Meghan said she was told that Archie would not be a Prince when Charles became King, which is protocol as the grandson of the Monarch, and that they were going to change some Law to do this.
H&M wanted the protocol to be kept.
No one wants their child to be the first not to be entitled to things that everyone else in the same position as they are received for 1000s of years.
Charles has been banging on about doing this type of thing for years, but I'm betting no one ever explained that to Meghan and Harry was probably in denial that Charles would go against tradition to do this to his own grandchild when it's not like he has a ton of them.
So it seems very personal and hurtful to H&M (in particular H, I think.)
It's not a "law" it's a Letters Patent from the monarch which designates how members of the family are to be styled - HRH Prince/ss, Lord/Lady, etc.
Just to be clear - the HRH Prince/ss style for all male-line grandchildren of the monarch has only been "the rule" for 104 years. Before that, some of the male-line grandchildren had the style of His/Her Highness Prince/ss; and the styling of the male-line grandchildren as a Prince/ss came over with the Hanovers (Sophia the Electress and George I) just over 300 years ago. So, this is not something that anyone in the same position has received for 1000s of years.
So, you acknowledge that the rumors of Charles' intentions to issue an updated LP when he becomes monarch have been around for years, yet somehow it's personal to Harry? Even though this is something that is also going to affect William's grandchildren by Louis (because under the current LP Charlotte's kids won't get HRH styles)...
He's already a target.
I am just saying Harry would want Archie to have the title he is entitled to under law when Prince Charles becomes King and not have the rules changed.
Why is that hard to understand?
I am not saying it's right or wrong to do so and the system is set up to do whatever the Monarch wants but I can see why Harry would want that for Archie.
I'm trying hard to understand why they think he should be entitled to that style. Just because something has been done a certain way for a hundred years doesn't mean it needs to continue.
You don't know whether H&M did or did not want Archie to have a title. You just believe what the tabloids say. Eugenie & Beatrice have the princess title because that's what Andrew wanted for them. It may not be that H&M wanted him to be called prince but the fact that Harry's own father i.e. the grandfather when he became king planned to pass a rule specifically to deny him princehood had to do more than sting. What a insult! Some of you keep bringing up Anne's or Edward's kids. Do you really think that if there were serious death threats about Zara or Louise that The Firm wouldn't protect them? Charles knew there were death threats to his grandson & apparently didn't think that was important.
BTW the protection detail in Canada were the British version of secret service so their salaries would be to British citizens & be taxed. So the UK would be getting some benefits just as though they were working citizens in the UK.
It seems pretty apparent, given their intense focus on "he's not going to have a title" during the interview, that, yes, in spite of the very present example of the media routinely knocking Beatrice & Eugenie and justifying it due to their HRH styles, H&M wanted Archie to have the same. And, I have to ask... WHY? If Harry is as close to B&E as reported, surely he would understand just what a burden that HRH style is and want to avoid that for his own children. The British tabloid media and the British public in general seem to operate under the assumption (rightly or wrongly) that having the HRH in front of your name means they (the public) are somehow funding some part of your lifestyle. The public doesn't think they pay for Zara or Peter and never have. The public doesn't think they pay for Louise or James. Strangely, though, they think they pay for the Kents and Gloucesters, which they really don't.
Also, Charles issuing an updated LP that limits the use of the HRH style further doesn't just impact H&M's children. It also would mean that Louis' children won't be entitled to the HRH style, as well as the HRH style for all of his future descendants.
The level of security isn't based on whether or not you are an HRH or not. And, furthermore, even if Charles decided against issuing an LP further limiting the use of the HRH style, that wouldn't guarantee that Archie would have received publicly-funded security. B&E don't - because the public doesn't think it's necessary to pay for the security of the 2nd son's kids. Beyond all that... Please explain to me what security Archie needs as a newborn that he won't receive? He lives with his parents. His parents had security while working members of the BRF. Even if he was at home at Frogmore Cottage while they were both out and about, he would have had security at the house. I'm really confused by this whole "he wasn't going to have security" narrative being peddled because it just doesn't make sense - at least not until Archie is in preschool anyway - that he needed his own security detail.
