Calum Davies is a Conservative councillor in Cardiff and former Senedd candidate.
Were I to tell you that this column is going to be about the Royal Family, you may be forgiven for thinking that several paragraphs are coming up on the return of Harry and Meghan to British shores (sigh), the never-ending stories about Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor’s misdemeanours, or the King’s forthcoming Caribbean visit as he navigates post-colonial attitudes to his reign.
I will instead focus on BBC Wales’ favourite nationalist rent-a-mouth Michael Sheen.
I am an enormous fan of Sheen’s screen work: not just his turns as Brian Clough, David Frost, and Tony Blair – I think he’s excellent in everything including Masters of Sex, Good Omens, and have just enjoyed his minor part in 30 Rock. He really is a terrific actor, and I recommend he focusses all his energy here for his public comments outside of the cultural realm over the last ten years or so have not quite matched the same quality.
Whilst luvvie actors espousing lefty talking points is hardly a revelation, Sheen has taken a more avowedly political approach than most. He certainly gives it more thought than his peers, but so does Russell Brand and Nish Kumar. Luckily for Sheen, he can at least fall back on his craft.
BBC Wales has a fascination with Sheen. To be fair, a Welsh boy making it to Hollywood is a success story. We are so proud when one of our own rises to lofty heights that we can get a bit carried away with how much attention we give them. However, the BBC takes this to extremes with Sheen and are very happy to report his every utterance, no matter how pedestrian.
What they all have in common though is a political strand that seems to be quite popular in BBC Wales. It can be characterised as Welsh nationalist, with the usual trappings of republicanism, Anglophobia, and general leftism. Just look at the new Plaid Cymru government, where the First Minister, Deputy First Minister, and another senior minister are all ex-BBC. Meanwhile, a former Chief Executive of Plaid Cymru holds a senior editorial position in BBC Wales.
Sheen has not just played Nye Bevan and, soon, Owain Glyndŵr just because they are a worthy subject, but as they are his idols that conform to his political beliefs. Bringing them and their ideas into the popular culture by the weight of his celebrity is helpful to the proliferation of his preferred narrative. I’ll quickly note that whilst Glyndŵr has been adopted as a nationalist talisman, his rebellion was not a result of a patriotic uprising but a land dispute with a neighbour that the King, who he had until then been quite happy to serve, backed rather than him.
Last week, Sheen said that the Welsh people should be asked whether they would like the title of Prince of Wales “back” when it next becomes vacant. Two problems stand out immediately: first, the title of Prince of Wales, prior to its adoption under the Plantagenet dynasty, was never used by an individual who held the entirety of Wales under their rule as Wales had always been a collection of kingdoms. The Prince of Wales has only ever had jurisdiction over the entirety of Wales whilst incorporated into the English/British crown, with exception of a period of less than ten years, two centuries before Edward I came when Wales was briefly united.
Second, what does “back” mean?
There is no pretender or defunct Welsh dynasty on which that title can be bestowed. Surely, we would not let a partisan Senedd decide so they can award it to their favourite separatist? Let us not forget that it was not that long ago that the nats had designs on Huw Edwards being the first president on independent Wales. Maybe Sheen covets the title for himself – under the guise of a repatriated, anti-colonial label, of course.
Sheen said that the title “symbolises something that was essentially a put-down to Wales,” adding “obviously that was a long, long time ago, but these things have power still.” It is not wrong to say that the way the title’s role came about as a means of showing various Welsh upstarts that there was a new sheriff in town under Edward I, but like Sheen himself admits, this was over seven centuries ago. Its origins only casts a shadow because people like him want to stand in it. Welsh nationalism relies on a grievance culture to generate support for its end-goal.
Things have moved on. The title represents Wales’ central place in the Crown. The Welsh Dragon is missing from the Union Flag, but it has a role in the embodiment of the British nation via its Head of State. Whilst its origins may not have been driven by altruism, its modern-day significance is clearly not an insult to the Welsh, but a compliment. An investiture should go ahead for William to consolidate royal support in Wales rather than appease republicans.
Prince William is a patron of the Welsh Rugby Union, lived on Anglesey, and undertook military duties there. His father spent a term at Aberystwyth University. Both have visited Wales numerous times and made efforts to speak the language; notably, William in a recent video marking St David’s Day and Charles in his first speech to the nation after ascending the throne. It is not unreasonable to say that making efforts to ingratiate yourself with the Welsh is itself a good enough reason to maintain the title, but then neither can it be to refer to events in the 13th century. The title has a new, better, inclusive meaning that hugs the Welsh close to monarchy and Britain. That is why Welsh nationalists don’t like it – it spoils their narrative.
I appreciate that Sheen has put forward the idea of a consultation but proposing that the question – which is not subject to anything close to significant public discourse – is put on the agenda is to manufacturer the mass conversation that republicans want in the same way that nationalists are the ones who want referenda on independence. Even without the other comments he made, Sheen’s preference here is naked.
Furthermore, you can’t really win with the nationalists: they oppose a Prince of Wales that is not actually Welsh, but when a king’s son is born in Wales – like Edward II and Henry V – it is a mere tactic to dampen such accusations. (Yet, the republican left is quite happy with a lax immigration policy that allows people to claim a permanent right to residency in Wales with relative ease these days.) Personally, I consider the Royal Family to be Welsh, as every monarch since Henry Tudor is a direct descendant of his. We should rejoice that we have taken over the country – but instead the miserable separatists want to relinquish Wales’ historical inheritance.
Finally, while length denies me producing a full account of the argument and sources here, the scholarly evidence shows that since “the conquest” of Wales, the Welsh in general have been fine with being British and having a monarchy, and have been as full and equal subjects or citizens as their fellow English and Scottish brethren for hundreds of years to the extent that, today, polls show Wales to be pro-Union and pro-monarchy, and close to the British average.
The truth is that the argument to “return” the title to Wales is driven by a group of people who do not like monarchy, do not like Wales being a part of Britain, and continue to indulge themselves in ahistorical arguments about the Welsh being a subjugated people.
Sheen says his thoughts and actions on the matters he now extemporises on – including giving back his OBE – are driven by learning more about Welsh history. If only that were so.