Prince Archie & Princess Lilibet?

[susan12345678]

Surely not?

I look forward to Harry's announcement explaining that they will decline prince and princess titles for their DC, in keeping with their decision to stand down as senior royals and live private lives in the US.

Anything less under the circumstances would be rank hypocrisy

They updated their SM to say "Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Cornwall" right after the Queen died, then updated it again the next day after they were given the POW titles. Two different updates.

Could someone please link or screenshot the statement from the palace where they offer H&M an Earl title please.

www.royal.uk/prince-harry-and-ms-meghan-markle-announcement-titles

Harry was granted the title Earl of Dumbarton by the Queen on his wedding day.

Earl titles automatically pass to the oldest son of anyone who currently holds the title Earl. Archie is Heir to Earl of Dumbarton and entitled to use that regardless of whether he or his parents do choose to use it or not.

Yes, they did actually.

I was too was expecting for the formal announcement from KC, before anyone changes anything.

I believe the rf website itself only updated the titles after his announcement to bestow.

@TheWheeledAvenger
The posters seemed to say that H&M were offered the title for Archie specifically. The title belongs to Harry, so I guess Archie could be 'Earl of ......' instead of 'The Earl of..........'.

MM said no one told them anything, Archie was just named 'master' without the parents being consulted. She also said they told her that security would be linked to him being protected, and I believe this was according to rule 1 (there are 3/4 I think) of RAVEC protection - loosely, he would be protected no matter what due to that status.

So I don't think this was a mere matter of 'titles' for the sake of it.

Anyway, if A&L have the titles, it's not really up to anyone else, it would be their right, and they may decide at 18 to drop it.

Yes but Harry would have been aware that Archie was entitled to the Dumbarton title. If posters on here know then a prince of the realm would have done. I concede that Meghan may not have known but Harry should have done.

I don't think at 'Earl' title falls under section 1 of RAVEC protection.

I think Meghan knew all of Harry's titles and which ones he can allow his children to use. That part is rather straightforward.

She was contesting the Prince part, which the palace told her is what would give Archie his own protection.
If say, they go somewhere outside the palaces' (normal everyday protection), they can leave Archie with the nanny and Doria and he would be entitled to his own protection, away from the parents. That is what they mean.

I think they are stressing the consort bit at the moment to prevent confusion during the funeral week where they are talking about the last Queen, and also to stress to those who didn't want Camilla to be Queen that she's not the monarch.

However officially, like all other Queen Consorts before her she is Her Majesty Queen Camilla, and in future will be simply Queen Camilla when talked about in news reports etc - just like Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother, and Queen Mary who was the previous Queen Consort etc.

It has been explained to you several times on many threads that the title Prince/Princess does not grant you automatic protection.

Also explained over and over again is the fact that Archie and Lilibet are only entitled to Prince and Princess now that their grandfather has inherited the throne. Nothing was taken away or denied to them.

You appear to be stuck in this endless loop of believing misinformation, and seeing offence when there is none. Honestly it's not healthy.

There are more pressing matters to attend to at the moment, for the same reason Edward hasn't been announced the Duke of Edinburgh.

If I had to guess I would say they will give the children the choice when they are 18, like Edward and Sophie have with their children.

@NimrodNimroy
You are the one who seems stuck in a loop.

Meghan was told by the palace itself that Archie would not be protected because of his lack of prince status - she did not get this from the tabloids or wherever people get it from here.

I presume this is section 1 (in his case) - under the automatic protection of titles like King/Queen, Ambassador, former PM etc. Harry had assumed he was protected under this (as is Andrew and others I think). The met does not discuss protection, so not sure where it's been proven who gets the protection, where and when.

He then asked under section 2 - has his level of thread gone down, he was told no. Meaning that he should fall under that section.

He is willing to go under section 3 - where he pays for protection himself.

Anyway. He is now in court to clarify all of that, so best to just let the courts decide. The only reason I bring it up is that it ties together with A&L 's titles.

Another point, once again, MM never said titles are being taken away from Archie, she said they wanted to change the patens particularly for him when PC becomes king (in the future, back then).

What is not healthy is you going on and on, accusing MM for something she never said.

I let Meghan say it again.
twitter.com/evamisgo/status/1389253277292826632

On the BBC today :

twitter.com/I_amMukhtar/status/1568967114177843202

You're arguing that "Meghan's truth" is the only truth. .

The facts are being a prince or HRH does not automatically entitle you to protection.

Archie and Lilibet are automatically HRH now Charles is King. The choice as to whether they use it is their parents / theirs once they turn 18. Nothing was or has been denied to them.

What can be debated is whether Meghan's ignorance on these matters is the fault of Prince Harry / the Royal Household or even herself as a highly educated woman in her 40s. I think it was a combination of all three.

Rather strange that W, KC, C and KM titles have already been updated on the royal website.

I wonder if the titles have already been quietly alters - albeit with a few legality bits and bobs still to be finalised.
Now would not be the best time for KC to announce such ofcourse, he is still riding on the goodwill of the grieving.

While you are again seeing offence and speculating on a half glass full perspective I like to give people the benefit of the doubt.

My opinion is, it hasn't been updated as HM are taking the time to decide whether to use the titles or not. It is a poisoned chalice and requires careful consideration.

Charles is now king. Camilla Queen Consort. William & Catherine now Prince & Princess of Wales. William is now heir apparent.

There is absolutely nothing strange about the website being updated to reflect that.

How come Anne, a princess since birth, doesn't get this then? Or Beatrice and Eugenie? Where's the rule written that says protection is linked to being called prince or princess?

Odd really that Meghan said this when it is inconsistent with what was written by their hugely sympathetic biographer, Omid Scobie, in Finding Freedom. In that he says that the Sussexes made their own decision not to use any titles for their child(ren), not that it was denied to them to do so. Wonder why Meghan's story changed later? And it was her story, given the details of her cooperating with the book that came out in court.

Strange wording it sounds sounds like the palace are waiting for information.

https://www.elle.com/culture/celebrities/a41154327/why-meghan-harry-kids-archie-and-lilibet-royal-titles-not-changed-yet/?utmsource=facebook&utmmmedium=social-media&utmcampaign=socialflowFBELM&fbclid=IwAR08LBfDraquURqqedabgSSXLzlY_Wo2HjBdESL-yxhiaVxJ86jRFfX3tUI

Omid would have written what he was told by palace staff though.

He is constantly called H&M mouth piece, but he never actually met MM till her last day engagement. Even in court, Jason Knauf explains that he was talking to him, and it was him JK who convinced H&M who were unsure that he is reliable - and he was working against H&M it turned out. But as he was employed by KP and they were part of the bosses (with W&K), they had to concede that, technically he was working under their instructions. He produced part of what he discussed with H&M and how he should brief OS enquiries. Most of it was about Samantha. Long story. We discussed that on another thread.

Omid got a lot of things wrong including the crying story and engagement (he somehow mixed up the wedding / engagement story).

We don't know who briefed him in what exactly, for all we know JK himself could have told him. It could just have been what someone understood, and went around the offices as a natural fact.

H&M say they were never asked, I will believe the horses mouth for now, till I hear formally from the palace on the contrary.(Gosh, that is why the palace needs proper 1/2 spokesperson, sick of these 'palace source')

This.

At the time of Archie’s birth (and the OW program) -

Two of the Queen’s children (Princess Anne and Prince Edward) only had protection when on royal duties, and they are senior working royals.

Prince William is the only royal of Harry’s generation to have protection, the others do not.

William and Kate’s children also have protection as they are 3rd, 4th and 5th in line to the throne. None of the other great grandchildren have protection.

Yes, @alwayscheery

They are quoting Hello magazine. A strange way to go about it.

If A&L currently have the titles, that is what should be listed currently. Anything else, can be changed later when H&M put out a statement, that they will not be using the titles etc.

It may hinge on the case, it may not. Who knows how long this case will take or when H&M will come to their decision.

I'm sure H&M are just too busy with the funeral right now to deal with it. But the workers who deal with the updating of the site, apparently are not. They are aware it's a subject of contention.

Strangely enough they vaguely say :
Asked whether Archie and Lili would take the titles of Prince and Princess, he added: "At the moment, we're focused on the next 10 days and as and when we get information, we will update that website."

To which I say, update it with the current information as of now, then change later if any changes need to be done.

Anyway, I guess whatever, we will hear later if they have the titles or not.

If A&L currently have the titles, that is what should be listed currently. Anything else, can be changed later when H&M put out a statement, that they will not be using the titles etc.

Given that one of Harry & Meghan’s complaints is that they announced Archie’s titles without any consultation with his parents announcing a change in their titles without any consultation with them would be incredibly rude.

Waiting for them to decide if they want the children to be known on the succession list as they currently are, or by titles is a far more respectful option toward H & M.

Plus removes the controversy angle of “they’ve had titles taken away” if that had to happen.

I suspect, yesterday’s ‘fab four’ walkabout notwithstanding, there’s plenty of unseemly wrangling going on behind the scenes.

if the RF were happy for the dc to be automatically made HRH/ princess/Prince the website would have been updated accordingly.

The promotion of Edward to Duke of Edinburgh is a different matter because it would presumably require an announcement / proclamation of some sort. There was some speculation when PP died that Charles was reluctant for Edward to have his father’s title, so it may not be a foregone conclusion

Interested to see what happens