Birth of Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor: May 6, 2019

[duchessrachel]

What a precious baby!! I like the name and I just read that he will have not title. I am a little disappointed in that, but that is just me. I completely understand why, in that they want him to have as normal a life as possible. Otherwise for me, extremely happy news!! Harry looks totally besotted with that baby and Meghan looks so protective like any mother. I think them showing the Queen meeting the baby is so AWESOME!! Is that a first?

[Lilyflo]

Originally Posted by wyevale

The name sounds like the son of a 'hipster' north London hedge fund manager...

Archie was the 15th most popular (& rising) boy's name in the UK last year. Seems it's broken out of the north London, hipster, hedge-fund manager enclave (if that was the source). :)

[wyevale]

Why everything that has to do with this couple is always Meghan, this Meghan that

Because even the most cursory glance at Harry's 'CV' reveals a markedly weak character, and one 'easily influenced' - as a bachelor, his 'bad boy' antics [under the influence of others], in the army his 'heroics' [under the influence of his superiors, and peers]. And now this.. 'suddenly' Californian and trendily 'egalitarian' ?

[Osipi]

Originally Posted by alvinking

hmm, the IT of Buckingham Palace is not on top of things.
Somebody is going to be in trouble

Son of the D&DoC instead of Sussex??????

https://twitter.com/dumielauxepices/...72298766057477

Now that is just a sloppy, uncalled for, unthinking, idiotic kind of mistake that will probably send the offender into the nearest bathroom cringing with a bright red face as he/she awaits the boom to lower that will slam the palace gates on him/her loudly!

[Nico]

Originally Posted by Curryong

Robert Jobson Twitter 'While there are obviously courtesy titles that could be used by their son the Sussexes have chosen not to use them AT THiS TIME'

https://mobile.twitter.com/theroyale...Ctwgr%5Eauthor

Mmmm seems to me like the "Princess of Wales" title for Camilla. it's there, it's legally hers but she has chosen not to use it.
However the "at this time" seems a bit baffling : they are basically taking an option and then wait and see ? "let's raise our child like a private citizen, then if it doesn't work there's still a title or two to use".
Another cherrypicking if you ask me. This couple is very lovable but still so much full of contradictions.

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Nico

Mmmm seems to me like the "Princess of Wales" title for Camilla. it's there, it's legally hers but she has chosen not to use it.
However the "at this time" seems a bit baffling : they are basically taking an option and then wait and see ? "let's raise our child like a private citizen, then if it doesn't work there's still a title or two to use".
Another cherrypicking if you ask me. This couple is very lovable but still so much full of contradictions.

I don't think the "at this time" is part of the announcement. It seems that the reporters just haven't gotten any guidance on the future when Charles becomes King, or, even further away, once Harry passes on. But I do think it's sensible to not jump at those decisions today. Right now, there is one decision, and that's if he'll be Master Archie or Earl of Dumbarton as courtesy title. They chose not to use the courtesy title.

[loonytick]

The thing about courtesy titles is that they're optional, right? A son may use his father's lesser title, but he is not obligated to do so? Perhaps Harry's experience just makes him prefer his child be old enough to understand something of what the title is all about before people start calling the child by it.

[Jacknch]

Please note that throughout today a number of posts containing unnecessarily aggressive comments have been edited or deleted. Please be reminded that when responding to someone you do not agree with or who may have posted something that was incorrect, please have the courtesy to all fellow members of responding in a respectful and constructive way.

With regard to the decisions that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex make in their lives - both private and public - it would seem sensible and respectful to take it that such decisions are made jointly and not to presume one or other of them have made the decision alone.
This is particularly the case when referencing the Duchess of Sussex. The habit of assuming and indeed aggressively promoting the idea that the Duchess herself makes decisions that in reality must clearly be jointly made with the Duke or are out of her hands to make (such as her title or the use thereof) is unacceptable.

[suztav]

Originally Posted by jacqui24

The Duchess of Sussex is a working royal. Her son, on the other hand, is a private individual who is expected to establish his own career one day.

Again, why is it solely Meghan's decision? Did I miss a memo somewhere? Is Harry entirely irrelevant in his own family? Given what he's said in the past, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if it was his idea.

This child is the heir to the Dukedom of Sussex as the Queen did include male heir of the body when she issued Harry the Dukedom of Sussex. However, what difference does it make in the child's life if he's Master Archie or Earl of Dumbarton? He'll be Archie.

One difference I could think of is that, potentially, some in the media would have the decency of not thinking they are entitled to him if he has no official title.

I think this is "all Harry" … and his attempts to say "look at me … I'm normal". I'm sorry and I know that I'm going to hear it from everybody but …. you and your child will never have a mortgage, have to ride a subway, have a 9-to-5 job, fear that you will loose your pension. You are not normal. Your child will also grow up incredibly privileged.

I remember an interview where Harry was asked "what would you do if you weren't born a prince?" Harry replied, "I'd want to work with the Hitsu people." Really? You think the average person has the option to work with the Hitsu people? The average person has to go out and get a job and earn enough $$ to buy groceries and send their kids to school.

While I appreciate the intent of wanting to be grounded and down-to-earth … it's just not the same thing.

I'm sorry … but, I just can't ….

JMHO!

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by wyevale

Because even the most cursory glance at Harry's 'CV' reveals a markedly weak character, and one 'easily influenced' - as a bachelor, his 'bad boy' antics [under the influence of others], in the army his 'heroics' [under the influence of his superiors, and peers]. And now this.. 'suddenly' Californian and trendily 'egalitarian' ?

Thank God William is heir to a 1000 years of history...

I don't find him to be a weak character. In fact, I found that he knows what he wants to do when it matter and when it's something he's passionate about. Sure he's had his moments of youthful indiscretion, but most of us have done dumb things when we were young. But when it comes to his work, he has shown passion and resolve. He also seems quite clear on what he wants in his personal life. No one but Harry is responsible for his life and choices, whether good or bad.

Originally Posted by suztav

I think this is "all Harry" … and his attempts to say "look at me … I'm normal". I'm sorry and I know that I'm going to hear it from everybody but …. you and your child will never have a mortgage, have to ride a subway, have a 9-to-5 job, fear that you will loose your pension. You are not normal. Your child will also grow up incredibly privileged.

I remember an interview where Harry was asked "what would you do if you weren't born a prince?" Harry replied, "I'd want to work with the Hitsu people." Really? You think the average person has the option to work with the Hitsu people? The average person has to go out and get a job and earn enough $$ to buy groceries and send their kids to school.

While I appreciate the intent of wanting to be grounded and down-to-earth … it's just not the same thing.

I'm sorry … but, I just can't ….

JMHO!

I think it's fair to say their child will be privileged growing up, but so are a lot of others without a title. You don't have to be struggling to be a normal person.

[Lilyflo]

I know two young men who don't use their courtesy titles at all & never have. They'll get the main ones eventually but choose to be first name/last name for now.

[Dman]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

Rebecca English confirms he'll have no title

https://twitter.com/RE_DailyMail/sta...429180938?s=20

The HRH will come the moment Charles ascends to the throne. HRH Prince Archie. For right now, he’s just Archie.

[Fem]

Originally Posted by Dman

The HRH will come the moment Charles ascends to the throne. HRH Prince Archie. For right now, he’s just Archie.

Not necessarily. They might choose (as they did now) not to use it. I don't see a reason Prince Charles would refuse his son and his wife the choice when it comes to their child titile.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by wyevale

Because even the most cursory glance at Harry's 'CV' reveals a markedly weak character, and one 'easily influenced' - as a bachelor, his 'bad boy' antics [under the influence of others], in the army his 'heroics' [under the influence of his superiors, and peers]. And now this.. 'suddenly' Californian and trendily 'egalitarian' ?

I don't understand this either … Whether they like it or not, Archie is heir to the Dukedom.. so why this "He's just Archie" stuff.

[Serafina]

Originally Posted by Lilyflo

Archie was the 15th most popular (& rising) boy's name in the UK last year. Seems it's broken out of the north London, hipster, hedge-fund manager enclave (if that was the source). :)

I had a quick glance at the ScotlandsPeople website for fun and 555 boys were named Archie (first or middle name) in 2018. There were 34 Archibalds

(That's not the same as a popularity ranking but I like the fact the information is bang up to date and searchable).

Archie is very similar to 'Alfie', which is also popular and often given as a standalone name (as opposed to being short for Alfred). There were 514 Alfies born last year according to the same records.

Does anyone think that the birth certificate image will be shared, or is that tradition reserved for children of the heir?

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Serafina

I had a quick glance at the ScotlandsPeople website for fun and 555 boys were named Archie (first or middle name) in 2018. There were 34 Archibalds

(That's not the same as a popularity ranking but I like the fact the information is bang up to date and searchable).

Archie is very similar to 'Alfie', which is also popular and often given as a standalone name (as opposed to being short for Alfred). There were 514 Alfies born last year according to the same records.

Well, interesting facts. I'm still surprised at how many people now give what used to be considered nicknames as official names. Especially seeing how much Archie outranks Archibald. Maybe by the time this baby is a grown man, it won't feel so much like a child's name because there'll be so many grown Archies around.

[PtahHotep]

Why complain about Archie being a nickname and not a proper name? NOBODY is going to call him ARCHIBALD anyway, except maybe at rare state functions. Might as well. Like I said before, let's enjoy the informal nature of it.

[sndral]

Originally Posted by DuchessMia

... Thought it was cute they ran into Prince Phillip. He got to see the little bubba before the Queen. Can’t wait to hear his name.

Originally Posted by Erin9

...I loved the bit about them running into Prince Philip on the way over.

Mmm, mighty suspicious am I the only one who suspects Prince Phillip knew exactly when & where the couple would be before the photo/video shoot and just ‘happened’ to be in the vicinity to get a peek at his newest ggrandchild?
Archie - not a name I would have chosen - but I wasn’t fond of the name Louis either or Lena or Isla - I’ve never met an Archie, however I did know one Archibald.

[loonytick]

Originally Posted by sndral

Mmm, mighty suspicious am I the only one who suspects Prince Phillip knew exactly when & where the couple would be before the photo/video shoot and just ‘happened’ to be in the vicinity to get a peek at his newest ggrandchild?
Archie - not a name I would have chosen - but I wasn’t fond of the name Louis either or Lena or Isla - I’ve never met an Archie, however I did know one Archibald.

I love the idea that he may have then gone in to his wife and teased her that he got to see the baby first.

[Susan999]

Originally Posted by loonytick

I'm kind of getting the vibe here that Harrison seems like an unusual name to some folks. Is that accurate? The reaction is surprising to me. Where I am, it's not one of those names that you run into everywhere but it's certainly within the realm of normal. I think of it as quite traditional. I personally tend to like it more as a middle name than a first name, but I've certainly known my share of men and boys who go by Harrison.

In Britain giving surnames as given names is seen as very American, though it is catching on. I was much more surprised by Harrison than I was by Archie, but it seems that for the Americans on here it is the opposite.