Jump to content
Kath

British Royals

Recommended Posts

8 minutes ago, fykeylicious said:

ARCHIE HARRISON MOUNTBATTEN-WINDSOR

 

sharing this again so it's at the top of the page in case someone just clicks on page 17 :)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My understanding (very tenuous) is that grandchildren of the monarch are entitled to be styled Prince/Princess but Edward and Anne declined for their children. George, as the heir is entitled but Charlotte and Louis are not. However before George was born the queen extended that courtesy to all of Williams kids as they are the kids of the heir. Not sure what happens after Charles takes over. I think having so many generations of heirs is confusing protocol!

 

google agrees with me except that it’s only grandchildren of the male line, but I’m pretty sure the Queen offered it for Anne’s kids and she said no. The part about William’s kids is relevant because once the succession rules were changed (before George was born) he could have been a girl, heir to the throne, but not a princess.

.

For the most part, the titles and styles of a Monarch’s descendants are determined by the Letters Patent issued by King George V in 1917. Under these LPs, the style of ‘Royal Highness’ and title of ‘Prince/Princess’ is granted to:

  • children of the monarch
  • grandchildren in the male line
  • the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales

Several additional LPs have been issued since then, which make some alterations to the original LPs:

  • 1948 – King George VI issued LPs declaring that all children of then-Princess Elizabeth would be styled as HRH and titled as Prince/Princess. Without these LPs, Charles and Anne would not have become HRH until The Queen’s accession in 1952. Instead, they would have been styled as children of a Duke. Charles would have been Charles Mountbatten, Earl of Merioneth (using his father’s most senior subsidiary title by courtesy), and Anne would have been Lady Anne Mountbatten.
  • 1957 – Queen Elizabeth II issued LPs creating her husband a Prince of the United Kingdom. Until that point, he was merely HRH The Duke of Edinburgh, and not ‘Prince Philip’ as the media often referred to him.
  • 2012 – Queen Elizabeth II issued LPs declaring that all children of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales would be styled as HRH, with the title Prince/Princess. While this had no effect on Prince George, who was already entitled as the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales, it did affect his younger sister Princess Charlotte. Were it not for these LPs, Charlotte would be styled Lady Charlotte Mountbatten-Windsor until her grandfather became King.

 

Edited by dixiedoodah
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Okay, anyone know why they picked Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor?

Windsor I get, but how did they come up with the other names?  Who are they honoring??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, princess said:

Okay, anyone know why they picked Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor?

Windsor I get, but how did they come up with the other names?  Who are they honoring??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry for the duplicate post. The site is being weird. Princess, Mountbatten-Windsor is the (I guess unofficial?) last name of Queen Elizabeth’s family. Mountbatten for Philip and Windsor for her. I’m digging deep into my Duran Duran era Anglophilia today.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Duana (the Name Nerd on Lainey's site) says that the Archie is unprecedented (in a quick search) of the royal ancestry. So presumably they just liked the name. And it's not even Archibald (I admit THAT scandalized me a little bit - I appreciate choice for nicknames AND formal names - not everyone wants a "cute" name)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

baby-names-6.jpg

 

The Baby Name Game

April 30, 2019

[Blind Gossip] This celebrity couple is having a baby very soon and everybody is playing the name game!

We do know about one specific conversation that took place very early on in the pregnancy, before the gender of the baby was even known.

It was about the baby’s name.

Basically, the expectant parents wanted something in the name to honor his mother or his mother’s family.

[His older brother] restricted them. He did not want [their mother’s] first name used but said it was fine to use her middle or last name. [The older brother’s wife] was especially opposed to the use of the first name but she did not get directly involved in any discussion with the couple.

We’re not sure why the older brother did this. Perhaps he and his wife are planning to use his mother’s name for a future child of their own?

While everyone here is an adult and we don’t think that the expectant couple was necessarily looking for permission from the older brother, his opinion does matter a lot to them.

Or did.

Given what’s transpired in the past few months, we do not know if their original discussion many months ago will hold… or if the younger brother and his wife will thumb their nose at the older brother and do what they want.

We’ll all find out soon!

Similar: The Singer Baby Twist

Younger Brother/Wife:

Older Brother/Wife:

[Optional] Pick the baby’s name! Boy: __________ Girl: __________

 

 

SOLVED!

Younger Brother/Wife: Harry and Meghan

Older Brother/Wife: William and Kate

The newest little royal has been named: Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor!

The baby was presented and the announcement of his name was made this morning, conveniently just in time for the American morning TV shows.

Harry and Meghan did not present their baby to the public on the cold concrete stairs outside the hospital like Prince Charles and Princess Diana – and Prince William and Kate – did with their children.

prince-charles-princess-diana-harry-birt

prince-william-kate-middleton-birth.jpg

No, no, no.

These beaming new parents chose to premiere their beautiful baby boy on the opulent red carpets of Windsor Castle.

prince-harry-meghan-markle-6.jpg

We do not know about the origin of the name Archie. It is not a standard royal name and they are not saying that it is short for Archibald. If you will recall, Prince Harry’s first name is actually Henry, but he has been called Harry from the beginning.

We think that Archibald would actually have been a better fit. William bald… Harry bald… Archibald.

prince-william-harry-bald.jpg

We jest.

Harrison is also not a traditional royal name and may be a contraction of “Harry’s son.”

Mountbatten-Windsor is the official last name for the family. Not everyone uses it.

Did you know that royals don’t actually list their last name on a driver’s license or a passport? They use their titles.

However, they can select a last name if they like. For example, Prince William’s children use the last name of Cambridge at school.

Little Archie does not have any kind of royal title as part of his name. Yet. So we’ll call him Archie Sussex for now.

Anyway, going back to a specific conversation that took place very early on in the pregnancy  – before the gender of the baby was even known – there was a discussion of using Harry’s mother’s name in some capacity. Princess Diana was born Diana Frances Spencer.

William and Kate included Diana as part of their daughter Charlotte’s name (Charlotte Elizabeth Diana) but they were apparently not keen on Harry using Diana for his baby’s first name. Harry and Meghan, for their part, were not keen on Frances for a girl or Francis for a boy. Spencer would have been cute for a boy… or very non-traditional for a girl.

As it turns out, none of Princess Diana’s three names were chosen for Harry and Meghan’s first child, although they did make a special effort to include Diana’s siblings in the birth announcement.

Nobody guessed Archie as a potential name. That is not surprising as the name is not a traditionally royal name and is also not the name of any known member of either family.

Congratulations to Meghan and Harry on their beautiful baby boy!

Welcome to the world, Archie Sussex!

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I love how Meghan is gushing about how easy Archie is. It’s such a naive new mom thing to do. Nearly all newborns are easy. If a baby is colicky (and I’m not saying Archie will be—20% of babies are so more likely not) it doesn’t start until two weeks past the due date. That’s also when babies start to get a bit fussy during the evening, called the witching hour (though at its peak usually lasts between 4:00/5:00 and 9:00/10:00 so “hour” is a misnomer) which is more common than colic. If you’re lucky enough to have a baby that isn’t colicky and doesn’t go through the witching hour then the baby usually “wakes up” somewhere between two and six weeks. It’s far too early to know if they have an “easy” baby or not but most moms are fooled in those first few weeks. 

ETA: Also love the name and the pictures. 

Edited by witchkitten
  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even I - who have NO kids- laughed when they mentioned how easy going he is. HE ISN'T TWO DAYS OLD YET (when they first made the comments) SO HOW WOULD THEY KNOW? OK, it's ridiculous. On the other hand, if your mom is living with you and you probably have a night nurse or nanny or two, it probably is easy. Even if she's breastfeeding....She hasn't had time to get tired yet!

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do love that when Will & Kate were out (MOnday?) and asked about the baby, Will said he looked forward to welcoming his brother into the group of sleepless parenthood or something similar. I think Will & Kate are fairly hands on (modern royals, if you will) and it must be hard for them - they want to appear "normal" and I'm sure they do far more hands-on parenting than any of the older royals have, but at the same time - they have money & privilege & it IS easier for them, so it must be a fine line about what you are able to say in public. If Megan had come out talking about how Archie cried all the time and the diapers were a poopy mess (they wouldn't be just yet, would they? ;-) it wouldn't have come off well either. So she really had to say he's been easy.

Over the years, Kate & Will have been able to "slip" some of the normal things their kids do - their tempers, willfulness, etc. I think that's probably the sweet spot for how a modern royal has to talk about parenthood.

This is all based on mostly US press coverage of the royals. I read a couple UK journos on twitter but otherwise don't follow stuff (unless Lainey mentions it, like Will's supposed affair with Lady Chomendeley - I never know if I'm spelling that properly) so the impression could be very different in the UK where opinions tend to be a bit more polarized? 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The name Archie really surprised me and I did not like it at first. I am beginning to get used to it. Apparently it is popular in Britain. I would've liked the name Spencer in there somewhere. Harrison makes me think of Harrison Ford. Why have we not gotten to see the baby's sweet face yet? We have seen his feet which look awfully big for such a youngster, and his nose. I want to know if he has red hair like Daddy. Now they are not going to release the birth certificate until ... well we don't know when. If she is so controlling and crazy about privacy, she married into the wrong family. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/8/2019 at 8:11 PM, witchkitten said:

I love how Meghan is gushing about how easy Archie is. It’s such a naive new mom thing to do. Nearly all newborns are easy. If a baby is colicky (and I’m not saying Archie will be—20% of babies are so more likely not) it doesn’t start until two weeks past the due date. That’s also when babies start to get a bit fussy during the evening, called the witching hour (though at its peak usually lasts between 4:00/5:00 and 9:00/10:00 so “hour” is a misnomer) which is more common than colic. If you’re lucky enough to have a baby that isn’t colicky and doesn’t go through the witching hour then the baby usually “wakes up” somewhere between two and six weeks. It’s far too early to know if they have an “easy” baby or not but most moms are fooled in those first few weeks. 

ETA: Also love the name and the pictures. 

My mother said that I would start raising hell (as an infant) every evening when she was trying to cook dinner. Sounds like I was just normal. 

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, Gracenote said:

. If she is so controlling and crazy about privacy, she married into the wrong family.

I think Harry is very private about private things. He (and Meghan!) are totally willing to be out in the public when they are doing their public duties. I don't think - given their actual roles in the family - they are wrong to want & seek privacy for their private lives. Princess Anne's kids get it. Prince Andrew's would if they wanted it - but they don't 😉 Prince Edward's get it (though, they're still much younger so it's not quite the same issue) The public feel some sort of ownership over William & Harry and while I understand it, I think it must be awful for them. William is heir to the throne and MUST be in the public eye. Harry is down to ....6th? at this point. Let his wife give birth in a hospital where she wants and reveal whatever the heck they want about their baby. It's their baby. Not ours. No matter how many of us got up at ungodly hours to livestream their wedding 😉

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, princess said:

Wasn't there some question about when she actually got pregnant too?? 

I was totally on board with the “she’s more pregnant than they are admitting.” Her bump was huge really early on. Her disappearing before the birth and the refusal to release the birth certificate do nothing to prove  to me that the baby couldn’t have come earlier than they said. I’m not. A huge conspiracy theorist, so it’s probably not the case, but it isn’t certain to me that it’s not either. Like, if three years from now they admit the baby was born a few weeks before they said, I’d not be shocked.

Edited by dixiedoodah
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not sure the timeline fits with IVF or some other kind of fertility assistance. It takes 3 to 6 months to prepare yourself for IVF. (It's true she could have started prior to the wedding, but doing so would have taken a lot of time and might have caused some bloating, which might have been apparent in those wedding dresses.

So if she did any of that, I'd argue they didn't start until after the wedding. Now, they got married in May of 2018 and had the baby in May (or April, if we're saying earlier) of 2019. Considering pregnancies are 10 months, that only leaves less than 2 months for any sort of assistance. (Please correct me if my math is off, which is always a possibility with me.) But at any rate, I'm not sure the timeline fits.

Also, if Archie was born prior to their admitting it (which is totally possible), he could only have been born like 2 weeks earlier. It's one thing to have the baby in secret, but there's really no need to lie about it. In fact, admitting to an earlier date would be a way for her to give a big middle finger to the British press, whom Meghan would have successfully hoodwinked. So if that's true, it would be a good ploy to own up to it, so she could prove she outsmarted them. Keeping it a secret would be okay for ~privacy although what does that matter really? We know the kids name and his parents....I mean will it have his bank information on it?  

So, I suspect that IF the baby were born earlier, I say we look for Meghan to release that information at some point, maybe in an exclusive interview to an American outlet? That would be a good way for her to flex her power. 

I dunno, I probably wayyyyyyy overthought this 😂:rolleyes:

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think IVF timing fits either - and yes, it's the bloating I thought of too (for hormone injections - they could have been doing other stuff). One thing that is on the birth certificate is the place of birth, so if they "got away" with doing it privately this time and want to deliver in the same place again (Portland Hospital is common rumor) they might want to keep that private. I mean, if it's the common rumor, that would be enough to generate press next time, but still. 

I'm still ok with the privacy. Or a later reveal. Why not?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was looking through People and thought this organizational chart was pretty neat!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, fykeylicious said:

holy shit!

they took phots "of and into the living area and din area of the home and directly into the bedroom"

https://www.cnn.com/2019/05/16/europe/prince-harry-meghan-helicopter-pictures-gbr-intl-scli/index.html

that's some bullshit

:shocked:  What a crappy thing to do to them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, branchop said:

I was looking through People and thought this organizational chart was pretty neat!

I couldn't find it, can you share the link?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×