Royalty Thread #9. Welcome Archie, the red headed heir, don’t care!

[Vagabond]

They'll just start bitching that they need to see the long form birth certificate. Because it has the info needed to prove treason.

Do they expect it to say that Archie was born in Kenya?

 

[floridaice]

Do they expect it to say that Archie was born in Kenya?

Well, that plays into the whole 'moving to Africa' scenario doesn't it!

 

[Lorac]

Duchess of Cambridge visits to Bletchley Park to celebrate 75 years since D-day. She has a personal connection to it as her paternal Grandmother and her grandmothers twin sister worked there during the war. Kate once again knocks it out of the park in a gorgeous blue dress with polka dots that she has worn before and flashes a lot of toned leg - the sky high heels certainly help the highlight how toned those legs are. And the smile on the young man in his rather nifty braces who presented the Duchess with flowers is literally from ear to ear - he looks so happy and proud

Duchess of Cambridge visits WW2 site where 'granny' was codebreaker

Kate and the codebreakers! (yep it's the Daily Mail - but the pictures are the best)

 

[MsZem]

Duchess of Cambridge visits to Bletchley Park to celebrate 75 years since D-day. She has a personal connection to it as her paternal Grandmother and her grandmothers twin sister worked there during the war. Kate once again knocks it out of the park in a gorgeous blue dress with polka dots that she has worn before and flashes a lot of toned leg - the sky high heels certainly help the highlight how toned those legs are. And the smile on the young man in his rather nifty braces who presented the Duchess with flowers is literally from ear to ear - he looks so happy and proud

That child is unreasonably cute.

 

[skatesindreams]

The smile on the young man in his rather nifty braces who presented the Duchess with flowers is literally from ear to ear - he looks so happy and proud

I bet he'll always remember the encounter!

 

[Lorac]

That child is unreasonably cute.

I bet he'll always remember the encounter!

The Daily Mail page has a video and Kate gets down and chats to the little boy for a long time - it was so adorable!!!

 

[aftershocks]

... Not saying it's true in Meghan's case, but it's not entirely unusual in the entertainment industry or even in the dating world to fudge a lot of things just a little, and once you start, you might not have any choice but to keep going.

Eh, that might be true for some people under certain circumstances and within certain contexts. However, my first reaction to this even being discussed in connection with the Duchess of Sussex:
Meghan's parents were behind-the-scenes crew on General Hospital when they met and married, not big time actors or entertainment industry honchos. There's absolutely no reason in the world for her parents to not know when she was born or to fudge her birth date. It's not like she was born in a war-torn country where birth documents are easily lost, destroyed or nonexistent. Surely Meghan was born at a hospital in L.A., which had to follow proper procedures surrounding births.

Neither did Meghan's parents have any clue when little Rachel Meghan was born that she would grow up and become a successful actor on a television series. Much less did they know their precious daughter would one day meet and marry a prince of the United Kingdom. What Meghan's parents did know (at least in the beginning in the case of her father) is how much they loved and cherished the little girl they conceived together. And they set about nurturing her and giving her everything they possibly could. This is especially true for Meghan's mother Doria, and her maternal grandmother Jeanette, who as with many loving African-American caregivers surely wished to see their beautiful baby girl Meghan go on to achieve at the highest level, and to experience better opportunities in life than were available to them.
Mission Accomplished, and then some!

Ridiculousness reigns in the absence of any solid 'peeping Tom' details about the Sussexes and their private lives.

How about we focus on some interesting facts, such as the fact I previously mentioned that Meghan was born on the same day as Barack Obama, and the Queen Mother (Elizabeth Bowes Lyon): August 4. Moreover, there's been crickets regarding the fact that Meghan and Harry have a fascinating shared ancestral history:
https://www.americanancestors.org/uploadedfiles/content/features/meghan-markle-chart.pdf

Further, here's another delightful fact: Meghan's mother, Doria Ragland, and her husband, Prince Harry (HRH The Duke of Sussex), share the same birthday: September 15

ETA:
BTW, can someone please link where it was officially confirmed that M&H do not want to release Archie's birth certificate? It might be made-up gossip and rumor (lots of crazy rumors are floating). Or, it might be true that they have no desire to make a big deal about releasing it, despite knowing it can be obtained as a matter of public record.

 

[Sylvia]

Disney created a Winnie the Pooh animation as a baby gift for Meghan and Harry:
https://twitter.com/scobie/status/1126580022150598657

It's cute ... here is the original video on FB: https://www.facebook.com/DisneyUK/videos/vb.277866969252/2228191657264067/?type=3&theater

BTW, can someone please link where it was officially confirmed that M&H do not want to release Archie's birth certificate?

This article cites 2 articles in the U.K.: https://www.usatoday.com/story/life...hies-birth-public-wont-see-it-yet/1169583001/

Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan of Sussex are expected to take the next step in introducing their newborn son, Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor, to the world: They will formally register his birth (as required) but will not make the document public.
For now. Like a birth certificate in the U.S., a birth registration is a public document in the United Kingdom and will eventually become public, possibly in months.
Buckingham Palace declined to comment on reports in the Sunday Telegraph and in The Sun on the decision by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who have been resolute in seeking as much privacy as possible for themselves and their baby since Meghan's pregnancy was announced in October.

 

[PDilemma]

@aftershocks, you know Doria Ragland's birthday? Tell me again about how you aren't unnaturally obsessed with Meghan?

 

[AxelAnnie]

Prince Harry and Duchess Meghan of Sussex are expected to take the next step in introducing their newborn son, Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor, to the world: They will formally register his birth (as required) but will not make the document public.
For now. Like a birth certificate in the U.S., a birth registration is a public document in the United Kingdom and will eventually become public, possibly in months.
Buckingham Palace declined to comment on reports in the Sunday Telegraph and in The Sun on the decision by the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who have been resolute in seeking as much privacy as possible for themselves and their baby since Meghan's pregnancy was announced in October.

I don't get why they are doing this. It is a public document. It is no big deal.............unless it IS a big deal.

 

[attyfan]

I don't get why they are doing this. It is a public document. It is no big deal.............unless it IS a big deal.

Since it is a public document, why should they do the work? Why not let those who seem to be overly interested get it themselves?

 

[Sylvia]

@PDilemma, you seem to be somewhat "unnaturally obsessed" with aftershocks' posts in this thread?

But, seriously, can we stick more to the topic at hand and keep it FUN rather than being overly critical of other people's posts here? Use the 'Ignore' feature if you have to.

 

[canbelto]

Seriously I come to this thread to learn about when Meghan's being carted off to the Tower of London.

 

[AxelAnnie]

Since it is a public document, why should they do the work? Why not let those who seem to be overly interested get it themselves?

Perhaps I misunderstood. I thought the birth certificates were public and they were putting a hold on theirs.

 

[aftershocks]

@aftershocks, you know Doria Ragland's birthday? Tell me again about how you aren't unnaturally obsessed with Meghan?

Uh, and can you tell me again what your motivations and interests are exactly regarding the Sussexes? Scratch that, never mind, I get your apparent drift.

You don't pay careful attention to what I say, only to what you wish to pick out and pick on. I've made no secret about my interest in the royal family and in British history and monarchy generally, and most recently and specifically in the love story between Harry and Meghan. I've already stated how, why and when I began following their story. You don't really care about the truth behind my interests or you wouldn't keep poking in such a negative fashion. In any case, your mind is made up regarding what you choose to believe.

And btw, what with all the rampant stupidity and utter nonsense being thrown around about Meghan, and the whining and complaining by the royal reporters, and the non-stop slants of all kinds in the tabloids, I find Meghan to be amazingly calm, focused and centered. As someone I know recently said, "... Meghan has remained strong. She refuses to let the noise in. She knows how to deal with toxic people and attitudes. She's as comfortable in her own skin as Camilla is." I would also cite Michelle Obama and Hillary Clinton as other strong women, comfortable in their own skin, in the face of ridiculous attacks.

 

[once_upon]

Google is suggesting news articles solely on the royals. Mostly Meghan and Harry, with some on what Kate wore.
I blame this thread.

 

[aftershocks]

^^ The British royals just happen to be trending right now (with M&H still popular a year after their marriage, and particularly since the birth of their son). I'm actually not the only person who became interested in following M&H's love story for its uplifting, feel-good nature. The confirmation that they were dating came with Prince Harry's press release, the day after the U.S. presidential election, November 8, 2016. Harry's unprecedented statement is now part of the historical record: https://www.royal.uk/statement-communications-secretary-prince-harry

In November 2016, I didn't know anything about Meghan as I'd never watched Suits. I have since then and it turned out to be a very good, well-acted, well-written, and expertly produced show. The show couldn't survive the loss of three important leads: Gina Torres, Patrick J. Adams, and Meghan Markle. Torres is supposed to be starring in a spin-off series set in Chicago.

BTW, I shared Doria Ragland's birth date here because of the fact it's the same day as her son-in-law's. Doria's daughter is famous, so there's interest in Doria and in her background too, not just by me. In fact, there's a lot of interest worldwide. Here's a tip of the iceberg example regarding reactions to the lovely family photo posted by the Sussexes on May 8:
https://twitter.com/JamesCleverly/status/1126431146773024768
https://people.com/royals/royal-baby-archie-first-photo-queen-elizabeth-doria-ragland/

I've previously posted one or more of the below links on FSU, which may not have been of interest to some folks the first time, nor even this time:
https://vitabrevis.americanancestors.org/2018/05/meghan-markles-maternal-family/
https://www.cleveland.com/entertainment/2018/05/meghan_markles_surprising_clev.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uKgbW6K7Mm4 (Chattanooga, Tn Ragland connection reported)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79KQuc7_tuk Daily Mail TV Markle/Ragland ancestry
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-aJxQHrhXXw (Distant Ragland cousins from Georgia)

I'm from Cleveland, so yes, I was intrigued when I discovered that Meghan's mother's family has connections to Cleveland, Ohio, by way of Georgia (Doria's maternal side) and via Missouri, Tennessee & Georgia (Doria's paternal side). The above-linked article by a Cleveland reporter contains a few slightly inaccurate details that I randomly found more about online via the work of a genealogy enthusiast (info also posted above).

Even Kate and Meghan share a common ancient relative, Elizabeth Mortimer. And both Kate and Meghan are related to the Windsors through a Bowes-Lyon connection (see on the chart I linked in my post #67). Meghan is also distantly related to the Spencer clan, though Kate is not: https://anthonyadolph.co.uk/princess-catherine/

There is widespread interest altogether in the Sussexes, and the interest is growing. Since Archie's birth, the Sussex Instagram account has increased from about 5.6 million followers to 7.9 million followers.

Why not be positive instead of negative or dismissive? If none of this is that interesting to most folks, that's fine. The Duchess of Cambridge also has a fascinating background and family history, part of which was mentioned in the earlier linked article about her recent public engagement. Kate's father comes from a well-to-do family, while Kate's mother comes from a more working-class background. Coincidentally, Kate's paternal grandfather, Peter Middleton (a WWII aviator), piloted with Prince Philip to South America, in 1962:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...en-marks-75th-anniversary-RAF-Air-Cadets.html (scroll down)
https://hrhduchesskate.blogspot.com/2016/12/kate-recalls-memories-as-duke-of.html

 

[Vagabond]

Prince Harry paid damages over pictures of his Oxfordshire home

Prince Harry has accepted substantial damages and an apology from a news agency that took aerial photographs of his Cotswolds home, forcing him and his wife, the Duchess of Sussex, to move out.

In a high court statement, lawyers for the Duke of Sussex said Splash News and Picture Agency, described as a well-known paparazzi agency, flew a chartered helicopter over the Oxfordshire property, photographing “the living area and dining area of the home and directly into the bedroom”. The property was privately rented by Harry and Meghan.

Photographs and videos were syndicated, and published by the Times and other media outlets, the court was told.

An apt reminder that certain bloggers and posters on FSU are not the only ones who can go too far.

 

[canbelto]

Wow with that drop waistline in the dress she wore to Bletchley Park Kate looks like she has a very long torso. Most of her dresses have a higher waistline or a belt to hike up with waistline. This is one dress which seems to sit where her actual waist is and ... wow.

 

[DFJ]

Wow with that drop waistline in the dress she wore to Bletchley Park Kate looks like she has a very long torso. Most of her dresses have a higher waistline or a belt to hike up with waistline. This is one dress which seems to sit where her actual waist is and ... wow.

A bit of a knockout that girl. She always looks just fabulous.

 

[puglover]

I personally love the fact that Kate wears dresses, etc. that she has worn before. I wish more celebrities would do the same. Does anyone know - is she the first royal to adopt this practice?

 

[mag]

I personally love the fact that Kate wears dresses, etc. that she has worn before. I wish more celebrities would do the same. Does anyone know - is she the first royal to adopt this practice?

Princess Anne is famous for rewearing clothing. I read somewhere that everything is cleaned and packed away together: shoes, dress, coat, hat, etc. She brings them out 10, 20, even 30 years later.

 

[MLIS]

The Queen rewears outfits all the time. As mag said, Princess Anne is known for pulling out outfits decades later and rewearing them -- most famously, maybe, she wore the outfit she wore to Charles and Diana's wedding to the wedding of one of the Duke of Gloucester's daughters 27 years later. Impressive she could still fit into it! Diana herself often reworked outfits, and was particularly known for rewearing outfits to events where she didn't want to draw attention to herself, like someone else's wedding. It might seem like Kate does it more frequently, but I think that's as much because there are so many more blogs and royal watchers now tracking her outfits obsessively, so we notice more.

 

[MsZem]

I personally love the fact that Kate wears dresses, etc. that she has worn before. I wish more celebrities would do the same. Does anyone know - is she the first royal to adopt this practice?

You can see Queen Maxima's recycled outfits here. This Order of Splendor post includes the "Bambi dress" worn by Crown Princess Mary of Denmark.

The Swedish royals also rewear older stuff and put their kids in things they wore as children. Crown Princess Victoria has worn Queen Silvia's old dresses several times, including to the most recent Nobel Prize ceremony.

 

[taf2002]

Wow with that drop waistline in the dress she wore to Bletchley Park Kate looks like she has a very long torso. Most of her dresses have a higher waistline or a belt to hike up with waistline. This is one dress which seems to sit where her actual waist is and ... wow.

The 4th button down is where her actual waist is. The waist on her dress is not where her actual waist is. If it was she'd be a freak of nature.

 

[canbelto]

The 4th button down is where her actual waist is. The waist on her dress is not where her actual waist is. If it was she'd be a freak of nature.

I think it's probably between the fourth and fifth button. She does have a very long waist and she gets most of her height from her long torso.

 

[MLIS]

Archie Harrison's birth certificate is floating around on Twitter. Assuming it is legitimate, it states that he was born on May 6 at the Portland Hospital in London (which I think everyone assumed, but hadn't been confirmed). It gives Meghan's profession as "Princess of the United Kingdom" (which is how Kate's profession was stated on her children's birth certificates) which is sure to cause another flurry of commentary from people who don't understand how British titles work.

 

[canbelto]

People mag's article.
https://people.com/royals/royal-baby-archie-birthplace-meghan-markle-prince-harry-birth-certificate/

I guess the plans to cart Meghan off to the Tower of London might be on hold?

 

[AxelAnnie]

I still don't get it. After they were home, what difference did it make if the "details of the birth" - which is only the place and date - are kept "private". Mystery to me.

 

[Jenny]

Oh I think the can still have some fun with this - where it says "signature of the informant" Harry's name is typed, not signed. William signed the birth certificates of all his kids as I recall.