Barsel - // For those of you who think that date was chosen purposely, do you really believe that King Charles would have said right at the start 'Let's choose this date as it's the kids birthday so hopefully none of them will come?' I mean, how childish do you think the King is? //
I don't think the King is childish, but i do think he has observed pragmatism close up from his mother all his life, in matters pertaining to the monarchy.
Yes, the King wanted Harry there, but that was never any guarantee that Harry was going to come, and if the date provides an excuse for Harry not to come, without having to be thought of as simply any more petulant and self-centred than he clearly is, his father would be happy to save Harry's dignity.
The King said quite plainly that he wanted Harry there and I believe the King didn't even realise it was Archie's birthday until it was eventually pointed out to him. //
I seriously doubt that.
Royal diaries are mapped out over twelve months in advance, and even allowing for the fact that the coronation was not in this year's advance planning, the date would have been analysed from all angles before it was decided.
As a family with grandchildren, and a great-grandchild, their birthdays are all known, and any plans are made around them - i think any family does that.
And that goes to the nth degree for the royals, who have to plan everything to ensure there are no clashes, and birthdays are one of the major clashes to avoid - unless it actually helps out.
That is what i believe happened here.
The notion that Charles doesn't know his grandchildren's birthdays, as a grandad, not as a King, simply doesn't fly.