Battle Royale Forums

Welcome to Battle Royale Forums. Join us today and become part of the growing group of survivors.

The Royal Wedding

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by Lindigo, May 16, 2018.

  1. Lindigo

    Lindigo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2015
    Messages:
    9,142
    Likes Received:
    1,236
    If I were his auntie, I would want to be appropriate. Hello, sweet Archie! And then I would probably call him Peaches for the rest of his life.
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  2. Lindigo

    Lindigo Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Mar 28, 2015
    Messages:
    9,142
    Likes Received:
    1,236
    Archie’s name is unexpected, to put it mildly. It doesn’t reference a former monarch — or a male who is or was in some way connected to the monarchy — as is traditional within the royal family. But the name was apparently able to pass muster with Queen Elizabeth, who almost certainly had final right of approval on the boy’s name.

    Every set of parents has to grapple with what to name their baby. They want something that works with their last name, that is simultaneously neither too mundane nor too ridiculous. In some cases, parents may also value a name which honors people or places that are important to the parents.

    But as a royal, the list of acceptable names is woefully abbreviated.

    Generally, royals — particularly those closer to the throne — tend to pick the names of nobles who have gone before them. Prince Charles — himself named after two previous kings — for example, named his first son William, after several previous English kings. His second son, Harry, was also named for previous kings. Harry’s actual given name is Henry, for those unaware.

    For Harry and Meghan, the list of acceptable names is even shorter than the one William and Kate had to work with.

    For example, considering that Archie is seventh in line to the throne, giving him the name of a previous king could be seen as presumptuous. This severely limits their naming choices. What’s more, “modern” names like Kevin or Colin are considered to be unacceptable.

    And inasmuch as the royal family is Christian, Biblical names like David or Michael are appropriate. However, more “obscure” Biblical names, like Hezekiah, are certainly off the list.

    Adding to the confusion, the name of John is absolutely, positively, 100 percent unacceptable. King John (1166-1216) was such a terrible king that no royal since his reign has had that name. It’s considered bad luck.

    https://www.inquisitr.com/5426631/r...-welcome-archie-harrison-mountbatten-windsor/
     
  3. purriwinkle

    purriwinkle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    6,649
    Likes Received:
    1,114
    What I read was that Archie means “genuine”, “bold” or “brave”. Harrison means “son of Harry”. I think both names suit this little prince who is adorable and unique. Seventh in line means you don’t necessarily have to follow convention, I guess.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  4. southernlady

    southernlady Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2014
    Messages:
    1,279
    Likes Received:
    550
    I like it!
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  5. southernlady

    southernlady Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2014
    Messages:
    1,279
    Likes Received:
    550
    I must admit, some of the remarks about baby Archie are really making me angry. A new baby is something to celebrate.
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Morgotha

    Morgotha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    16,030
    Likes Received:
    1,105
    They have racists in England, too.

    "
    BBC broadcaster Danny Baker was fired from BBC Radio 5 Live due to his “stupid unthinking gag” regarding Prince Harry and Meghan Markle’s newborn son, the news organization announced Thursday.

    Baker, 61, tweeted a photo of a couple holding hands along with a chimpanzee in a suit and wrote, “Royal Baby leaves hospital.” Markle’s mother is African American. The tweet has since been deleted."

    https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/bbc-fires-broadcaster-tweet-meghan-markle-prince-harrys-baby
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. southernlady

    southernlady Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2014
    Messages:
    1,279
    Likes Received:
    550
    What is wrong with people?!?! I'm glad he got fired, he deserved it.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
  8. PepperAnn

    PepperAnn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    34,267
    Likes Received:
    2,240
    Me too! Even though I hate the name. LOL

    It just keeps making me think of this:

    [​IMG]
     
    • Funny Funny x 1
  9. PepperAnn

    PepperAnn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    34,267
    Likes Received:
    2,240
    Anybody else fascinated by the Royal Split?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  10. Morgotha

    Morgotha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    16,030
    Likes Received:
    1,105
    It makes me appreciate Kate Middleton, that's for sure! LOL, I wonder if Meghan Markle will find the black coalition is giving her the cold shoulder now, or will she be welcomed? I'm sure a lot of people looked to her as an inspiration, and as a racial voice, and to have her throw royalty away? That might not be appreciated very much by her prior supporters. It'll be interesting to see.

    Prince Harry is a big boy, and is responsible for his own decisions.

    I'm most sorry for young Archie though, who won't get a royal upbringing. Too bad!

    I also feel sorry for the Queen who has to see this happen when she's in the twilight of her life and undoubtedly would rather spend her time spoiling her grandchildren than dealing with a split in her family.
     
  11. PepperAnn

    PepperAnn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    34,267
    Likes Received:
    2,240
    I feel bad for Meghan. I know a lot of this stems from all the hate she gets from people. But I know a lot of it also stems from her riff with Kate.....which is causing a riff between Harry and William.

    One thing I do know, Harry really loves her deeply.
     
  12. Morgotha

    Morgotha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    16,030
    Likes Received:
    1,105
    I used to feel bad for her, up until this split. IMO, there's no good reason for her to sacrifice her child's future for what are basically selfish reasons. *Every* life has problems! She should have toughed it out for a few more years before insisting her family go nuclear.

    Also, for all we know her life won't even be any better now than it was before! I'd like to see them do a giant apology to everyone and be welcomed back in to the fold, personally. Again, IMO, but what a terrible, terrible decision!

    Oh, and I agree completely that Harry loves her with all his heart!
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  13. PepperAnn

    PepperAnn Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    34,267
    Likes Received:
    2,240
    Yeah but who's to say this is on her insistence? Harry said they have spent months sorting this out. And Harry has always been a rebel.
     
  14. Morgotha

    Morgotha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    16,030
    Likes Received:
    1,105
    Harry did two tours in Afghanistan with their army as part of living up to his duties. I'm sure that when his grandmother told him to fall in line, he would - without someone else telling him not to. And seriously, you know as well as I do that if Meghan really wanted to stay they'd still be Royals regardless of what Harry wanted. Ooh! I've got my "anti-Meghan" hat on today!:eek:
     
    • Funny Funny x 3
  15. Jama

    Jama Moderator
    Staff Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2013
    Messages:
    7,633
    Likes Received:
    1,442
    Yeah, the British Royals are seriously damaged people, but Meghan is damaged goods as well. That's about all I know about this situation.

    But it's the internet, so therefore my stupid opinion needs to be expressed. lol
     
    • Funny Funny x 2
  16. purriwinkle

    purriwinkle Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 31, 2014
    Messages:
    6,649
    Likes Received:
    1,114
    At least Mo’s not ragging on you know who, lol, but puh-leeze, let’s look at the situation here. Henry and Meghan have stepped away part time, giving up their positions as senior royals. Being a senior royal means not being able to take an outside job apart from their royal duties. Henry is sixth in line to the crown. What are the chances that he would ever ascend to that position? Are his duties so important that no one else can carry them out?

    Here’s the thing. No matter what, he is and always will be a prince. So far they still have their titles. He says he will never abandon his family or country if they need him. He and his wife will still do some “royal” things that grandma or duty may require.

    They are moving to Canada which is part of the British Commonwealth, not the ends of the earth. He will still support and continue with his many charities, i.e. the Invictus Games, etc. They are a very wealthy couple already but now they have the opportunity to make their own money which should alleviate some of the tax burden Briton’s pay to support the royals.

    Times are changing, and if this move shores up their marriage, mazel tov. As was said, if circumstances don’t work to their advantage, they can no doubt always go back if they haven’t done anything that would embarrass the crown. I think Andrew has that corner covered for now.

    For heavens sake, Edward VIII abdicated his crown for Wallis Simpson, and they had Nazi ties. If the monarchy survived that, this is but a ripple.

    I hope they go to Toronto for selfish reasons. We go there a lot and I would love to catch a glimpse of either Harry or Meghan if I was so lucky....but I would be cool about it, lol.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  17. Morgotha

    Morgotha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    16,030
    Likes Received:
    1,105
    I don't think it's a minor thing at all. The "Royals" are the face of the nation. Two prominent ones have turned their backs on their duties and basically renounced their titles. I think that's MORE serious than having a pervert/deadbeat like Prince Andrew. He's just a screwup. They are *renouncing* their position! That IMO just looks worse.
     
  18. tink

    tink Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2013
    Messages:
    9,024
    Likes Received:
    1,112
    If being a royal means you have to put up with intrusions into every aspect of your life, having racists say awful things about your family and generally being forced to endure misery, then to me it isn't worth it.

    Harry watched the press hound his mother to death. I'm glad to see he is trying to protect his wife and son from all that. Some things are more important than some stupid title.
     
    • Winner Winner x 1
  19. Morgotha

    Morgotha Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2012
    Messages:
    16,030
    Likes Received:
    1,105
    For Diana, or you or I, that level of attention might indeed be too much to live with. For a Hollywood actress though? I'd think she'd have a thicker skin. After all, paparazzi follow the Hollywood people around 24/7 as well, go through their trash, etc. What's the difference?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  20. southernlady

    southernlady Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2014
    Messages:
    1,279
    Likes Received:
    550
    I was all for Harry and Meghan, but my opinion has changed. Meghan wants her voice to be heard and that is a good thing, but she knew what she was getting into when she got involved with Harry. It's not like it was a guarded secret. Diana, Fergie, even going back to King Edward's abdication to marry Wallis Simpson. You can't have it both ways when it comes to the Royal Family.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1

Share This Page