No senior royal other than the Queen & Prince Philip has met Baby Archie

Royal baby

Duchess Meghan welcomed Baby Archie very early Monday morning. The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge had scheduled some work on Wednesday in Wales (a series of events in a day trip), and Prince Charles and Camilla spent the bulk of the week in Germany. In Will and Kate’s case, they were in London when they weren’t in Wales, and perhaps they had other commitments, and couldn’t make the (albeit untaxing) journey to Windsor. Charles and Camilla’s excuse was much better, probably because Charles’ schedule is so tight, it’s difficult for him to just “pop by Windsor” for a few hours without a massive reshuffling. So, big surprise, no one but the Queen and Prince Philip have met Baby Archie.

Senior members of the royal family have still not met the newest arrival, five days after his birth. Prince Charles and Camilla, along with William and Kate have not been to visit the first child of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex, baby Archie Harrison.

The seventh-in-line to the throne was born at 5.26am on Monday, and it had been hinted that grandfather Charles and wife Camilla would call in on Meghan and Harry today, after returning from their trip to Germany. The couple are now set to visit next week, with the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge not far behind.

Speaking to The Sun, Clarence House said Charles and Camilla would visit in the coming days, while a spokesperson for the Sussex’s said William and Kate were in the diary to stop by at Frogmore Cottage. MailOnline contacted Kensington Palace, but they had no comment to make at this time.

[From The Daily Mail]

I’m just going by memory, but it feels like the only Cambridge child that Charles met within a day was Prince George? Charles and Camilla didn’t visit the hospital when Kate gave birth to Charlotte or Louis, and I feel like it was probably several days (or maybe even a week or so) before Charles met his second and third grandchildren. I know we’re supposed to be like “oooo Charles, Camilla, William and Kate are so shady/disrespectful!” but honestly, I don’t think it makes a huge difference if Grandpa Charles meets his grandson on Day 5 or Day 7. Same with Uncle William, although I bet Kate really does want to hold the baby. I’m surprised she’s stayed away.

Cambridges Newborough Beach

Prince Charles and Camilla visit the Brandenburger Tor in Berlin

Photos courtesy of WENN, Avalon Red, Backgrid.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

158 Responses to “No senior royal other than the Queen & Prince Philip has met Baby Archie”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Lisa says:

    Yeah. Not surprised and not a big deal imo.

    • minx says:

      Exactly. There’s plenty of time, let the new little family rest and bond.

      • Lunde says:

        No big deal. The press wrote this when Archie was 5 days old! Many people don’t want lots of visitors in the early weeks

      • minx says:

        Lunde, yes, I certainly didn’t want to see many people. Our family and friends were good about waiting for us to extend the invitation. In the early days I just wanted to rest and stare at the baby—didn’t want to entertain, clean my house, fix food, etc.

      • Megan says:

        I don’t have any kids, but based on the experience of many other people in my life, giving birth and caring for a new born is pretty damn exhausting. Let’s give Meghan and Harry a second to catch their breath.

    • chloe says:

      My sister-in-law asked me to wait about a week before I came for a visit, she needed some time to bond with her baby, I don’t think the family not visiting is a big deal. Meghan’s Mom is there to help her.

    • Sam Louise says:

      Yes, I think Kate of all people (with 3 young kids) knows that Meghan is likely exhausted physically and mentally and not in “entertaining mode” right now.

  2. Laughysaphy says:

    I don’t think this is a big deal. It’s been less than a week. The Sussexes might have wanted the first week to themselves (weird royal commitments and photo calls aside). I did giggle at the image of Kate having to restrain herself from popping over to snuggle a newborn 😂

  3. mint says:

    The Queen gets in there first, because she is the Queen and she has to sign off the name. Maybe the others are just giving them time as a family and figuring stuff out. Meghan looked great at the photocall but also understandably tired. So maybe they just need and want some time before visitors. Not everything is shady or a big conspiracy theory

    • Lunde says:

      The Queen also gets there first because they are next door neighbours!

    • Lady D says:

      She is also the most senior of royals, along with the Duke of England who have both seen the baby. The DM did not mention that fact in their headline about no senior royals visiting Harry’s baby. I was waiting for the comment section to point that glaring error out to the DM, but alas, nothing.

  4. Digital Unicorn says:

    Big drama over nothing and am sure they visited this weekend, esp as the Windsor Horse Show is happening at the moment and many of the royals attend that.

    Also, the Markles has been true to form with their nasty articles whinging about poor Evil Papa Smurf, although I loved the ex first wife’s story – it was brutal and proved everything that we’ve said about Toxic Thomas, a bad husband and neglectful father.

    • Renee2 says:

      @Digital Unicorn,

      Do you know where we can find the interview with the first wife? I’d really like to read that.

      • Lady D says:

        Use the Daily Mail search engine, put in Thomas Markle, the article should show up in there.

      • Digital Unicorn says:

        Also check the Mirror website as thats who she gave the interview to.

      • Bettyrose says:

        I just Googled thomas markle ex wife mirror, and deargawd. I believe all of it. Typical narcissist behavior. The fact that the ex wife has stayed quiet till now says a lot. These are probably still painful memories, and I’m sure it hurts that her daughter turned into that same type of person. No doubt she got paid for the interview, but she also did Meghan a favor substantiating TM’s abusive personality.

      • Mariposa says:

        Thanks for that link. Typical narcissistic behaviour, but I’m interested in the family dynamics around Samantha. It seems like she took on a lot of her dad’s behaviours.

  5. Melly says:

    This is not a big deal in my opinion. I’m sure Meghan and Harry are enjoying the private time with their new baby, without having to host any extra people in their home

    • Kittycat says:

      When my friends and family members had babies usually they wanted a few days to themselves.

      Completely understandable since you know reality.

  6. Chica71 says:

    This is not a big deal. Give this a rest. Who wants to be entertaining folks when body still feel like a mess and learning Basi parenting skills. This truly sucks for women!

  7. tempest prognosticator says:

    I agree with all these comments. It’s thoughtful to give the new family some time and space to adjust to their new normal.

  8. Marie says:

    I don’t agree with the comment about Kate. Why would she want to hold the baby and why are you surprised about her staying away from the baby? She’s never been close to Meghan, and rather sees her a threat more than anything else. Of course there is a rift between William and Harry. There is merely one hour drive between the two houses so if the dolittles really haven’t visited the baby, it seems like the brothers don’t want that for now. But they are brothers, they have always been close. William is insecure, and having an even more insecure and entitled wife don’t help. I think he and Harry will one day find a way. As for Meghan and Kate, they will remain like it has always been between the two of them. Cordial. That’s it. Kate in my opinion is not keen to have Meghan’s baby in her arms, and Meghan wouldn’t want her to be close to her son either.

    • ana says:

      Because Kate’s love for babies is well documented and I think you’ve got your tin foil hat on a bit too tightly.

      • Tresha says:

        Don’t be fool, any excuse to push out Harry.

      • Jaded says:

        @Tresha – there is NO excuse for being rude on this site. Please hold back on calling someone a “fool” for making an appropriate comment.

        @Marie: nice to see you’re on such close terms with the Cambridges and Sussexes that you can enlighten us all on Kate’s antipathy about babies other than her own.

    • Catherine says:

      Why wouldn’t she want to hold the baby? Why is it that someone always has to bring negativity into this? Why always bringing it up? And why does it need to be any competition between them? Why can’t you hope that these two women might be more than cordial one day? And yeah as a mom, Kate can be helpful to Megan like so many of us are with our friends or acquaintances that are new moms. As a black woman some of the negative comments in here about these two women saddens me. I hope they can become friends one day and I don’t think there are any competition between them.

      • ChillyWilly says:

        Archie is her nephew I am sure she wants to hold him. People just won’t let their Princess Cat fight fantasies go! Will and Harry are the ones with the issues not Meg and Kate. Gah!! So misogynistic to want these women at each other’s throats.

      • Fiona says:

        I think it’s great everyone is giving Harry and Meghan time to get to know their little one before meeting him.

        I agree with ChillyWilly that OF COURSE Kate is looking forward to holding her little nephew! Newborns are enchanting, one can hold and gaze for hours. Pure magic.

    • Hunter says:

      I have no connection to either woman, and I want to hold all the babies. 😁

    • Monicack says:

      Marie’s internalized misogyny on Mother’s Day is making me giggle.

      • Spicecake38 says:

        You said it!Jeez some people with come up with any theory just to pit women against each other,I mean we are talking about family welcoming an innocent baby,not everything is a secret plot of bubbling hatred 🙄

    • WTW says:

      I don’t see why Kate would want to hold the baby more than William would. It is William’s blood nephew, which is also why I thought it was strange when William said he’s been an uncle once before because of Pippa. While this is technically true, that child is not his bio nephew and the experience isn’t quite the same. I would imagine holding his brother’s nephew would be more significant than holding an in-law’s. I have an uncle by marriage I was close to growing up, but my aunt by marriage and I were never close. It is my blood aunts and uncles I was always closest to as a child, and I assume that’s because they were my mother’s siblings and cared about me more because of that. I feel like it’s the same for my husband and his aunt and uncles by marriage. One uncle by marriage he seems close to, some aunts by marriage he barely knows.

      • MattyLove says:

        What in the world? Are you serious? You expect him to be “more” of an uncle to this baby than his wife’s sister’s son because “blood?” Come on. I’ve got nieces and nephews by “blood” and by marriage and I feel literally no difference. This is ridiculous.

      • Jaded says:

        Good lord the crazies are out in full today.

      • MrsBump says:

        Wow!! Do you also think that adoptive parents don’t love their kids because “blood” ?

      • M.A.F. says:

        oh please. There are just some family members you are to close and those who you are not. I have one uncle, my father’s brother, and I can’t stand him.

      • WTW says:

        Glad to see I’m a “crazy,” and, no, I’m not talking about adoptive parents at all here. Just saying that most people I know are closer to their aunts and uncles by blood than the ones by marriage. If that makes me crazy, so be it. (But I would caution against cavalierly using terms that demean mentally ill people to insult an Internet stranger.) I was discussing my own experience. If yours is the complete opposite, great. If you don’t see why someone might feel closer to their sibling’s child than their in-law’s child, we can agree to disagree. Not everyone is close to their in-laws and not all in-laws feel like they share the same responsibility to their nieces and nephews by marriage. That was my point. I don’t see why it’s shocking to think that William might be more excited about meeting his brother’s first child than Kate would be. I’m not saying Kate wouldn’t be excited at all. Just saying this seems like it would be a more significant event to William. You also forget that a lot of people have conflicts/tensions with their in-laws, step-relatives, etc. that make these relationships different.

      • Tigerlily says:

        This is really f*cked up. I have several nephews I have been close to since they were born, babysat & took for overnights frequently to give my sisters a break. I also married my husband when I was in my late 30′s (I’ve never had biological children) & we cared for his granddaughter (18 mon when I met him) from early on, basically every weekend. That young woman (she’s 24 now) is MY granddaughter & she makes no bones about the influence I’ve had on her life. I also have several more granddaughters who would be astounded if anyone inferred that I wasn’t their “real” grandma. Blood has nothing to do with it, love is everything & anyone who knows me knows that my girls are everything to me.

      • Jaded says:

        @WTW – No, most people are NOT less close to aunts and uncles by marriage so don’t speak for the majority here who have VERY close ties to non-blood relatives by marriage. I happen to be very close to my aunt (married to my mother’s brother), in fact I’m probably closer to her than I was to my own mother. I am also VERY close to my aunt’s adopted daughter who I have no blood ties with either – she’s my family no matter what. You are clearly in the minority and your convoluted thinking about who will be closer to Archie is just silly.

      • Jaded says:

        @Tigerlily – you sound like a lovely human being and thanks for setting WTW straight.

      • Tigerlily says:

        @Jaded- Thank you. I have a soft spot for wee ones who need extra love & attention. I also believe that it does take a village though I take care not to usurp parental roles.

      • Smalltowngirl says:

        I am an only child but my husband has several nieces and nephews who are as much mine as his and some of them would *gasp* even say they are closer to me than him. My children love my husband’s siblings and in-laws equally and couldn’t differentiate between them and their favorite aunt is no blood relation to them at all. So to me it makes perfect sense that William considers both Phipps and Harry’s sons his nephews, becasue they ARE.

        Also, I love babies. When a friend or relative has a baby, I can’t wait to get my hands on it. My husband not so much. He held the oldest of our nieces and nephews for a picture and then none of the others until our children were born. He does not have that “new baby gimme” instinct, so it wouldn’t surprise me if Kate was more excited to meet Archie than Will.

      • Befrazzled says:

        As both an adoptive and biological mother (AND aunt!) I find this incredibly offensive. Blood doesn’t make a family, it’s all to do with how you love each other, full stop.

      • Sam Louise says:

        It’s well known that William is very close to the Middleton family. It makes complete sense he is close to Pippa’s baby.

    • lily says:

      Because Kate loves babies; she’s really good with them as well

      • Sunnee says:

        😒, oh brother! My eyes are paining me from rolling them so hard.
        BTW, there was a retraction about the Frogmore parking lot story. Apparently Evil Meg did not ban employees from parking there after all. 🙄

  9. Chica71 says:

    May be Megan can do the black southern thing and send RR and xenophobic crew into a tizzy by having a sip and see

    • Feeshalori says:

      As a northerner who has no clue, what is a sip and see? Drinks and a peek at the baby?
      And a Happy Mother’s Day to all the moms who celebrate this day, and even to those who don’t. You all deserve a big shoutout!

      • Sunnee says:

        I just heard of a “sip and see” two weeks ago. A coworker had her baby early, well before our planned baby shower and her mom hosted a “sip and see “ for her, AT HER COUSIN’S HOUSE! It was announced so we wouldn’t bother her. It’s a nice way to see the baby without people calling or stopping by. Gave the new mom a rest. The baby was 6 weeks old when we went.
        We had tea sandwiches, petit fours and mimosas. We took our baby shower gifts and some frozen casseroles for her to heat up.
        I may be a b()+h but this “Kate is a documented baby whisperer” is idiotic. She has her one year old to cuddle, so why should she hunger to touch baby Archie? Seems silly. She and her hubs will go when it fits their schedule. No snub. But yes, they are not close and yes they are weirdly competitive with Meghan and Harry. It’s their hang up.
        Obviously Prince Charles and Camilla haven’t seen the baby yet as they’re traveling, I’m sure they will when it fits their schedule. No snub. Frankly as a new mother I didn’t give a care if people didn’t come over. I was not in the mood for hosting.
        The photo of Archie’s little feet with the Forget-Me-Nots in the background is darling. Diana’s sister has seen the baby, and that makes me verklempt. I’m glad they continue to reach out to her.

      • Snowflake says:

        I’ve never heard of that either

      • hunter says:

        Thank you Sunnee, wow I’d never heard of this!!

        So the cousin managed the sip-and-see with baby while mom stayed home somewhere else?

        That sounds delightful.

      • ana says:

        “But yes, they are not close and yes they are weirdly competitive with Meghan and Harry. It’s their hang up.”

        How do you know that? Did Kate call you up and tell you?

    • BeanieBean says:

      I think it’s just a Southern thing–I first heard of it while watching Southern Charm.

  10. Kittycat says:

    You know babies spoil if you don’t see them fresh out the oven.

    (Sarcasm- everyone will see the baby when they have time in their schedule)

    • minx says:


    • Tresha says:

      Agree great

    • Sophie says:

      They might not spoil but they do change and grow every single day. I can’t imagine not being there for the birth of my grandchild! I’d be all over it like Doria obviously is. “People” can visit whenever they want, but Charles is not “people,” he’s the baby’s grandpa!

      • notasugarhere says:

        Charles was away on a government-required trip to Germany in the midst of Brexit chaos. He doesn’t get to change that because of an overdue grandchild. He and Camilla were really cute accepting gifts for the baby during their tour.

      • Irishgal says:

        It’s not the norm here for anyone other than the baby’s father to attend a birth. Or in absence of a father then one other person of the mothers choosing. We do it totally different and normally do not have multiple people in the room and most definitely no one waiting outside and can be in hospital anything from 1-5 days post partum

      • Kittycat says:

        Seriously babies change a lot and not everyone will witness each and every moment.

  11. Monicack says:

    Totally OT but it will be so much fun to see what the little fellow’s personality will be like. Pensive and shy or scampish and high octane or a hundred other variations. Children can often lift the banality of our everyday lives simply because they’re fascinating and delightful. I’m so glad Harry and Meghan get to experience this gift. If you thought they were humane and compassionate before before watch out!

    • Wendy says:

      Beautiful comment! I too am very happy for them and glad they were able to do it their way as much as possible.
      I hope we get pics of all the cousins over the years, I’ll bet him and Lou are thick as thieves.

  12. Seraphina says:

    A happy mother’s day to everyone out there today!!!

    Who knows what the reasons are and I think it is wise to stay away the first few days and let mom and baby rest and get adjusted. And I know I didn’t want people around the first few days anyway. I just wanted to be with my baby and just chill.

  13. Becks1 says:

    Not a big deal IMO. I completely agree that Kate wants to snuggle that baby, because she seems to love snuggly babies, but I can also see her understanding that they want a few days to themselves. Charles was out of the country but I expect him to visit by today or tomorrow.

    • Hunter says:

      That’s a very good point. Kate absolutely can empathize how Mehan is feeling right now, and will respectfully give the new family a little space until Meghan feels like people-ing again.

  14. Peg says:

    Happy Mother’s Day! to those celebrating today.

  15. Amaryis says:

    Maybe it’s a germ thing? People tend to not wanna expose newborns to lots of people during their 1st weeks or 2.
    And the working royals are constantly in contact with people & potentially germs.

    • Tresha says:

      Exactly sensible observation.

    • Hunter says:

      You could be right. Though it literally never crossed my mind when my kids were born, I have a friend who isolated herself and her newborn from all of us for 3 months after the birth of her first due to germs.

      • Surly Gale says:

        When I brought my newborn home, I lowered him so the dogs (2 German Sheps) could have a sniff. My loving, lovely female, Greta, sniffed him up and down then gave his face a huge lick, just as the babe started a yawn….there was tongue and everything! I was almost hysterical. Tom! take the baby NOW! Doc, my dog just tongued my baby, will he die? Doc: settle down, he’ll be fine….and from thereon I never really worried about germs, ever again…..and he’s healthy as a horse (or dog) :) I will never forget that fear though; it was the first time I truly understood that my heart now lived outside my body and would be forever full

      • Bella DuPont says:

        @ Surly

        What a charming little story! 😘💕

    • HelloIsThereAnybodyOutThere says:

      This might be particularly true for the Cambridge family. When our son was born, children under 11 I believe were not allowed in the hospital, unless they were siblings of the new baby, due to fear of germs. It was a hospital wide policy at one of the best children’s hospitals in the US. Our pediatrician also encouraged us not to have my son around my nieces, who were 2, 2.5, and 6 months until after his first round of vaccinations at 2 months. I had a friend have to remove her child from preschool at doctor’s orders due to her bringing home germs to her baby brother and him being hospitalized. Babies who get a fever over 101 before 6 weeks have to get spinal taps in the US- my coworker’s daughter had to have one due to this. Our pediatrician said as wonderful as other kids are, they tend to carry lots of germs and you don’t need a newborn around them if avoidable 🤷🏻‍♀️ So it could have NOTHING to do with whether Kate and Will want to see the baby and more whether Harry and Meghan’s doctor suggested they hold off.

      • Smalltowngirl says:

        Or even that one of the kids is under the weather (becuase kids are walking germ factories) and Kate and William don’t want to risk infecting the new baby.

  16. Jessica says:

    He’s a week late and everybody has a schedule. Apparently Doria went home already.

    • BabaBlacksheep3 says:

      Why? She’s retired.

      • Lady D says:

        She teaches yoga to seniors in rest/care homes. She was pictured wearing an ID tag from a senior’s residences group. I think she also teaches privately, I’m not sure if she has a studio.

  17. Boxy Lady says:

    Awww, H & M put out a sweet picture of Archie’s feet on Instagram for Mother’s Day. So cute!

  18. Lady Keller says:

    I’m sure Meghan is fine with not having every member of the royal family over. I remember with my first just wanting to sleep and snuggle my baby 24/7. I hated having to hand him over to anyone else. I just wanted to hold him constantly. We had family over and I was literally sitting on an ice pack feeling so angry that i had to get out of my pajamas and tidy up my house.

    It’s funny how people get. Some friends and family acted like they NEEDED to see the baby immediately. He’s not going anywhere and he doesn’t do anything but scream and cry, so you dont miss much if you don’t see a newborn. My father didn’t see my first born for at least 2 weeks because he was very sick. Some people in our family acted personally offended by it and wouldn’t let it go. I was grateful he had the decency to stay away because he thought he might pass on his germs. Guess what, 3 years later they have an amazing relationship and the mutual adoration is beautiful.

    • Amaryis says:

      This is nice to hear, especially because I have friends & family who’ve been offended because I DIDN’T drop everything to see a baby 10 minutes after it was born.

  19. Neners says:

    The Instagram picture of little Archie’s tiny feet in front of the forget-me-nots (Diana’s favorite flower, supposedly) hit me right in the feels!

    • TheOriginalMia says:

      That got me too! Such a sweet photo.

    • TeamAwesome says:

      I knew we could really on them to do a post, and it does not disappoint! Thank you for pointing that out about the flowers, so lovely.

    • koko says:

      Those little toes. Precious.

    • IlsaLund says:

      Happy Mother’s Day everyone!

      And that photo is adorable. Those precious little feet. I could yum yum and kiss those lil toes all day😂😂

  20. Guest says:

    Lol did you see the opinium poll? Richard palmer is gleeful over that one because Meghan is only 2nd about camilla, Kate is in the high 60s and William’s the most popular royal. Hahahahhahahahahahahahaha.

    If that poll is accurate no wonder the UK voted for Brexit. Yikes…

    • Nic919 says:

      Why would a poll like this be released anyway? They so want to spin that people don’t like Meghan and the media have not given her any kind of peace during this time. After George was born the UK media was basically cooing, but here every little thing is scrutinized and criticized by the UK tabloid media. It is so tiresome.

      • Guest says:

        So they could spin it to show the UK doesnt like Meghan. I want to know who they polled because the YouGov poll showed something different. I dont know about Meghan but there is no way William is more popular than the queen. 🙄

    • norah says:

      anything with palmer is shady as heck

      • Millennial says:

        Palmer really dislikes Meghan. Constantly writing hit pieces and this ten tweet long thread about the royal popularity polls is a good example of him presenting information that suits his narrative. He pretends to be a “neutral” journalist but he’s definitely taken a firm anti-Sussex stance. And alllllll the haters and racists flock to his twitter to comment underneath his posts. You think that’d tell him something but he courts it so I’m of the opinion he’s a hater and a racist too.

      • Olenna says:

        Agree. I saw Palmer’s string of messy, spiteful tweets and how he encourages the most ignorant anti-Meghan commentariat to support and expound on what he writes. Palmer, Tominey, Wooten and Eden are tops among the most unprofessional and mean-spirited RR corps/editors. Why they don’t just leave the Sussexes alone on Twitter and throw all of their attention on the “most popular” royals, makes little sense to me. Their tweets can’t be selling that many clicks on the tabs. In fact, it appears the ignorant and hateful commenters are more like a morale support and cheering section for these losers.

    • Beach Dreams says:

      William supposedly being the most popular royal is an instant “tell” that the poll is highly manipulated. Lots of people don’t realize how easy it is to construct a poll to fulfill whatever narrative the creator desires.

      • Kendra says:

        I do not know, every time he is mentioned in some other than gossip sites I only see positivity. Not everyone follows gossip and details like how work schedule.

      • Nic919 says:

        I haven’t seen any poll where William is more popular than the Queen until this one and unless having an affair on the side is what helps make him more popular, I seriously doubt the methodology.

    • Tina says:

      The numbers essentially haven’t changed since the wedding. Most people either approve of Meghan or are indifferent to her. They just don’t know her yet.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Of course it isn’t accurate. It is a slanted poll of only the people who read his tabloid. The royal tabloid writers are getting desperate.

      • Tina says:

        Opinium is a proper polling outfit, but it is strange that the poll has only been reported in the Sunday Express. We’ll see if the other papers pick it up tomorrow (I can’t imagine the Daily Mail leaving it alone).

    • Casey20 says:

      If Willian is the most popular Royal that speaks volumes about the British People. Princes Charles and the Queen work harder. Brits reward William for doing nothing….

      • Lol says:

        The UK gets the king they deserve with William. Just like the Brexit mess that’s a big cluster. Then again I wonder how many people who took this poll have an “I ❤ Brexit” poster in their room.

      • BabaBlacksheep3 says:

        The whole family get awarded for doing nothing

  21. sbwillson says:

    Could it be royal etiquette that The Prince of Wales would meet the baby before Prince William?

  22. TheOriginalMia says:

    I assumed everyone was giving them space. C&C said they would get by as soon as they could. They know how it is with a newborn. Meghan is healing and Archie is sleeping/eating/pooping. Doria is there for them while Harry continues his duties.

  23. KidV says:

    The title says “Senior Royal”, that’s it. For all we know they’ve had tons of minor royal or non-royal visitors. They do have friends and family outside of the Senior Royal circle.

  24. jen says:

    This title is something i would expect from the daily mail, seems to be stirring up drama where this is none.

  25. Mego says:

    I believe there were similar headlines around the birth of the Cambridge children too. Harry was away around Charlottes birth etc.

    It’s exhausting for reporters to come up with daily stories about the royals so they have to rehash old narratives. Thankfully Meghan did an alleged shady endorsement on instagram so they have something to be outraged about.

  26. wendywoo says:

    I’ve had several fights with friends about this but here goes:

    Why not call him Archibald? It’s a perfectly fine name and they/the public can call him Archie for as long as they/he want without him being saddled with a diminutive as a proper name. He’s f&&king royalty, for chrissake. It’s not like anyone’s going to make fun of a member of one of the few royal families that still have real constitutional powers for having a name that sounds “fancy”.

    You aren’t naming a baby, you’re naming a baby/child/teenager/adult/middle-ager/elderly person. Give them a name they can stand up in court as a barrister and introduce themselves with and not sound like they’re at a reality show casting call.

    Also, while I’m at it- don’t give your dog an ironically proper name (Errol, Oswald, Desmond, Hyacinth) on their registration papers while giving your child a diminutive on their birth certificate. Let them have the choice to take themselves seriously at some point, please.

    Rant ended.

    • Tourmaline says:

      The truth is there are plenty of lawyers and doctors out there TODAY with given names like Katie and Jack. It doesn’t really matter.

      The Duchess of Cornwell’s grandson’s given name is Freddy. Diminutives as given first names are not uncommon including in the crowd that surrounds the Royals.

      This all kind of reminds me in an uncomfortable way of the studies that given two fake resumes and ask who will get a job interview, and the resume with the more African American sounding name does not get chosen. The name that a newborn is given shouldn’t limit their life choices, if they do, it’s really on society and not the named person. None of us have any blame or credit for the first names that others gave us when we were born.

      • wendywoo says:

        A name is a brand and it matters (also, this has to do with diminutives, not race-that was a cheap shot and a canard).

        You can’t have “Jay Jays Lawyers and Stuff” as the name of your legal firm and then blame “society” that you aren’t taken seriously. A name is lifelong- it’s much easier to become less formal over time than more. It costs absolutely NOTHING- no expensive education or clothing- except the time to envision (and respect) your child as an adult, not just the adorable, vulnerable infant in your arms.

    • SugarPlumFairy says:

      I agree with you completely, but in the UK it’s now the new norm to give children nicknames as full, formal names. Soon they’ll be plenty of doctors, judges, politicians, academics, and lords with those kinds of cutesy names. Just check the UK Top names or indeed the extended Windsor family… Archie has relatives (in-law) called Jack, Mia, Lena, Eliza, Gus, Lola, Freddy, and Xan — not John, Maria, Helena, Elizabeth, Augustus, Dolores, Frederick, or Alexander. He’ll fit right in.

      I do think the choice of name shows they intend him to stay a commoner — “Prince Archie” is a bit too much.

    • olive says:

      they wanted to name him archie. that’s the only reasoning we need. their baby, their decision.

      you can have clear stringent rules for what to name people (and dogs, apparently) but those rules don’t apply to anyone but you.

      • wendywoo says:

        Ergh. I’m so obviously cursing at clouds here.

        I give in. Let’s just all give our children names ending in -ie or -y, keep reading YA fiction as if it’s literature and only watch Marvel films. God forbid we become- or let our children become- adults. It’s our DECISION, right?

      • KidV says:

        Damn. My name ends in y and is also the nickname of a more formal name. I guess I’ll close down my successful business and let everyone know my name is not brand worthy. Oops, my bad. Good to know I can keep reading Harry Potter, though.

        Personally, I think Archibald is a worse name than Archie. If he doesn’t like Archie he can use Arch. I have a feeling Polo Baby Archie will re-brand the name much like Harry did with his name. Harry doesn’t seem so horrible to me anymore.

      • olive says:

        @wendywoo you really are cursing at clouds here with these old-fashioned rules of yours that you want to apply to the rest of the world. you will not find universal agreement on your ideas.

    • TASHENAH GOSHA says:

      Your post reminds me of a teacher I’d overheard making fun of my name. My teacher was wondering how people were going to pronouce my name.

      “Tashenah” Too ethnic. Too Black. There will never be a Dr. Tashenah Gosha. Your mother should have name you some else. Something more acceptable.

      • wendywoo says:

        I’m sorry that happened to you. I also have an unusual name and experienced similar ignorance.
        As I said above- this is about established diminutives for established, common names.

      • Dani says:

        I love your name!

    • notasugarhere says:

      You have no right to decide what anyone should name their child, nor to force your version of naming conventions on anyone else.

      • wendywoo says:

        No, I don’t. Hence this being a comment on a message board. Quelle horreur!

      • notasugarhere says:

        Your comment proves you want to. Why you think you have a right to do so, that your way of naming children or pets is better than anyone else’s? No idea why you think that highly of yourself.

      • wendywoo says:

        No. It proves I have an OPINION. And opinions are usually held in higher esteem by their holder than… say.. directly conflicting opinions.

        Feel free to Archie/Millie/Billy/Polly it up- a salut- just be realistic in that it doesn’t go without notice.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Thankfully, you don’t. You get to obsess over your love of old-fashioned names and naming conventions. And we all get to do whatever we want regardless.

      • wendywoo says:

        Yes, You do. How many times must we have this exchange?

    • BeanieBean says:

      Wendywoo–My name ends in a ‘ie’ and I’ve done OK in life, make decent money & etc.

      • wendywoo says:

        Well, Beanie is a strong name. Is it Welsh? :)

      • DM2 says:

        There are literally hundreds of old, some ancient, diminutive and non, stand-alone names that end in ‘y’ or ‘ie’, male and female, so relegating those as the standard for ‘YA fiction’ or ‘Marvel’ names might just be moot, let alone condescending. Notwithstanding, names that might have a different cultural source than what you might be used to. Nobody says you have to like them, but you shouldn’t really generalize, either.

      • Olenna says:

        I don’t recall anyone having such strong “opinions” about Louis (Louie) Cambridge’s French name. What is the BFD about “Archie”? He was named by his parents almost a week ago and this is still an issue; why? He’s not a prince, lord or earl, so why TF does anyone care that it’s not a traditional “British” royalty name or ends in y or ie? Some people (and those hateful RRs) should just stop following this family’s every move and decision, and leave them alone.

    • kerwood says:

      The name Archie clearly means something to the parents. Should Harry and Megan have done market research on what was the most acceptable name? I think the idea that a ‘royal’ child should have a ‘royal’ sounding name is a bit archaic. I’ve known lots of people with classy, adult-sounding names who have absolutely no class or intelligence whatsoever.

      A baby isn’t a ‘brand’. Maybe that’s what’s wrong with society these days. People see themselves as brands, commodities to be bought and sold, instead of as human beings. Archie is a newborn. It’s up to him to make his name something to be proud of. I hope he does.

      • 10KTurtle says:

        Seems to me that this royal baby being named Archie henceforth determines that “Archie” is now a “royal” name!

    • Lauren says:

      Archie’s father has the exact situation you describe: formal proper name with a diminutive by which he is known and with which he evidently identifies way more strongly. He chose differently for his son, and I think he understands better than any of us the pros and cons, the difficulties and the benefits. Do any of us take Harry less seriously because he goes by Harry and not Henry?

    • MsIam says:

      In 20+ years from now, Archie will fit right in with the rest of his cohort since apparently it is a popular name in the UK right now. There are plenty of Kathys who are not Katherine, Rickys who are not Richard, Billys who are not William and they do just fine. And I hardly think that anyone will throw Archie Mountbatten-Windsor’s resume in the trash.

  27. kerwood says:

    It’s probably no surprise that William hasn’t visited his brother, even though they live near each other, because they don’t seem to be particularly close right now and I don’t think that Kate and Megan are close either. What DID surprise me was when William was interviewed after Archie was born, I got the impression that he hadn’t spoken to his brother yet. I would have thought that William would have been one of the first people he would call. Maybe they did speak and William didn’t want to say anything.

    • notasugarhere says:

      They don’t live near each other. W&K live 3.5 hours away from London at Anmer Hall. Meghan and Harry live 30 minutes from London at Windsor.

      • Peg says:

        Windsor to London is 45-60 minutes depending on traffic.
        William lives in London, where their children go to school.
        Anmer Hall most likely used at weekends and when the children are out of school.

    • Ellie says:

      Why is it necassary for William to visit? Both brothers don’t need to be with each other like glue, it will be fine if William doesn’t visit for a few weeks. Harry wasn’t there when Charlotte was born either and didn’t meet her/William till weeks later.

      And no, they don’t live near. William and Kate are at Kensington since it’s still school term time for the kids, and H&M live outside London at Windsor.

    • Splinter says:

      My thoughts, exactly. If they don’t get along too well right now (and there has been a lot of speculation they don’t) I don’t see why Wills would rush to see the baby. I also don’t see Kate visiting the baby alone, she wouldn’t want to piss him off.

  28. HelloIsThereAnybodyOutThere says:

    Did you all see the SussexRoyal post and photo this morning? Such a precious picture and a nice caption that commemorates all moms ❤️ I imagine Harry especially misses his mother this mother’s day, but I’m sure he’s enjoying Meghan’s first as well

  29. celialarson12 says:

    I am sure family and friends , royal and other will visit in due time. I am getting more more astounded at the joke that is a royal reporters career. In real life this type of occupation is not called reporting. It is called rumour and gossip mongering.

  30. ojulia123 says:

    Maybe the parents don’t want visitors yet. I’ve known lots of couples who ask people to refrain from visiting while they get to know their baby and get used to being new parents.

    Can’t wait for more pictures, though!!!

  31. Irishgal says:

    Just FYI it is not mother’s day here in Europe

  32. Tai says:

    Sussex Royal Instagram is at 7.8m while Cambridge’s at Kensington Palace are 8.7m. When Sussex started their own account Kensington was at 7.xm so you can see how fast Sussex Instagram has grown. I wonder if they will overtake? The newest picture of Archie’s tiny feet in front of the flowers is so cute. Apparently the blue-forget-me-not was Diana’s fav flower. Its mine too!

  33. Weaver says:

    I worry that the media anger over not being able to fully monetize Archie’s birth with translate to even more brutal coverage of Meghan.

    • Rojas says:

      Meghan and Harry will still play them dust.

    • Vanessa says:

      I think your theory about the royal reporters is right they probably had countless articles ready to print about Archie . You just know their were itching to write so many opinions based articles on Archie if he got titled the royal reporters know that Meghan is good for their business no one was really interested in the royal family global . Until Meghan all the royal reporters see Meghan as their little cash cow their no longer irrelevant anymore now every any newspaper are going to them for their opinions. I believe it was a good idea for Archie not to be titled this protected him for the royal reporters their not entitled to access to him like the another royals if and when Archie is presented it will be on Meghan and Harry terms . The royal reporters are so arrogant and entitled that they think that they can bully and harass Meghan for her whole pregnancy and then turn think that Meghan and Harry will allowed them anywhere near their child .

  34. Brook Meadow says:


  35. Carolind says:

    I also thought it strange William saying he had a nephew already. Technically that is Kate’s nephew. William is great at praising up the Middletons but not so good with his own family.

    When our daughter was born my parents in law already had three grandchildren in their teens. They lived 250 miles away, retired, in good health, went away on tons of hols but didn’t see my daughter until her christening when she was over 3 months old. Not too hot at visiting other relatives either.

    • Ainsley7 says:

      Will and Kate are married and that means Pippa’s son is as much his nephew as hers. I don’t think it’s weird at all.

    • olive says:

      no, he’s william and kate’s nephew, just like archie is now kate and william’s nephew, and meghan is now aunt to the cambridge kids.

      maybe other languages do, but english doesn’t have separate terms for the aunt/uncle you are related to via blood and the aunt/uncle you are related to via marriage. it’s the same word for the same thing.