During Oprah Winfrey’s interview with Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, the subject of Archie’s title came up. The couple, who had previously told the world that they were happy to have him remain just “Archie” after his birth, all of a sudden changed their tune, stating their frustration that he wasn’t a prince and wasn’t given taxpayer-funded protection.
But now, in another revelation from Robert Lacey’s upcoming book “Battle of the Brothers,” it appears like the couple’s comments were motivated by Prince Charles telling them that Archie would not become a prince once his grandfather is king.
According to the Letters of Patent, only grandchildren of the monarch can be princes and princesses. The Queen did amend it to allow Prince William’s children, who are the great-grandchildren of the monarch, so they could be titled because their father will eventually be king.
It made sense, but Archie having a title makes no sense in Prince Charles slimmed down monarchy, especially if the little boy and his sister, Lilibet, are raised entirely in California.
Why give a kid kicking about Santa Barbara a title like prince? It’s completely unnecessary.
But Meghan and Harry are both rather upset about and consider Charles’ proposed future a slight, and probably attribute it to “racism.”
Per The Daily Mail, “Insiders suggest the issue was still raw at the time of the recording – which might help account for the devastating criticisms they unleashed on the show, including the damaging implication that an unnamed senior member of the Royal Family had referred to Archie in a racist way.
“The loss will be all the more galling as the Sussexes havemade a point of refusing to use another, lesser title for their son, who is technically the Earl of Dumbarton. They took that decision safe in the knowledge that Archie would become a Prince in due course. Or so they thought.”
Here’s the thing, that Archie won’t be a prince shouldn’t be a surprise to Harry or Meghan. Charles has made his vision of a slimmed down monarchy well know, and all royal families are already making similar changes.
Only the children of Crown Princess Victoria in Sweden have a Her/His Royal Highness (HRH) in their titles. King Carl Gustav’s six other grandchildren were recently stripped of their HRH, which was expected. No one seemed to kick up a fuss.
In Denmark, only Crown Prince Frederik’s first-born son will receive any government funding. The Crown Prince’s three other children are essentially on their own (though mom and dad will no doubt help the out).
Royal families are slimming down and limiting titles or giving those further from the throne lesser titles. This was a decision that the Earl and Countess of Wessex, the Queen’s youngest son and wife, came to the same conclusion and decided to give their children the lesser titles of Lady and Viscount, instead of Princess and Prince. They recognized that their children, though valuable members of the family, are far from the throne and a higher title is just impractical and without it they can lead a bit of an easier life.
Meghan Markle, who is probably banking on her children having titles post-divorce, and Harry, who has proved to be both incredible arrogant and dimwitted, are incensed over the decision.
It’s clear the couple want the fairytale aspect of royalty and don’t deal well with reality. Archie and Lilibet are loved by the family, but that doesn’t mean they get a title. That’s not how it works.
In the last 10 years, two of the four monarchs who abdicated did so because of scandal. Prince Charles has to protect his future and that of his son and grandson, not pander to the feelings of his second son and wife.
Picture from The Mirror.