Archie's Birth Certificate released - Meg's a Princess of the United Kingdom

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They do DNA testing before the certify the baby as a royal offspring. Hence the delay.

My kid is adopted. So, maybe it’s different but doesn’t everyone wait for their birth certificate?

I waited about2 weeks, but I’m not in England.

You get the birth certificate instantly in England. You go and register at the office in the area of birth anytime in the days following - I think up to a couple of months but most go in the first few days (or in Harry’s case probably the registrar came to him!) and they fill it out in front of you and give you a copy then and there. Then it goes in a public database and that is how this copy came out - a researcher for a newspaper would have gone and requested it. It takes a few days to get in the database so that’s the delay. (Signed, Brit who used to work as a researcher at a British newspaper, and did these registry office searches all the time!)

When does it say he registered the birth? Isn’t it possible he waited until now? Especially both his trip just days after, I can understand not prioritizing the registration.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They do DNA testing before the certify the baby as a royal offspring. Hence the delay.

My kid is adopted. So, maybe it’s different but doesn’t everyone wait for their birth certificate?

I waited about2 weeks, but I’m not in England.

You get the birth certificate instantly in England. You go and register at the office in the area of birth anytime in the days following - I think up to a couple of months but most go in the first few days (or in Harry’s case probably the registrar came to him!) and they fill it out in front of you and give you a copy then and there. Then it goes in a public database and that is how this copy came out - a researcher for a newspaper would have gone and requested it. It takes a few days to get in the database so that’s the delay. (Signed, Brit who used to work as a researcher at a British newspaper, and did these registry office searches all the time!)

When does it say he registered the birth? Isn’t it possible he waited until now? Especially both his trip just days after, I can understand not prioritizing the registration.

It says nothing just like it did when William registered the births of his three children a week or more after.

[Anonymous]

Why are people obsessed with the birth certificate of a baby who lives in England?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hate the name.

+10,000,000

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I still can't believe they named him Archie. Such a stupid name...and a nickname.

HRH Archie...where's his pal Jughead?

I agree. I understand wanting to get away from a traditional "royal" name, but there are SO MANY other classic names they could have chosen. And they settled on Archie. SMH.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They do DNA testing before the certify the baby as a royal offspring. Hence the delay.

My kid is adopted. So, maybe it’s different but doesn’t everyone wait for their birth certificate?

I waited about2 weeks, but I’m not in England.

You get the birth certificate instantly in England. You go and register at the office in the area of birth anytime in the days following - I think up to a couple of months but most go in the first few days (or in Harry’s case probably the registrar came to him!) and they fill it out in front of you and give you a copy then and there. Then it goes in a public database and that is how this copy came out - a researcher for a newspaper would have gone and requested it. It takes a few days to get in the database so that’s the delay. (Signed, Brit who used to work as a researcher at a British newspaper, and did these registry office searches all the time!)

When does it say he registered the birth? Isn’t it possible he waited until now? Especially both his trip just days after, I can understand not prioritizing the registration.

It says nothing just like it did when William registered the births of his three children a week or more after.

The date is at the bottom - 17 May. So he actually did it today. I’m the British pp - that means either they released it themselves, or someone went straight there to obtain a copy, and got it straight away. Possibly they released it themselves to avoid all the speculation since it is so easily obtained. Anyway - the main thing I learned from it was that Meghan’s first name is actually Rachel.

[Anonymous]

the name Archie is bad- at least his middle name is... oh wait....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Do we call her Princess Meghan?

Archie is the worst name ever. I judged Amy Poehler and Will Arnett and am judging Princess Meghan and Prince Harry.

If she didn't have the title of Duchess, which is how she is addressed, and she was married to a prince, she would be called "Princess Henry" (see "Princess Michael of Kent"). You have to be born to the title to use "Princess" and your real first name.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:For effs sake. It was so nice having the first page of the forum be royal obsession free for once.

PS- that’s not new information. Kate also had princess listed. What else do you think they would put as occupation? Free loader? Banana writer? Humanitarian?

I love you. And I think “free loader” would work just fine.

[Anonymous]

So why is Louis HRH Louis blah blah but Archie is just Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor? Why is Archie not HRH as well?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They do DNA testing before the certify the baby as a royal offspring. Hence the delay.

My kid is adopted. So, maybe it’s different but doesn’t everyone wait for their birth certificate?

I waited about2 weeks, but I’m not in England.

You get the birth certificate instantly in England. You go and register at the office in the area of birth anytime in the days following - I think up to a couple of months but most go in the first few days (or in Harry’s case probably the registrar came to him!) and they fill it out in front of you and give you a copy then and there. Then it goes in a public database and that is how this copy came out - a researcher for a newspaper would have gone and requested it. It takes a few days to get in the database so that’s the delay. (Signed, Brit who used to work as a researcher at a British newspaper, and did these registry office searches all the time!)

When does it say he registered the birth? Isn’t it possible he waited until now? Especially both his trip just days after, I can understand not prioritizing the registration.

It says nothing just like it did when William registered the births of his three children a week or more after.

The date is at the bottom - 17 May. So he actually did it today. I’m the British pp - that means either they released it themselves, or someone went straight there to obtain a copy, and got it straight away. Possibly they released it themselves to avoid all the speculation since it is so easily obtained. Anyway - the main thing I learned from it was that Meghan’s first name is actually Rachel.

Rachel is her Suits name! This is all news to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So why is Louis HRH Louis blah blah but Archie is just Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor? Why is Archie not HRH as well?

Letters patent signed by King George V limit the usage of Prince/Princess. You can google it if you want, off the top of my head I believe it’s given to all children of the sovereign and grandchildren “in the male line” (so children of sons but not daughters). Thus, Prince Andrew’s daughters are Princesses but the children of Princess Anne aren’t. Any sovereign can grant additional titles. So, she gave all of William’s children the HRH/Prince(ss) titles and I believe it had been reported that she offered titles to Princess Anne for her kids but she declined.

So, under the letters patent, Archie is not automatically granted the title. Whether one was offered and declined, or not offered in the first place, we don’t know.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Archie isnt short for anything? Sigh.

It is a full name in Scotland.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Archie isnt short for anything? Sigh.

It is a full name in Scotland.

you keep saying that but I've never seen that before - do you just know someone named Archie from Scotland?

Lots of Scottish Archibalds in history....

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Archie isnt short for anything? Sigh.

It is a full name in Scotland.

you keep saying that but I've never seen that before - do you just know someone named Archie from Scotland?

Lots of Scottish Archibalds in history....

You so petty!