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

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Ista

I think it's more an issue of confusion. Archie has a (courtesy) title, whether it is used for him or not, and he will be an HRH at the death of the Queen, whether it is used or not. All of this is true since no LP's have been issued to change that. Hence, the confusion. There's a discrepancy that is putting everything up in the air, and what it means and what the Sussexes intend by it is all open to interpretation. Whenever there is ambiguity it opens the door to conjecture. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that.

But is there confusion? I do think it's clear they are going with Master Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor. He is entitled to the title, and we all know what it is, but he's not being known as that.

On a different note. If little Archie grows up and decides, you know what, I want to be known as Earl of Dumbarton before I'm Duke of Sussex, I believe the Sussexes would be supportive of his choice.

[ACO]

Originally Posted by Ista

I think it's more an issue of confusion. Archie has a (courtesy) title, whether it is used for him or not, and he will be an HRH at the death of the Queen, whether it is used or not. All of this is true since no LP's have been issued to change that. Hence, the confusion. There's a discrepancy that is putting everything up in the air, and what it means and what the Sussexes intend by it is all open to interpretation. Whenever there is ambiguity it opens the door to conjecture. I don't see what's so hard to understand about that.

I mean I guess. I don't get saying they need to renounce their titles because they don't want their baby to be HRH when he will likely never be a working royal. It just seems extreme to me but to each their own.

[Rudolph]

If I'm not mistaken ITV said the decision on titles was made between The Queen, Harry, Charles and William.

If I got that right it probably means the decision on Archie's style has been made into the next reign.

[Zaira]

Papers are running with the powerful, lovely and historic image of the Queen, Philip, Harry/Meghan/Doria and little Archie.

I've seen lots of comments from British folks online (and in my personal life) about how meaningful the pic is. People saying they see their families reflected for the first time at the national level/in the BRF.

Really, its been a moving day.

[ReeceT21]

I don’t really think the comparisons to Anne and her children are totally correct either. At the end of the day, Peter Phillips was born and will die without a title. The same cannot be said of Archie. He will be Duke of Sussex one day, if not Prince. The comparisons to Margaret are more fair and her children were known as Viscount Linley and Lady Sarah at birth. And I don’t buy that it inherently affords you more privacy. “Lady” Sarah Chatto leads a more private life than “Mrs.” Zara Tindall.

I’m not arguing as some above that Harry and Meghan should renounce all titles. Obviously they’re still working royals. But if they really want Archie to go without a title they could have not accepted a dukedom that forces him to have one one day. Or maybe the Queen could have stated at their wedding that the Sussex dukedom was non-inheritable and one-off for Harry.

[Ista]

Originally Posted by jacqui24

But is there confusion? I do think it's clear they are going with Master Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor. He is entitled to the title, and we all know what it is, but he's not being known as that.

Well, clearly there is, as we've seen by the pages of discussion about it. If there had been an announcement that he was going to be known as Archie Harrison etc, but would assume the courtesy title at a later point, there would have been more clarity. As it is now, there are lots of questions. As we see.

[Duc_et_Pair]

Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53

At this point, I doubt the Sussexes ever plan to give their son Archie either a courtesy nobility title, nor a royal title. But we shall see. Perhaps his parents want Archie to make the decision on his own, when he's reached a certain age.

They have no say in that. As eldest son and heir of the 1st Duke of Sussex, the baby IS Lord Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, Earl of Dumbarton, future 2nd Duke of Sussex.

The point is that Harry and Meghan can not say "we do not want a title for Archie". They have no authority about that and the titles bestowed are not Harry's. They as much Archie's future titles as they are Harry's present titles, as the Letters Patent goes way beyond the current holder of these peerages.

Of course, Harry and Meghan can say: just call him Archie. But this private preference does not wipe out thay their son is the Heir to three peerages and is by convention and jurisdiction what he is.

[poppy7]

Name surprised me. Lack of title did not. I think it is right that only the future children of the monarch should be a prince or princess. Actually I think only a child of a monarch should be and titLes upgraded as. A grandchild, but whose parent will be monarch, a lord or lady and then upgraded when parent becomes monarch. The rest can just not have them. If they won't work for the monarchy, then why would they. A lot has changed in the past ten years.

[ACO]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

If I'm not mistaken ITV said the decision on titles was made between The Queen, Harry, Charles and William.

If I got that right it probably means the decision on Archie's style has been made into the next reign.

I haven't heard that but I did see Chris Ship and other royal correspondents clarify that no decision on his future HRH status has been discussed. So basically nothing has occurred to prevent him from having it once Charles is king. It is not like the Wessexes in that case though they might make it official when that times comes.

[ReeceT21]

Originally Posted by ACO

I mean I guess. I don't get saying they need to renounce their titles because they don't want their baby to be HRH when he will likely never be a working royal. It just seems extreme to me but to each their own.

I think very few people here are advocating for Archie to be an HRH or a Prince. That is the title most people were against him having, for his own sake. Most of us are wondering about a subsidiary title, something used by not only the royal family but almost every Dukedom, Marquisette and Earldom in Britain.

There’s a big gap between being HRH Prince Archie and Archie, Earl of Dumbarton.

[Ista]

Originally Posted by ACO

I mean I guess. I don't get saying they need to renounce their titles because they don't want their baby to be HRH when he will likely never be a working royal. It just seems extreme to me but to each their own.

I don't see the need for the Sussexes to renounce anything, either, but I understand why some are perplexed by the whole thing.

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

If I'm not mistaken ITV said the decision on titles was made between The Queen, Harry, Charles and William.

If I got that right it probably means the decision on Archie's style has been made into the next reign.

Chris Ship also said Archie will in time become HRH when Charles becomes sovereign. Unless there is a source they are using that's telling them this, it seems they are all just assuming. Even on how the decision would come about. Queen and Charles I can believe. But why would William be consulted if his nephew is Master or Lord or Earl of Dumbarton?

Personally, I doubt most of them will care even if there is another HRH in the future. One, the Queen can put a stop to all this right now if she wanted. She can issue an LP to further limit HRHs, she hasn't. And on this issue, any future monarchs must live with the decisions before their time. The only thing they would care about is this child will not be working royal when they are monarch as they would be supporting them.

I think at the end of the day, they are all making assumptions as we are here. BP isn't addressing this right now with the public.

[Leopoldine]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

If I'm not mistaken ITV said the decision on titles was made between The Queen, Harry, Charles and William.

If I got that right it probably means the decision on Archie's style has been made into the next reign.

Perhaps a future monarch wants to honor Archie at a later point in time?

[helenw]

Archie was born on George Clooney’s birthday, and my husband just pointed out that the character Clooney played in Three Kings was Archie.

Just a thought. 😉

[Rudolph]

Originally Posted by jacqui24

Even on how the decision would come about. Queen and Charles I can believe. But why woud William be consulted if his nephew is Master or Lord or Earl of Dumbarton

William would be consulted because Harry's children will fall under his reign.

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Ista

Well, clearly there is, as we've seen by the pages of discussion about it. If there had been an announcement that he was going to be known as Archie Harrison etc, but would assume the courtesy title at a later point, there would have been more clarity. As it is now, there are lots of questions. As we see.

Based on what I've seen from official channel, it doesn't appear that Harry and Meghan have any intention to add Earl of Dumbarton in the future until it's time for Archie to inherit the title as his or have said anything that leads people to believe they would. And it's not a confusion that he would eventually become Duke of Sussex, Earl of Dumbarton, and Baron Kilkeel as the LP explicitly states how that will work. It'll take a legislation of Parliament to change it.

The confusion comes from what others are saying right now, which is more in reference to HRH Prince Archie of Sussex when Charles becomes king. At this point, it is premature to announce that.

But a lot of what I'm seeing isn't confusion (there are some), but a lot of it is just anger at the situation it seems. People seem to have a difficult time accepting that he'll just be Master Archie rather than Lord Archie.

[Mbruno]

Originally Posted by jacqui24

But is there confusion? I do think it's clear they are going with Master Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor. He is entitled to the title, and we all know what it is, but he's not being known as that.

On a different note. If little Archie grows up and decides, you know what, I want to be known as Earl of Dumbarton before I'm Duke of Sussex, I believe the Sussexes would be supportive of his choice.

It is unrealistic to believe he will go against his parents’ wish and decide he wants to be called Lord Dumbarton instead of Mr Archie Mountbatten-Windsor . And, as others have said, if he does , the
Media will say he is being pushy ( it would definitely backfire against poor Archie).

I also think that decision seals the deal about Archie not becoming an HRH in the future.

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Rudolph

William would be consulted because Harry's children will fall under his reign.

But we aren't talking about HRH. And again, I don't see why anyone who have strong objections either way on HRH. As long as they don't have to fund him, why does it matter? Like I said, if anyone feels so strongly about it, they should just encourage the Queen to issue a new LP. It'll solve the problem for good.

As it stands, it brings up the question if a monarch can at will take away someone's HRH status if they haven't reached it yet? If not, and she certainly hasn't commented either way, do we really think the first order of business for Charles the minute his mother passes will be to take away his grandchild's HRH status? Because by LP, he has it the minute Charles becomes King.

[Osipi]

It may sound very weird but I'm having a flashback to all the outrage way back when a lot of Mrs. suddenly decided to become Ms. As Archie Bunker said "a near Miss".

The kid is going on a whopping 4 days old. We'll see what develops when it happens.

[jacqui24]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

It is unrealistic to believe he will go against his parents’ wish and decide he wants to be called Lord Dumbarton instead of Mr Archie Mountbatten-Windsor . And, as others have said, if he does , the
Media will say he is being pushy ( it would definitely backfire against poor Archie).

I also think that decision seals the deal about Archie not becoming an HRH in the future.

Why would he need to announce it to the media? He is a private individual after all. Unrealistic a child would go against the wish of his parents at some point? We've all been teenagers right?

I'm not saying this is the issue he's going to pick up, but I'm just saying theoretically, it's his decision when he's old enough to understand.