Yes, the wealth was produced by the subjects and taken by force or threat of force by the monarchy. So yeah stolen. It’s kinda why our forefatehrs fought a war for liberty. But hey, they do seem awfully polite, let’s give it another shot shall we?
You merely repeat the opinion you stated earlier. I've asked you to please provide evidence.
It’s kinda why our forefathers fought a war for liberty.
Kinda but may not exactly?
I am very cautious when someone suggest that all wealth is stolen (because this coincides with what Marxists want us to believe, and there is plenty of that propaganda in our textbooks). The truth is, much of wealth was acquired by luck (settling on a more fertile land), working harder than neighbors, etc. Much royalty in our Western neck of the woods, heavily influenced by Germanic traditions, comes from success in the battlefield. This applies to Gothic Spain, Gallic France, and Germany itself. In Rome, even midlle-level officers could receive land for services. The title of Marquise (count of a march, a border settlement) was granted for services.
In sum, great many noble titles and the accompanying wealth was earned, not stolen by means of expropriation or intimidation.
Some societies view services performed by monarchs as useful and compensate monarchs accordingly: royalty earns its keep. Consider, for instance, the fact that the British taxpayers pick up many of the Queen's expenses. Do you think she intimidates them into submission today.
Just something to think aboout, but I don't think the issue as simple as you suggested it to be.