The Controversy Around Archie’s Title: A Primer on British Royalty
The debate surrounding whether Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, son of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, was denied a royal title because of his race has resurfaced. This article aims to clarify the real reasons behind this decision and address the misconceptions surrounding Archie's title.
Understanding the Current Situation
Archie Mountbatten-Windsor is currently residing as a Prince of the United Kingdom but it raises questions about how he would have fit into the traditional naming practices of the monarchy. Many misconceptions have surrounded his exclusion from certain titles, primarily because of the legal and practical reasons involved.
Why Archie Was Initially Not Given a Title?
When Archie was still in the womb, his parents, Prince Harry and Meghan Markle, approached the British monarchy to ensure that their child would have the appropriate security measures in place. However, these measures were not possible without the title. The family was informed that the title of a Prince or Princess would only come with separate security, which the parents requested but could not arrange given their security constraints.
It is important to note that royal children are typically given titles based on the timing of their births relative to the monarchy. This is governed by the Letters Patent of 1917, which outlines who can be addressed as “His/Her Royal Highness” (HRH). According to this document, royal children are given the title HRH upon the death of Queen Elizabeth II, as they would then be the grandsons or daughters of the new monarch, in this case, King Charles III.
Impact of the Royal Family on Archie's Title
Many incidents, such as Archie traveling to South Africa with his parents, have been cited as reasons why he would not have a title. However, these trips can be more symbolic than legally binding. The security and protocol around royal trips are subject to various factors, not just the title of the children accompanying the royal family.
When Meghan Markle made statements about the “convention” for grandsons to receive the title HRH, she highlighted the existing legal framework. This convention merely refers to a tradition that is overridden by the letter patent, which explicitly lays down the legal basis for the titles.
dispelling Misconceptions
Archie was not denied a title because of his race. The decision was based on legal and operational reasons. Meghan’s comments about racial undertones were, at best, unfounded and at worst, a cynical attempt to gain sympathy. The concept of a “racial undertone” in the UK is largely misunderstood. The title of an HRH is not influenced by a monarch’s personal beliefs or racial considerations. The legal framework is clear and consistent.
The discussion around these titles has also become a proxy for a broader debate about race and privilege within the royal family. While it is natural to be curious about such matters, it is crucial to base our understanding on accurate facts rather than assumptions. People outside the UK who have experienced racial discrimination might assume that similar practices exist globally, but this is not the case.
The key takeaway is that the decision to grant Archie the title of Prince was based on the legal and operational requirements of the British monarchy, which are well-documented and transparent.