of King Edward VII, and was also a royal spare. His elder brother Prince Albert Victor, Duke of Clarence and Avondale, died suddenly in 1892 after contracting influenza at the age of twenty-eight. His death placed George in direct line to the throne and paved the way for the first Windsor monarch. The early years of George’s reign were blighted by the First World War. In response to the British public’s escalating anti-German sentiment, George changed the house and family name by Royal Proclamation in July 1917 from the House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha to the more Anglican-sounding House of Windsor. Almost a hundred years later the House of Windsor continues to reign. It was also George who delivered the first Christmas Message to the “British Empire” in a radio broadcast made from a temporary studio set-up at Sandringham in 1932.

The Queen’s father, King George VI, was yet another spare thrust into fulfilling a destiny not his by birth. Following the abdication of his brother Edward VIII, who had reigned a mere three hundred and twenty-five days before stepping aside in order to marry American divorcee Wallis Simpson, George reluctantly took on the role of King. Leading his country through the war years, he restored a sense of continuity, boosting public morale, and as such was a popular ruler. In 1926 his first daughter, Princess Elizabeth Alexandra Mary was born. At the time of her birth she was never expected to be crowned Queen, but later this year, on September 9^th, 2015, she will surpass Queen Victoria’s record to become the longest reigning monarch in British history.

Raising Princes William and Harry, Diana was conscious that William, as heir, would be well taken care of by the establishment. She made a concerted effort to ensure Harry was treated equally and never felt left out. Though Harry remains one of the most popular members of the royal family, he, along with fellow spares Princess Margaret and Prince Andrew, Duke of York, has been at the mercy of incessant public scrutiny and has faced harsh criticism over a slew of ill-advised choices.  In recent years however, Harry has risen above the naysayers to champion the needs of wounded veterans as well as overseeing the work of his charity Sentebale.

With the birth of the new baby Cambridge, William and Kate are now charged with raising their own heir and spare, but as history has shown, the British monarchy is anything but predictable. In two of the last three generations of monarchs the second-born son has stepped into the top job and reigned successfully.

It will be many years from now before these children are expected to embark on official royal duties and make their own mark on the international stage, but one thing is certain: one should never underestimate the potential of a royal spare.