Aside from the dear old easel – making its appearance on the Buckingham Palace forecourt hours after the news had already emerged across the world – the arrival of the duke and duchess’s first-born has broken almost every other royal convention.
No hospital entrance has been cluttered for days on end by legions of gibbering news crews with nothing to report; no royal gynaecologist has acquired temporary celebrity status; no army of royal fans has been camped out waiting for a fleeting squint of a bundle of joy in royal arms.
And this is likely to continue in the days ahead as we await the few outstanding details surrounding the new seventh in line to the throne – not just the choice of names but even some sort of indication of where he came in to this world.
Tony Appleton announces the birth of baby boy to Prince Harry, Duke of Sussex and Meghan Duchess of Sussex, outside Windsor Castle
The fact that this elementary detail should, as I write, have officially remained under wraps long after the birth is another break with tradition.
In short, the Sussexes are rewriting the rulebook. And they have done so, understandably, because they do not regard this as a royal birth, however much the rest of us might bang on about ‘the royal baby’.
Indeed, he could be the least ‘royal’ frontline member of the Royal Family we have known. For young Master Mountbatten-Windsor will not, technically, be royal. Unless the Queen changes the rules on titles – as she did for the children of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and as her own father did for Prince Charles – the baby will not be called His Royal Highness.
The system was drawn up by George V in 1917 and decrees that the title of ‘Prince’ or ‘Princess’ along with the style of ‘HRH’ extends as far as the children of the sons of the sovereign and their spouses and no further. I am assured Her Majesty has no plans to change the rules in this case.
In short, the Sussexes are rewriting the rulebook because they do not regard this as a royal birth, however much the rest of us might bang on about ‘the royal baby’
What’s more, the baby may not even qualify as regular aristocracy, let alone royalty. I use the term ‘Master’ advisedly.
As the eldest son of the Duke of Sussex, the boy would normally expect to take his father’s secondary title as a courtesy title. On his wedding day, the Queen gave Prince Harry three titles – Duke of Sussex, Earl of Dumbarton and Baron Kilkeel. So we could normally expect the baby to be called the Earl of Dumbarton.
However, my understanding is that the couple have given serious thought to setting aside his courtesy title and, instead, letting him be known as ‘Master’ or ‘Mr’ like any other baby boy – albeit one with the surname of ‘Mountbatten-Windsor’.
What’s more, the baby may not even qualify as regular aristocracy, let alone royalty. I use the term ‘Master’ advisedly
Certainly, there was no reference to the Earl of Dumbarton in yesterday’s announcement and it was significant that Palace officials would not confirm that the usual conventions on titles will be applied in this case.
All of which is entirely in keeping with a couple who want to play a full part in royal life while also establishing their own 21st century way of doing things.
Republicans may not be the only ones who regard the rules on royal titles as anachronistic nonsense. However, they do underline what a shrewd operator George V really was.
As well as changing the family name from Saxe-Coburg and Gotha to Windsor at the height of the First World War in 1917, he
