Meghan Markle has previously suggested it was her son Archie Mountbatten-Windsor’s “birthright” to be a prince and the decision not to give him a title went against convention. She expressed her shock at being told he would not get security and the idea of him “not being safe”, and said she wanted him to have the title so he could have police protection. But royal expert Richard Fitzwilliams has said the couple’s second child is “unlikely” to have a title as they are non-working royals.
Speaking to Express.co.uk, Mr Fitzwilliams said: “So far security is concerned, only working royals qualify for palace security.
“But it is a tragedy that this has apparently been a matter of so much concern over the way this has been handled.
“Regarding any future title, they have stepped down as working royals.
“It is unlikely, I would have thought they wouldn’t want one.
READ MORE: Meghan Markle’s ‘sinister threats’ spark fear in Royal Family
“We don’t know what future we want for Archie so this will no doubt be one of the many issues the Queen will want to discuss with them.”
Archie was not entitled to be a prince because of rules set down by King George V more than 100 years ago.
At the time of his birth, a royal source said Harry and Meghan had decided he should be a regular Master Archie Mountbatten-Windsor.
Harry has always stressed the importance of wanting to be seen as normal, and he was thought to have wanted to give his baby the opportunities of an ordinary life that he never had,…
