Meghan’s lies are coming back to bite her as information from around time of Archie’s birth have resurfaced that he could’ve been given his father’s courtesy title of Earl of Dumbarton since he was not entitled to be a prince. Apparently this moniker wasn’t enough…
Earl of Dumbarton. Hmm. Doesn’t sound quite unique as Prince of Sussex does it? Apparently, Archie’s mother, Meghan Markle was way off her mark. She made the claim her son wasn’t allowed to have a title because of the colour of his skin. Not only does that sound totally stupid, but she created that tall tale out of thin air. She would’ve know that her firstborn did not qualify for a princely moniker. This comes from news.com.au.
It was revealed upon Archie’s birth that his parents were offered one of Harry’s courtesy titles as Earl of Dumbarton. However, this was rejected by the Sussexes. Meanwhile, Meghan said in the Oprah interview that this was incorrect. Her son wasn’t entitled to have a title because of his skin colour. Both these things are lies. Firstly, he is not eligible to be prince as his father is a second born. However, he will be when PC is king. Also, race has nothing to do with it. The Letters Patent were put in place long before Archie came along.
It states that only the children and grandchildren of the monarch are allowed to be princes and princesses. Great grandchildren are not included. The only reason George, Charlotte, and Louis have titles is because their father, Prince William will be king. As will their grandfather, Prince Charles. The Letters Patent 1917 state that only the eldest son of the eldest son of the heir to the throne can be granted a title.
In 2012, prior to the birth of Prince George, The Queen issued her own Letters Patent which granted all future children of Prince William access to have prince or princess titles.
This rule wasn’t extended to Harry as he is the second son of Prince Charles. However, his grandmother could step in.
There is an exception to the grandchildren of the monarch not having prince or princess titles. One big example of Lady Louise Windsor and her brother, James, Viscount Severn, the youngest grandchildren of The Queen. They weren’t granted princely monikers as their father, Prince Edward is the Earl of Wessex rather than the Duke of Wessex.
It has been stated that Louise and James will be entitled to these titles when they turn 18 if they choose. Their mother Sophie, Countess of Wessex has said that she and her husband have not encouraged their children to want these titles as they want them to make their own decision when the time is right.
Another example of this is Peter Phillips and Zara Tindall. Neither of them were given titles as their mother, Princess Anne did not want them having them. Their own children do not have titles either. Also, they are the offspring of a female child of the monarch. They were not entitled to titles though their grandmother, The Queen could’ve stepped in and granted it.
Back To Archie
Meghan and Harry would’ve known that their son does not have automatic rights to a princedom. However, he will once Charles becomes become king as Archie will be a grandchild of the monarch.
The Duchess of Sussex might’ve claimed she didn’t care for titles, but why was she so desperate for her child to be a Prince? She and Harry could’ve agreed for Archie to be an Earl, but no. It was not good enough for her. She wanted him to be on the same level as his older cousins, despite knowing he wasn’t.
Also, using the cover of concerns over his skin colour is just wrong. Meghan knows too well as does Harry that Archie will not be a prince until his grandfather becomes king.
Finally, we wanted to discuss the security aspect. Why would a baby who cannot be on its own be in need of security when his father had security as a working royal? If he was able to look after himself, and his parents paid for such services, then sure, give the kid protection.
Also, it’s well-known that most royals don’t have security unless they’re conducting work on behalf of The Queen. Grow up, Harry and Meghan!