Meghan Markle has expressed deep frustration following the recent decision to bestow a royal title on Princess Charlotte in memory of Queen Elizabeth II, while her own son, Archie Harrison, was notably excluded. For Meghan and Prince Harry, this feels like more than just an oversight—it appears to be another painful reminder of the growing distance between them and the royal family. At the heart of this situation lies more than just ceremonial titles; it touches on the deeper themes of family legacy, inclusion, and the ongoing tension between tradition and change within the monarchy.
The decision to honor Princess Charlotte with a royal title is not just a symbolic gesture—it is rooted in the customs and values of the royal institution. Royal titles carry historical weight; they signify duty, trust, lineage, and identity. When a royal title is granted, it signals that the individual is considered a key figure in the future of the monarchy. Charlotte’s new title reflects her direct connection to the line of succession, as she is third in line to the throne. This elevated status comes with public recognition and an expectation of future royal responsibilities.
Archie’s absence from this recognition, however, raises important questions. Why was he left out? What does this decision say about his place in the royal family’s future? Meghan and Harry’s supporters argue that this isn’t just about hierarchy or tradition—it may also be influenced by the couple’s strained relationship with the rest of the royal family. Archie and his sister, Lilibet, represent a new generation of royals, but their path is markedly different due to their parents’ decision to step away from official royal duties and move to the United States.
Within the British monarchy, there has always been a distinction between royal and non-royal grandchildren, particularly based on proximity to the throne. Children of the direct heir generally receive more prestigious titles and roles. In this context, Princess Charlotte’s status as the child of the future king gives her a significant advantage. Archie, as the child of the younger son who has stepped back from royal duties, does not fall under the same classification. But while this may explain the official reasoning, many still question whether such a rigid system is fair or reflective of modern values.
Meghan Markle has openly criticized the traditional structure of the monarchy, describing it as outdated and exclusive. She believes that the institution should evolve to reflect the world as it is today. From her perspective, denying Archie a title while granting one to Charlotte reinforces an imbalance that extends beyond protocol—it touches on equality and inclusion. Meghan has emphasized that growing up in California, Archie may not need or even benefit from a royal title, but at the same time, she feels the disparity highlights deeper issues of recognition and respect.
This situation also prompts broader questions about the relevance of royal titles in today’s world. As society shifts towards valuing individual merit, equality, and authenticity, the idea of being defined by a hereditary title feels increasingly out of step. For Archie and Lilibet, growing up outside the traditional royal environment might provide them with the freedom to shape their own identities. They are less likely to be burdened by expectations and more likely to forge their own paths. Some even argue that they might be better off without titles, using their platform to contribute to society in ways that go beyond royal appearances.
There is precedent for this approach. Prince Edward and Sophie, Duchess of Edinburgh, chose not to have their children use royal titles, allowing them a more ordinary upbringing. This decision was seen as a step towards modernizing the monarchy and offering their children greater privacy and personal agency. Archie and Lilibet might be part of a growing trend where younger royals choose lives defined more by purpose and character than titles and protocols.
At the core of Meghan and Harry’s vision is a desire for a more inclusive and compassionate monarchy—one that values people for who they are, not just the titles they hold. By stepping back from their roles, they’ve challenged the traditional mold and invited the institution to evolve. Archie and Lilibet, as children raised in this new context, may come to symbolize a different kind of royalty—one based on service, empathy, and personal achievement rather than inherited status.This raises a larger question for the monarchy: can it maintain its traditions while embracing the values of modern life? Meghan’s disappointment and Harry’s departure suggest that the royal family is at a pivotal point. They must decide whether to uphold customs that have long defined them or begin a process of renewal that includes a broader definition of what it means to be royal.
The decision to exclude Archie from a title has implications that reach far beyond one child. It speaks to how the monarchy views itself and how it wishes to be seen by the public. Will it be an institution that clings to the past, or one that welcomes change and diversity? Meghan’s perspective is a call for fairness, and it challenges the royal family to consider how it can better reflect the inclusive values of a contemporary society.Queen Elizabeth II was known for her ability to honor tradition while also adapting to the times. She embraced television, social media, and changing public expectations throughout her reign. Perhaps one of the most meaningful ways for the monarchy to honor her legacy would be to continue evolving—welcoming new ideas, voices, and approaches. Meghan and Harry’s vision could be part of that evolution.
Looking to the future, Archie and Lilibet may well redefine what it means to be royal. Without titles, they might serve as role models for a generation that values authenticity over aristocracy. They could grow into public figures who use their influence to advocate for causes they care about, becoming symbols of a more human, accessible form of royalty.
Ultimately, the monarchy faces a critical decision: will it continue down the path of tradition alone, or will it embrace the possibility of a more modern identity? The story of Archie and Lilibet is not just a personal family matter—it is a reflection of broader societal questions about fairness, inclusion, and what leadership means in the 21st century.
Where do we go from here? The conversation around titles, identity, and belonging within the royal family must continue. Meghan and Harry’s experience shines a light on the growing need for a more flexible and compassionate institution. Archie and Lilibet, though young now, may one day be central to this transformation. Their journey could inspire future generations of royals to rethink what it means to serve, to belong, and to lead—not through titles, but through values and actions.