However, Archie was not entitled to be a prince because of rules set down by King George V more than 100 years ago.
Express.co.uk readers reacted strongly to the suggestion that Archie should be handed the title to heal the rift with Meghan and Harry.
Commenting on this website, one fumed: “What Meghan wants, Meghan gets, sorry your Majesty, if you give in to this, the Monarchy will be finished in the UK.”
Another blasted: “What complete rubbish if anything the pair of them should be stripped of any title.”
“Such concrete measures are urgently needed.
“The greatest beneficiaries will be the Prince of Wales, as he prepares to assume the throne, the British and Commonwealth publics, and the cause of family reconciliation, finally laying to rest the legacy of Princess Diana’s tragic death.”
During the Sussexes’ interview with Winfrey, Meghan suggested she wanted Archie to be a prince so he would have police protection.
But being a prince or princess does not automatically mean royals have security.
In a Letters Patent issued in 1917, George V declared that the great-grandchildren of the monarch would no longer be princes or princesses, except for the eldest son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales.
It read: “…the grandchildren of the sons of any such Sovereign in the direct male line (save only the eldest living son of the eldest son of the Prince of Wales) shall have and enjoy in all occasions the style and title enjoyed by the children of dukes of these our realms.”