Christening of Archie Mountbatten-Windsor: July 6th, 2019


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Wonder how long Doria had been there. I guess she left her house in the middle of the night and had a private entrance to LAX and a lot of PET . and a private exit at Heathrow or Gatwick. She looks really nice and I wonder that broche she has on her coat from where is it? It might look subreal for her now to be so many times in Windsor and now through her daughter related to the royal familly
 
I like the fact that the Lily Font was used. Tradition is important.
 
Wonder how long Doria had been there. I guess she left her house in the middle of the night and had a private entrance to LAX and a lot of PET . and a private exit at Heathrow or Gatwick. She looks really nice and I wonder that broche she has on her coat from where is it? It might look subreal for her now to be so many times in Windsor and now through her daughter related to the royal familly

It all depends. Sometimes people just luck out. Even Meghan wasn’t pictured every time she flew from Toronto or London. Although sometimes the paparazzi catches them. This week is high travel time, she could very well simply blended in more with more people at the airport.

The more I look at Archie, the less certain I am about who his features take after.

Btw, with that elaborate gown, I’m always in fear that the baby will slip out of the parent’s arm. Maybe it’s just because I’m not used to holding babies.
 
I think it is a great picture! Everyone looks proud and happy. With respect to William's expression, photos capture a split second in time. The photographer probably took many pictures and Harry and Meghan choose the one that made the two of them look the best. I have one sister who always looks great in photos and, when we take family pictures, the rest of us have to find the ones in which we look the best, and it is a different photo for everyone.
 
So, if Archie is "not royal and a private citizen' as some posters claim here, why did he have all the trappings of a royal christening including being baptized by the Archbishop of Canterbury in a royal chapel using the silver gilt Lily Font, water from the River Jordan, and the ivory Honiton lace and satin gown used for all royal babies’ baptisms since the reign of Queen Victoria?



And, as a private citizen, why is his baptism certificate not being kept in the local parish register where it can be seen by anyone according to law upon paying a modest fee ? Instead, Dickie Arbiter is telling us that his baptism record will be kept separately at Windsor Castle to be made " available to historians" at some unspecified point in the future.
 
Last edited:
So, if Archie is "not royal and a private citizen' as some posters claim here, why did he have all the trappings of a royal christening including being baptized by the Archbishop of Canterbury in a royal chapel using the silver gilt Lily Font, water from the River Jordan, and the ivory Honiton lace and satin gown used for all royal babies’ baptisms since the reign of Queen Victoria?



And, as a private citizen, why is his baptism certificate not being kept in the local parish register where it can be seen by anyone according to law upon paying a modest fee ? Instead, Dick Arbiter is telling us that his baptism record will be kept separately at Windsor Castle to be made " available to historians" at some unspecified point in the future.

As I recall weren't Zara, Peter, Peter's kids and Zara's kids baptized wearing the Honiton gown? None of them are Royal.


I don't believe Archie is a private citizen at this point. He has the titles and will become HRH when Charles is King..nothing indicates the titles were declined...they simply deferred using the titles at this time from how I understand it.

His baptism records are being handled in the same manner as the Cambridge children's were.

LaRae
 
As I recall weren't Zara, Peter, Peter's kids and Zara's kids baptized wearing the Honiton gown? None of them are Royal.


I don't believe Archie is a private citizen at this point. He has the titles and will become HRH when Charles is King..nothing indicates the titles were declined...they simply deferred using the titles at this time from how I understand it.

His baptism records are being handled in the same manner as the Cambridge children's were.

LaRae

Can’t remember them all, but I remember seeing a picture of Peter holding one of his girls in that christening gown. We don’t know how their baptism records are stored as we’ve never seen them either.
 
Last edited:
Peter, Zara and their children are not HRHs, or have titles, but they are in the line of succession and are members of the royal family. I think they are #14 through 20.
 

That man forfeited his rights as a father and grandfather by selling out his daughter. Don't share that toxic man's words. He has himself to blame.

Delightful pictures and a very handsome wee baby. His chubby cheeks and expressive eyes. The Sussexes are so cheesy naming their red haired son Archie though lol! Here's hoping that he doesn't get teased for a comic book character ��.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Delightful pictures and a very handsome wee baby. His chubby cheeks and expressive eyes. The Sussexes are so cheesy naming their red haired son Archie though lol! Here's hoping that he doesn't get teased for a comic book character ��.

Apparently, he’ll be in good company regarding the name department in London.
 
It just seems to me that in the efforts to keep things private, we end up with more drama than is necessary.

Perhaps, but the drama is occurring only in the minds of the media and royal fans who are creating, pandering, and/or being caught up in this overwrought narrative. The royal family and the Sussexes in particular are simply trying to respectfully and peacefully go about their business without undue fanfare. The Sussexes don't make decisions without thinking them through. They clearly believe it's better for their son and his godparents to not have their intimate relationships constantly scrutinized and endlessly written about. If the godparents were revealed, there would be story upon story about everyone who was selected, and lots of digging into their backgrounds for whatever could be found out and obsessed over and written about in a negative fashion.

Unfortunately, that's what's been happening to Meghan and everyone closely associated with her ever since H&M began dating. But sadly the worst development that led to ratcheted-up negative frenzy was when someone released palace scuttlebut to the press last November after the Sussexes returned from their enormously successful South Pacific tour. Give the tabloid press an inch and they'll take over hundreds of acres.

No amount of palace p.r. that has been generated recently (way too late) in an attempt to smooth over that egregious faux pas and its aftermath, is going to be able to erase or calm down the media frenzy and negative erroneous narratives that have grown exponentially, specifically targeted against Meghan. The nasty rumors and negative stories should have been dealt with much sooner. By this point the media has turned those questionable leaked tidbits into some kind of monster that refuses to die. What someone didn't realize however, is that nothing negative thrown at the Sussexes is going to change who they actually are. In every public appearance, who they are individually and as a team shines through forcefully and clearly. They can't be blamed for being themselves and for desiring to put their best foot forward in advocating for and supporting good causes, while still being able to have a peaceful, private life raising their offspring.

Another thing that the petty leakers and persons behind the leaks didn't seem to realize is that Meghan is not going anywhere. She's part of the royal family. And when one member of the royal family is treated outrageously nastily, it ends up looking bad for the whole firm. Particularly in view of the fact that Meghan is a smart, kind, accomplished member of the family who is in love with her husband, and who has brought a lot of hard work and positive assets to the firm. She's also quite human and fallible like everyone else, and she doesn't deserve this level of OTT, inaccurate stories being written about her character. The press is bringing the drama and the negativity, not the Sussexes.

The contradictions abounding in this 'circus-like' atmosphere surrounding the Sussexes contain so many fascinating social/psychological, and social/cultural twists and turns. Still, make no mistake that the Sussexes will continue preserving their privacy and doing their best to keep the circus noise and nonsense far at bay away from the raising of their little boy, who btw, seems to be rather calm and collected. That's cool, because Archie will need those reserves of calmness and strength of character as he grows up in the royal firm as a cousin of the young Cambridges. It appears that Archie (currently at least) is shaping up to be more sought after and written about than is truly necessary.

Probably the courtiers are hoping the opposite will become the case as the Cambridge kids continue to grow. Hopefully, the spotlight will be more on George, Charlotte and Louis, and fingers-crossed that they will be able to handle it with deft aplomb. Little Charlotte already is handling the press nonsense quite beautifully. As Charlotte bossily told reporters last year at Louis' christening, "You can't come!" She meant the reporters couldn't follow her family into where they were gathering for refreshments. :lol: ...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

I think the situation with Thomas Markle is a very unfortunate one, and nobody comes out smelling of roses here.

Thomas has not exactly emerged as a the paragon of fatherly virtue, and it does not appear likely that he will be getting to see his grandson or son0-in-law any time soon.

As regards Meghan, the last thing she would have wanted was the unnecessary embarrassment and heartache this very public situation has brought. And unfortunately, standing where we are, it does not appear the situation will be resolving itself any time soon.
 
Wonder how long Doria had been there. I guess she left her house in the middle of the night and had a private entrance to LAX and a lot of PET . and a private exit at Heathrow or Gatwick. She looks really nice and I wonder that broche she has on her coat from where is it? It might look subreal for her now to be so many times in Windsor and now through her daughter related to the royal familly

My sister and I were just saying that today, that Doria never dreamed that some day she would be meeting with and related to the Queen of England, the future King and future, future King. You just never know what life has in store for you.
 
There’s a part of me that thought Mr. Markle was going to be there. I have to admit it. Now, we see that absolutely nothing has changed in that situation. His absence from the Christening was extremely clear.
 
So, if Archie is "not royal and a private citizen' as some posters claim here, why did he have all the trappings of a royal christening including being baptized by the Archbishop of Canterbury in a royal chapel using the silver gilt Lily Font, water from the River Jordan, and the ivory Honiton lace and satin gown used for all royal babies’ baptisms since the reign of Queen Victoria?



And, as a private citizen, why is his baptism certificate not being kept in the local parish register where it can be seen by anyone according to law upon paying a modest fee ? Instead, Dickie Arbiter is telling us that his baptism record will be kept separately at Windsor Castle to be made " available to historians" at some unspecified point in the future.

Baptismal records are kept by the church where the baptism ocurred, in this case the Windsor chapel.

A number of babies of non-Royal descendants of Queen Victoria have recently worn the replica gown for Christening—Savannah & Isla Phillips, Mia & Lena Tindall and Maud & Isabella Windsor.

And FWIW, I think the Sussexes should have announced the names of the godparents. Archie is 7th in line in the succession and his father is a Prince and Royal Duke.
 
Last edited:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...-christening-photographs-secret-ceremony.html

Archie is very cute. He looks a lot like Meghan.
Harry is underdressed, sorry.
And I love the look on William's face ;)

No, Harry looks absolutely perfect. His suits cut, the colour is perfect for a summer´s christening. I am so happy he abandoned wearing the typical stuffy black businessmen´s shoes...:whistling:
Don´t know your experiences of christenings (if they do take place at all these days...) in moder Germany. But if they do, father´s here often do not even wear ties for it!
 
Don´t know your experiences of christenings (if they do take place at all these days...) in moder Germany. But if they do, father´s here often do not even wear ties for it!




But then often the child who is baoptized often does not wear a tradtional chrstening gown but instead boys wear a little suit for example. But i would not compare christenings of normal people with christenings of royal/noble children.
 
But then often the child who is baoptized often does not wear a tradtional chrstening gown but instead boys wear a little suit for example. But i would not compare christenings of normal people with christenings of royal/noble children.


It is a "formal" occasion when you make it one or want it to be! Harry was not just any guest, he was the father of the baby who was going to be christened. So he and his wife were the ones who could decide how "formal" or informal it would be, royal or not!
This is not a coronation :lol:! It was a PRIVATE christening in summer´s England 2019. Cannot think of people reactions, the fits, if Harry (like many men actually do) wore a white T-shirt under his suit jacket...! ? Would love to see their faces when they took first looks at the photos...
 
It’s lovely to see the Spencer’s included. I love that Harry always includes his maternal family at important milestones. And it seems that they provided him maternal care and comfort after Diana.
Archie looks just like Meghan with ginger hair and Harry’s colouring.
 
If this is true, I don't believe a second that van Straubenzee insisted on remaining private and not named publicly as godparent, given his history with both William and Harry.

I agree. Nor do I think Tiggy Pettifer would have requested to remain private if she is a godmother as speculated.
 
...

Archie really is adorable. I guess the next time we’ll see him is on the tour. I wonder if he will have curls.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If this is true, I don't believe a second that van Straubenzee insisted on remaining private and not named publicly as godparent, given his history with both William and Harry.

The issue is probably they had to do all in or all out. Either release all the godparents names or none. Charlie like his brother would have no issue having his name out. But clearly others did. It would seem bizarre if some names were released and others not....
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom