Baby #3 | The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and Children | Forum

A A A
Avatar

Please consider registering
guest

sp_LogInOut Log In sp_Registration Register

Register | Lost password?
Advanced Search

— Forum Scope —




— Match —





— Forum Options —





Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters

sp_Feed Topic RSS sp_TopicIcon
Baby #3
October 17, 2017
7:48 pm
Avatar
shay

Duchess
Members
Forum Posts: 449
Member Since:
January 1, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Their third child is due in April 2018.  Like the other two pregnancies it is expected that William and Kate don't want to know the sex of the baby prior to the birth.

Any guesses on baby names?

Shay
The only stupid question is the one you don't ask.

October 21, 2017
2:41 pm
Avatar
Prof H

Crown Princess
Members

Moderators
Forum Posts: 957
Member Since:
January 2, 2013
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online

I am never right thought I was close with George and nkew Diana would be in there somewhere.

I wouldn't be surprised if a boy might have Michael as one of his middle names although Charles is still conspicuously absent.

Except for the Wessex's with Louise (James hadn't been used for awhile) and Edward who was expected to be a girl named after Philip's favorite sister, Her Majesty's children and grandchildren have been steered away from traditional names.  Even Andrew was a surprise.  

I'd like Philip or Alice but expect to be wrong-AS USUAL.

"If I had been born crested not cloven, you would not talk to me thus, sir."  Elizabeth I of England  

November 2, 2017
3:29 pm
Avatar
Emperor

Emperor
Forum Posts: 33
Member Since:
September 6, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

I same boy named Michael Phillip Charles

November 4, 2017
9:26 pm
Avatar
Prof H

Crown Princess
Members

Moderators
Forum Posts: 957
Member Since:
January 2, 2013
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online

Spencer family names were conspicuously absent during the naming of the Duke of Cambridge and his brother Harry.  Diana's brother Charles was himself named after the Prince of Wales.  Maybe it's because John is always considered an "unlucky" name among the Royal Family, Earl Spencer was not honored by one of the eight names given to his two Windsor grandsons.

"If I had been born crested not cloven, you would not talk to me thus, sir."  Elizabeth I of England  

November 5, 2017
4:22 pm
Avatar
shay

Duchess
Members
Forum Posts: 449
Member Since:
January 1, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Prof H said
Spencer family names were conspicuously absent during the naming of the Duke of Cambridge and his brother Harry.  Diana's brother Charles was himself named after the Prince of Wales.  Maybe it's because John is always considered an "unlucky" name among the Royal Family, Earl Spencer was not honored by one of the eight names given to his two Windsor grandsons.  

John Spencer was baptized as Edward John Spencer, and with John being an unlucky name and Edward already in use by Charles brother, it seems unlikely either would have been chosen.

Diana's grandfather was an Albert, and that name is also popular in the RF.  Her grandfather also had a brother named George, so that name has meaning on two limbs of the family tree.

Shay
The only stupid question is the one you don't ask.

November 6, 2017
10:01 pm
Avatar
Prof H

Crown Princess
Members

Moderators
Forum Posts: 957
Member Since:
January 2, 2013
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online

Indeed, I'd consider Charles a Windsor rather than a Spencer name.  The POW was Charles S's godfather.  John was, we both agree, unlucky in the RF dating back to the twelfth century.  EDWARD vii, while Prince of WALES and Princess Alexandra's younger son Alexander John lived only a day, and then there was Prince John, the lost Prince, the youngest son of King George V and Queen May.  But even though he was christened Edward John Spencer, Diana's father was always known by his second name which should have made it available for use as one of his Windsor grandchildren's right names.

Diana complained in the Morton book that her "husband's family," quite a nice way to refer to HM and the DOE, insisted on Arthur or Albert he that Charles named William after his much beloved cousin once removed so that that she was the one who nixed Albert and or Arthur for William.  It seems if she'd wanted a Spencer name her father's m=would have been appropriate, unlucky or not.  Royal names in the 20th century did not have to be traditional ones.  Victoria has virally disappeared even as a middle name, and Charles, which we now associated as extremely royal, was a shock when HM and the DOE bestowed it on their first son.  So was Andrew (named for both grandfathers) whose name was being touted as James to cary on the Stuart tradition.  Everyone in the family seemed to have wanted EDWARD TO BE A SECOND GIRL so he ended up being named largely for his godparents--Edward ANTONY RICHARD LOUIS.  

Had Diana really objected to traditional Windsor names, she probably could have added a Spencer one or two (Edward would have been acceptable x=specially if he had been named a godfather).  So would Charles, especially as it popped up as one of Harry's names.

Diana was good of many great brouhaha's out of her supposed slights.  Of the three Spencer names we've been dwcssing ere, two were perfectly good for the name of a royal procie and with the closeness between the Specter's and the Windsors at the beginning of the marriage Naming a baby for Diana's beloved father may have slipped by.

The Queen had to approved the names.  She already approved Zara so clearly was moving into a more modern feeling about them.  Just think of her grandfather who nixed Ann Margaret.  Can you imagine what he would have thought of Zara or Savannah or Ishla?  Of course, none of them is anywhere near the throne.

"If I had been born crested not cloven, you would not talk to me thus, sir."  Elizabeth I of England  

December 15, 2017
5:18 pm
Avatar
Gidzmo
Los Angeles, CA

Duchess
Members
Forum Posts: 1018
Member Since:
January 6, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Does HM really have to approve the names?  

"Men's evil manners we write in brass; their virtues we write in water."

--Griffith, Queen Katherine's servant (from Shakespeare's "Henry VIII")

December 20, 2017
9:31 pm
Avatar
Prof H

Crown Princess
Members

Moderators
Forum Posts: 957
Member Since:
January 2, 2013
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online

I don't think so.

However, there are incidents in the past when the monarch overruled a name parents wanted--the most famous of which is when the Duchess of York chose Ann Margaret for her second child if the baby turned out to be a girl.  For reasons yet to be discovered, George V loathed the name Ann and made a great fuss over the possibility.  Both he and Queen Mary had hoped for Margaret with its Scottish associations although the Duchess pointed out it was also the name of the nursery maid.  Eventually, the Duchess gave in and her baby was named Margaret (not for the maid obviously as she had a niece named Margaret) and Rose for her sister and maybe for the emblem of the House of York).

Could the Yorks have insisted on Ann Margaret (one hopes not considering they had no crystal ball to predict the 190s American actress who had only two names--Ann Margaret--)--probably.  Would they have?  Clearly not.  It was a custom to submit the names for approval.  When Elizabeth was born, the Duke of York suggested Elizabeth (as it is a pretty name, it's her mother's name, and it hasn't been used in our family in a long time--since the infant daughter of William IV and one of the daughters of George III, I think) and then Alexandra after his grandmother and finally Mary after his mother.  George V consulted his wife and asked if it was really necessarily to ask the young couple to add Victoria.  They both agreed it was not.  More recently, I believe that "over Christmas" the year before Princess Charlotte was born, the Cambridges sat down with Queen Elizabeth and told her they wished Diana to be one of the baby's names if it were a girl.  It probably was a courtesy; HM most likely would not have offended her grandson by refusing, but the custom exists.

IIRC, three years ago Prince Andrew and his then wife wanted to name their first daughter Annbel.  It may be tabloid gossip but this was one of their favorite nightclubs.  HM sat down with her daughter-in-law and went over various Victorian names (Sarah supposedly being fond of that era) and helped her chose Beatrice as a more suitable name for a royal princess.  No one is sure why the POW was given the name Charles.  The public announcement only said, "For personal and private reasons."  The last Charles in the family was Prince Charles Edward (Charlie, the posthumous son of Prince Leopold, someone whose Nad connections would hardly have made him a role model for a future king of Great Britain in the years immediately following World War II.  I suspect this was a case where the name had to be approved although George VI seldom denied his daughter anything.

"If I had been born crested not cloven, you would not talk to me thus, sir."  Elizabeth I of England  

December 20, 2017
11:22 pm
Avatar
Gidzmo
Los Angeles, CA

Duchess
Members
Forum Posts: 1018
Member Since:
January 6, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

The business with "Ann Margaret" was the only other one I knew about.  The future George IV apparently did not like the idea of the future Queen Victoria being named "Alexandrina" (apparently after Alexander II of Russia).

"Men's evil manners we write in brass; their virtues we write in water."

--Griffith, Queen Katherine's servant (from Shakespeare's "Henry VIII")

December 22, 2017
12:33 am
Avatar
LauraS3514

Lady in Waiting/Squire
Members
Forum Posts: 83
Member Since:
January 2, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Gidzmo said
The business with "Ann Margaret" was the only other one I knew about.  The future George IV apparently did not like the idea of the future Queen Victoria being named "Alexandrina" (apparently after Alexander II of Russia).  

The future George IV didn't like the idea of his brother's child. Period. And he hated his brother. IIRC, The Duke and Duchess of Kent had wanted to name their daughter either Elizabeth or Charlotte, but The Prince Regent vetoed both names, as well as several others they suggested such as Augusta or Georgina. It was the Regent himself who insisted that she be given the name of her godfather Alexander I of Russia. She was given the name Victoria, after her mother, as an afterthought - probably because the Kents loathed the name Alexandrina...

December 22, 2017
7:30 am
Avatar
Susan
New Jersey, USA

Queen
Forum Posts: 1364
Member Since:
November 24, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

LauraS3514 said

The future George IV didn't like the idea of his brother's child. Period. And he hated his brother. IIRC, The Duke and Duchess of Kent had wanted to name their daughter either Elizabeth or Charlotte, but The Prince Regent vetoed both names, as well as several others they suggested such as Augusta or Georgina. It was the Regent himself who insisted that she be given the name of her godfather Alexander I of Russia. She was given the name Victoria, after her mother, as an afterthought - probably because the Kents loathed the name Alexandrina...  

I do believe that the Prince Regent also was the one who added the name Victoria. As a child, Victoria was called Drina.

Susan

Eleanor of Aquitaine, by the wrath of God, Queen of the English

December 22, 2017
9:35 pm
Avatar
Prof H

Crown Princess
Members

Moderators
Forum Posts: 957
Member Since:
January 2, 2013
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online

IIRC th Archbishop of Canterbury, faced with a crying baby with only one name in his arms and a sobbing mother who wanted her child to have more than one name gave George IV a stern look, whereupon Prinny gave in and growled, "Let her be called after her mother then."

There was some effort to change Anlexandrina/Victoria's name to Elizabeth, as it sounded more English, when she came to the throne.

I really don't think the monarch must approve the name, but it is certainly a curteous thing to do to ask. I don't mean to get into the Diana discussion, but given the circumstances of the Wales' marriage, it was probably a nice gesture for William to approaches beloved Granny and suggest that they intended to include Diana as one of the baby's name--if it were a girl.

Accordingl to the recently released tapes for the Morton book, Diana supposedly said that her husband's family had wanted either "Arthur" or "Albert" and she wasn't having any of that. I suspect the way things work is that everyone tries to sit down and reach a compromise.  I also think "Oliver" might be vetoed and notice that though there have been royal princes named John, none of them have been older sons.

"If I had been born crested not cloven, you would not talk to me thus, sir."  Elizabeth I of England  

December 23, 2017
1:14 am
Avatar
Gidzmo
Los Angeles, CA

Duchess
Members
Forum Posts: 1018
Member Since:
January 6, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Prof H said

Accordingl to the recently released tapes for the Morton book, Diana supposedly said that her husband's family had wanted either "Arthur" or "Albert" and she wasn't having any of that. I suspect the way things work is that everyone tries to sit down and reach a compromise.  I also think "Oliver" might be vetoed and notice that though there have been royal princes named John, none of them have been older sons.  

As I remember reading, Victoria wanted her descendants to have some form of Albert or Victoria in their names.  Whether the parents wanted that was, in her eyes, irrelevant.  All of Edward VII's children (except maybe John) had either Albert or Victoria (of some form) among their names.

"Men's evil manners we write in brass; their virtues we write in water."

--Griffith, Queen Katherine's servant (from Shakespeare's "Henry VIII")

December 23, 2017
9:52 am
Avatar
Susan
New Jersey, USA

Queen
Forum Posts: 1364
Member Since:
November 24, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Gidzmo wrote: As I remember reading, Victoria wanted her descendants to have some form of Albert or Victoria in their names.  Whether the parents wanted that was, in her eyes, irrelevant.  All of Edward VII's children (except maybe John) had either Albert or Victoria (of some form) among their names.

The youngest son of Edward VII, who lived for only one day, was christened Alexander John Charles Albert.

I've always had some doubts about whether Queen Victoria did "decree" that her descendants should bear the name Victoria or Albert because not even all her children had Victoria, Victor, Albert or Alberta among their names. The exception was Princess Alice (Alice Maud Mary).

All of Queen Victoria's grandchildren EXCEPT for those below had Victoria, Victor, Albert or Alberta among their names.  All the children's and grandchildren's names are in their articles listed at Unofficial Royalty: Queen Victoria’s Children and Grandchildren Index.

  • Sigismund of Prussia, Waldemar of Prussia, Sophie of Prussia, Margarete of Prussia (children of Victoria, Princess Royal)
  • Elisabeth of Hesse and by Rhine, Irene of Hesse and by Rhine (children of Princess Alice)
  • Marie Louise of Schleswig-Holstein, unsure about Prince Harald who lived only 8 days (children of Princess Helena)
  • Leopold of Battenberg (son of Princess Beatrice)

The practice of using Victoria, Victor, Albert or Alberta among given names began to die out among Queen Victoria's great-grandchildren. In the British Royal Family, King George V's sons Prince George, Duke of Kent and Prince John did not have those names among their names. Neither did the two daughters of King George VI but his daughter Princess Margaret named her son David Albert Charles. Among the four children of Queen Elizabeth II, only Prince Andrew has one of the names (Andrew Albert Christian). 

Note that King George VI's first name was Albert and he was known his entire life as Bertie so perhaps the use of Albert in his descendants (Prince Andrew, Viscount Linley, Prince Harry and Albert Windsor) is in his honor and not Prince Albert's.

Among Queen Elizabeth II's grandchildren and great-grandchildren, only Princess Eugenie of York (Eugenie Victoria Helena) and Prince Harry of Wales (Henry Charles Albert David) have one of the names.

None of the seven paternal first cousins of Queen Elizabeth II (the grandchildren of King George V - their articles can be found at Unofficial Royalty: House of Windsor Index) have the names among their names. Among their children, only Princess Alexandra (of Kent)'s daughter has one of the names: Marina Victoria Alexandra Ogilvy.

Among the grandchildren of the Queen's cousins, only the Duke of Kent's son Lord Nicholas Windsor has a son with one of the names: Albert Louis Philip Edward Windsor.

Susan

Eleanor of Aquitaine, by the wrath of God, Queen of the English

December 23, 2017
7:23 pm
Avatar
Prof H

Crown Princess
Members

Moderators
Forum Posts: 957
Member Since:
January 2, 2013
sp_UserOnlineSmall Online

IIRC, Victoria wrote to one of her daughters that "she and Papa" had decided that their male descendants should bear the name Albert and she wished the female ones to have Victoria as well.  This should to be that the decision Mohave the girls use the name Victoria was hers alone after Albert's death.  As I mentioned in an earlier post, it was George V, her grandson, who consulted about the name not he Duke and Duchess of York's first daughter asked his wife, "I hardly think it is necessary to ask them to  add Victoria, is it?"  This implies the requirement, f such there were, for girls to have Victoria as part of their string of names, was waning (or had waned) by the mid 1920s.  It seems it had become more of preference than a requirement.

 

Victoria itself only entered the family as a name with her birth and the insistence of George IV that the baby have her mother's name and not one of the traditional Hanoverian ones.

"If I had been born crested not cloven, you would not talk to me thus, sir."  Elizabeth I of England  

December 23, 2017
9:44 pm
Avatar
Susan
New Jersey, USA

Queen
Forum Posts: 1364
Member Since:
November 24, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Yvonne Demoskoff, who I used to know way back when I was an AOL Royalty Community Leader (1997-2005), has an interesting website full of interesting information.  I was in contact with her a couple of years ago and she said she no longer updates it but it is still a site that is worth looking at,  Here is the main page Yvonne's Royalty Home Page. I am going to add it to the websites on the right side of Unofficial Royalty's pages.

I've used the site primarily for christening information for the British Royal Family but I just happened upon an area on the website that I was unfamiliar with related to the Victoria/Albert name situation: http://users.uniserve.com/~can...../names.htm

Yvonne has many quotes about Queen Victoria's thoughts about names.  It seems her suggestion to use Victoria/Albert was in a letter to her eldest son Bertie (Edward VII) ten days after the birth of his second child (King George V): "Of course you will add Albert at the end, like your brothers, as you know we [Queen Victoria and the Prince Consort] settled long ago that all dearest Papa's male English descendants should bear that name, to mark our line, just as I wish all the girls to have Victoria after theirs! I lay great stress on this; and it is done in a great many families."

So according to the quote from the letter, the names were to be used for the English descendants which makes a bit more sense than for ALL descendants.

In the area about Queen Victoria and names, there are several stories in which Queen Victoria attempted to force her will in the naming of a grandchild or a great-grandchild, only to be thwarted by the parents.  And there are lists of names.  Yvonne has Albert as the last of Prince Leopold's names, so it is only Princess Alice who did not have Victoria or Alberta among her names.  I looked in a biography of Prince Leopold to make sure that was accurate - his name was Leopold George Duncan Albert.

Susan

Eleanor of Aquitaine, by the wrath of God, Queen of the English

December 23, 2017
10:29 pm
Avatar
Susan
New Jersey, USA

Queen
Forum Posts: 1364
Member Since:
November 24, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Regarding Queen Victoria's names and her christening...the text in quotes below is from Christopher Hibbert's biography Queen Victoria - A Personal History - just so we all have the correct information.  Victoria's godparents were:

  • Alexander I, Emperor of All Russia (did not attend, Victoria's uncle, the Duke of York, stood proxy)
  • The Prince Regent (her paternal uncle, later King George IV)
  • Dowager Queen of Württemberg (her maternal aunt Charlotte, Princess Royal) (did not attend, another aunt, Princess Augusta, stood proxy)
  • Dowager Duchess of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld (her maternal grandmother Augusta) (did not attend, her aunt Princess Mary, Duchess of Gloucester stood proxy)

"As a matter of form, the parents sent a list of names proposed for the child to the Prince Regent - Victoire (her mother's name), Georgiana (in deference to the Regent), Alexandrina (in deference to the Tsar) and Charlotte and Augusta (the names of her aunts).  Nothing was heard from the Regent until the day before the christening when he wrote to say that he could not allow the name of Georgiana to be used as he did not choose to place his name before the Tsar's and he could not allow it to follow.  He would indicate the other names at the ceremony, disapproving of Charlotte, the name of his dead daughter, and of Augusta as being too majestic."

(The Archbishop of Canterbury and the Bishop of London were waiting in the Cupola Room at Kensington Palace where the christening was to be held.)

"Neither of them had any idea of what the names were to be when the ceremony began and the Archbishop had the child in his arms.  He looked toward the parents, then toward the Regent, for enlightenment. The Regent announced 'Alexandrina'. There was a pause.  The father proposed Elizabeth.  The Regent dissented, then looking at the Duchess of Kent who had been reduced to tears, he said sharply, 'Give her the mother's name also, but it cannot precede that of the Emperor.' So the child was christened Alexandrina Victoria, and in her early years was generally known by the diminutive of the first name, Drina."

Susan

Eleanor of Aquitaine, by the wrath of God, Queen of the English

December 23, 2017
10:38 pm
Avatar
Gidzmo
Los Angeles, CA

Duchess
Members
Forum Posts: 1018
Member Since:
January 6, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Susan said
Yvonne Demoskoff, who I used to know way back when I was an AOL Royalty Community Leader (1997-2005), has an interesting website full of interesting information.  I was in contact with her a couple of years ago and she said she no longer updates it but it is still a site that is worth looking at,  Here is the main page Yvonne's Royalty Home Page. I am going to add it to the websites on the right side of Unofficial Royalty's pages.

I've used the site primarily for christening information for the British Royal Family but I just happened upon an area on the website that I was unfamiliar with related to the Victoria/Albert name situation: http://users.uniserve.com/~can...../names.htm

Yvonne has many quotes about Queen Victoria's thoughts about names.  It seems her suggestion to use Victoria/Albert was in a letter to her eldest son Bertie (Edward VII) ten days after the birth of his second child (King George V): "Of course you will add Albert at the end, like your brothers, as you know we [Queen Victoria and the Prince Consort] settled long ago that all dearest Papa's male English descendants should bear that name, to mark our line, just as I wish all the girls to have Victoria after theirs! I lay great stress on this; and it is done in a great many families."

So according to the quote from the letter, the names were to be used for the English descendants which makes a bit more sense than for ALL descendants.

In the area about Queen Victoria and names, there are several stories in which Queen Victoria attempted to force her will in the naming of a grandchild or a great-grandchild, only to be thwarted by the parents.  And there are lists of names.  Yvonne has Albert as the last of Prince Leopold's names, so it is only Princess Alice who did not have Victoria or Alberta among her names.  I looked in a biography of Prince Leopold to make sure that was accurate - his name was Leopold George Duncan Albert.  

I did remember the account of George IV and not allowing the Tsar's name to be a second name.  Haven't seen Yvonne around the web for some time (haven't been able to access alt.talk.royalty for a LONG time).  

Interesting story on Alice's name--it seems that it was Lord Melbourne's favorite female name.  Victoria chose it for daughter #2 for that reason.

"Men's evil manners we write in brass; their virtues we write in water."

--Griffith, Queen Katherine's servant (from Shakespeare's "Henry VIII")

December 23, 2017
11:01 pm
Avatar
Susan
New Jersey, USA

Queen
Forum Posts: 1364
Member Since:
November 24, 2012
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline

Gidzmo wrote: Haven't seen Yvonne around the web for some time (haven't been able to access alt.talk.royalty for a LONG time).  

She's been focusing on family genealogy instead of royal genealogy and has a blog about that.  Yvonne was also on AOL when the two of us were.  http://yvonnesgenealogyblog.bl.....gspot.com/

Susan

Eleanor of Aquitaine, by the wrath of God, Queen of the English

Forum Timezone: America/Chicago

Most Users Ever Online: 100

Currently Online: Prof H
11 Guest(s)

Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)

Top Posters:

Member Stats:

Guest Posters: 0

Members: 4880

Moderators: 1

Admins: 3

Forum Stats:

Groups: 18

Forums: 52

Topics: 1198

Posts: 7511

Newest Members:

RobertBix, BeverlyTaind, edeawuduwieg, ohterujarh, Bryceunacy, adamnk1, ukaqizwiudagi, idanqasax, ufucipafol, usoxmaoxow

Moderators: Prof H: 957

Administrators: Emperor: 33, Scott: 556, Susan: 1364