HRH Prince Archie Harrison 0f Sussex and HRH Princess Lilibet Diana of Sussex

[Price21210]

Will Sussex be their last names? How does that work?

Lillibet just sounds like a name a toddler might call themselves which is why the Queen used it. There are lots of lovely versions of Elizabeth. She could have been Princess Isobel. I’m not keen on Prince George either, they could have been more original there. Look

No idea where you got that he said William was briefing on him daily.

But we all remember Jason Knauf reviving a case against MM after she had won it. He would not have gone without William's approval and he did not get fired after that is for sure.

Same JK also made the bogus bullying claims - which the 'bullied' wanted nothing to do with.

William let something slip to camilla about H&M and it was in the papers the next day. Tbf, it seems Camilla was also briefing against William too.

Charles and Camilla office leaked the exit document as it was only mentioned to them that H&M were ready to relinquish their titles, and that part appeared in the papers.

I think Lilibet was used not just for sentimental reasons but for merchandising ones too.

Though I do understand that the Royals do trademark some of their names so they can't be used nefariously by others.
So maybe I'm just being a little bit harsh.
But call me cynical there will soon be a brand of children's clothing & accessories called Lilibet which in it self is completely fine.
But it's the added kudos of being Lilibet a name forever sentimentally connected it with QEII.

For example say I was Queen I would have no problem with my DGGC being called Tracy or even Trace but I wouldn't like my personal family nickname of Teaks (a name hardly anyone else uses & always brings up recollections of me ) used unless asked first

I think.I read she's actually lilli,or Lilly for epeveryday use which is quite sweet princess Lilli/Lilly sounds nice .

I get what you mean but Isobel is a name in its own right now with various spellings

also thought maybe QEII would issue new letters patent to allow this as then it would be treating both William's & Harry's children fairly from the start.
Sometimes I forget that it's not just a family it's also a firm that's got set in its ways.

All this Archie's been left out business could have been avoided if one of the suits had said 'Ma'am I don't think the optics will look good as it will seem that you are favouring William's children over Harry's children
Or maybe QEII did want to be fair from the start but was talked out of it.

William’s and Harry’s children are not equal though, that’s the whole point of Royalty! of course they should not be treated the same, George will be King, he is far more important to the RF than Archie, to treat them the same would be absolutely ridiculous, that’s the equivalent of saying Peter and Zara Phillips should have been treated the same as William and Harry.

Also though once George has his own children assuming he does Charlotte and Louis will also become secondary they will be displaced just as Harry has .

also thought maybe QEII would issue new letters patent to allow this as then it would be treating both William's & Harry's children fairly from the start.
Sometimes I forget that it's not just a family it's also a firm that's got set in its ways.

It should be remembered though that the changes made for William’s children aren’t actually just for William’s children.

They are for the children of the POW’s eldest going forward. So will affect George’s children, his eldest’s children and so on.

They weren’t specifically LP’s for William’s and Kate’s children. They were to address the change going forward for the children of the heir.

All this Archie's been left out business could have been avoided if one of the suits had said 'Ma'am I don't think the optics will look good as it will seem that you are favouring William's children over Harry's children'
Or maybe QEII did want to be fair from the start but was talked out of it.

Not everything is about 'optics'. And surely most people understand that royal titles aren't awarded on the basis of 'fairness'? If that was the case, nobody would be called 'Your Royal Highness'. None of them are any better than the rest of us after all.

William is heir to the throne and Harry is not. His children are going to have a role to play in the future of the monarchy which Harry's won't, even had he stayed as a working royal. The LP's were issued to avoid the problem of a potential firstborn girl being a mere 'lady' while the younger brother she outranked was a HRH Prince, as would have been the case under the older convention.

In most European monarchies, the sons and daughters of the monarch's younger children don't have princely titles at all. I think this is the Letters Patent the queen should have issued. Obviously she didn't. Hopefully Charles will issue you to avoid these kinds of arguments for the next generation.

Issue 'one' not issue 'you'!

Yes, Anne, Andrew and Edward were also ‘displaced’ once William and Harry were born, this is not a new concept.

He said in his Netflix doc that he was heartbroken as they had made a pact that their offices would never ply those games against each other.
Yet never gave a single example of William or his office planting a story.
If you have one I’d love to hear it.
Because I’ve asked a few times, and nothing.

I’m assuming by ‘reviving a case’ you mean when JK being asked to provide evidence, then provided evidence MM lied in her statement?

How is JK exposing MM lies now Williams fault?
Do you expect people’s employers to force them to withhold evidence?
Any thoughts on MM lying in the first place?

Court docs also state it was very apparent team Sussex were briefing to the press from the outset of the case. Any thoughts on that?

@upinaballoon - sorry if others have answered you , my eyes aren't great , yes if I understand your question correctly , Archie not being a prince was nothing to do with being mixed race or security - he simply was not entitled to it according to the rules. & I do think it was a bit naughty of M& H to imply otherwise.

Surely even if Harry wasn't aware of the rules ( feasible - for him - ) they could have googled along with a lot of people. But "their truth"

I’m assuming by ‘reviving a case’ you mean when JK being asked to provide evidence, by daily mail, not anyone else

Archie not being a prince was nothing to do with being mixed race or security - he simply was not entitled to it according to the rules. & I do think it was a bit naughty of M& H to imply otherwise.
Didn’t they mean once Charles was King? Because of course Harry knows they’re not entitled until then. They’re claiming I assume that conversations were had about when Charles became king, at which point they were under current rules, entitled to them.

They deliberately implied Archie was not getting a title due to racism
Meghan ‘you would be correct in that assumption’ to Oprah when she asked was the reason he wasn’t a prince down to racism.

if only Meghan had told the truth, JK wouldn’t have had to get involved.

Maybe that’s what she thought though. Maybe the plan was to change the rules before Charles took the throne, or after, someone or something made her believe that was the reason. If you don’t like her you’ll think it’s an outright lie of course.

‘Maybe that’s what she thought ‘ really isn’t good enough though is it

They shouted racism, which is a very serious allegation to make. They accepted awards,
And are now saying they never said racism it’s the media who said it

They didn’t say it though. They did said though that she and Archie suffered racism in this country ( which is true ) and didn’t feel adequately supported by the institution about it publicly. Isn’t that what the award is for? Or did it specify ‘ royal family’?

They deliberately implied Archie was not getting a title due to racism
Meghan ‘you would be correct in that assumption’ to Oprah when she asked was the reason he wasn’t a prince down to racism

This is true, but unless I dreamed it didn't they later make some statement saying they now understood it was due to protocol rather than racism? (I've tried to find this but it's all been swallowed by the latest noise and fury)

If it's correct then with the "unconscious bias" comments that would be the second time they've retracted suggestions of racism, which would create questions of its own - not least whether they've been challenged over it and been unable to offer a coherent response

They said that they thought all the grandchildren would be treated the same.

the implication was (imo) that the rules weren’t changed for Archie, as they were for William’s children, because of race.

Given Harry’s apparent cluelessness about how his only family worked I’m guessing he didn’t realise the actual reason the LP’s were issued for Williams children and just assumed his would also have LPs issued.

@Puzzledandpissedoff

I don’t remember them issuing a statement about it being protocols but if someone has a link

I don’t think they ever meant or said that his family is out and out white suprematists who didn’t want him marrying a biracial woman. That’s not what I ever got. I interpreted it as, the environment is racist, the media were often racist, social media was horrifically racist and his family didn’t understand this was different to normal criticism because of unconscious bias and because of that, wouldn’t help them they way they should of.

@YetMoreNewBeginnings

You’d think someone as intelligent as Meghan would be clear on their facts before making these very serious allegations,