The Royal Baby Is Here! It's a BOY!

[sleepygirl1]

I'm thinking it will be Phillip Spencer Michael George

[WonderingInWA]

I would like to see Spencer be part of his name, but my guess is the queen won't allow it. I like Louis. Charles is Charles Philip Arthur George (which Diana misstated while taking her vows -- that marriage was doomed from the beginning!).

I am excited to see how this new generation of royals will carry on the Diana's tradition of bringing the monarchy a bit more modern.

[Beammeup]

Albert George Michael Spencer. Only until someone points out the singer.

[RachelB]

It seems kind of backwards that the british people put up with a group of people living extravagantly off of their taxes and pretending like they rule the country. Will they have a moment where its "off with their heads"?

That would be 1649. Didn't stick, though.

[JMarie]

Meanwhile, Dede waits and waits for her miracle baby to be born.

[snarkyjan]

I read today that the majority of people were hoping for a girl because they prefer - and are used to - British monarchs being queens. As it stands now, the next three up will all be kings.

I don't think there is any chance of a "King Spencer" in the future. The queen wouldn't allow it. Philip, George, Albert, Arthur, Richard.

His other grandmother said earlier that the baby would "be a Leo". Since he was born today, I think he's a Cancer. Could she possibly have been referring to the return of the name Leopold?

I think all of these are possibilities except for "Richard", since the first three Richards all came to bad ends.

[GolightlyGrrl]

I know this much for sure. Despite all of her wealth and privilege Kate will definitely be more of a hands-on mom than Michelle Duggar. I can't imagine Kate and William raising a Smugger. I'm sure they will make sure this child acknowledges all the advantages he has in life while instilling compassion and empathy for others.

[LeopardLady]

I read today that the majority of people were hoping for a girl because they prefer - and are used to - British monarchs being queens. As it stands now, the next three up will all be kings.

I don't think there is any chance of a "King Spencer" in the future. The queen wouldn't allow it. Philip, George, Albert, Arthur, Richard.

His other grandmother said earlier that the baby would "be a Leo". Since he was born today, I think he's a Cancer. Could she possibly have been referring to the return of the name Leopold?

Today's actually the first day of Leo, so he's a Leo.

[JenniferJuniper]

Today's actually the first day of Leo, so he's a Leo.

He's on the cusp, but according to the Washington Post, he's a Cancer.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/sty ... abys-sign/

I sort of like the name Leo though.

[HOTW]

It seems kind of backwards that the british people put up with a group of people living extravagantly off of their taxes and pretending like they rule the country. Will they have a moment where its "off with their heads"?

Actually every Monarch since George III has signed over the income form the Crown lands and since the Crown Lands grossed over $230+ Million last years on exchange for 11 Million on the Civil List, sounds like the Gov't comes out ahead. However with the CL Reform the Sovereign will receive a percentage of the profits from the Crown Estate in the future. Who knows perhaps Charles will not sign over the incomes when he takes the throne? The UK Gov't will be kicking themselves then. Since Charles and his father turned their Duchies under their control from non profiting ventures to able to profit and support their charities, the Crown Estates might profit even better?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... -Maam.html

[Megan]

Actually every Monarch since George III has signed over the income form the Crown lands and since the Crown Lands grossed over $230+ Million last years on exchange for 11 Million on the Civil List, sounds like the Gov't comes out ahead. However with the CL Reform the Sovereign will receive a percentage of the profits from the Crown Estate in the future. Who knows perhaps Charles will not sign over the incomes when he takes the throne? The UK Gov't will be kicking themselves then. Since Charles and his father turned their Duchies under their control from non profiting ventures to able to profit and support their charities, the Crown Estates might profit even better?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... -Maam.html

bhyYgnhhKFw

[PennySycamore]

OT, but I just love me some C.G.P. Gray! He did a funny one about the US-Canada border.

[theCR]

We almost share a birthday. Mine is tomorrow. :)

[PennySycamore]

We almost share a birthday. Mine is tomorrow. :)

Happy Birthday an hour and 7 minutes early!

[crazyforkate]

Four names, all traditional, George in there somewhere, at least one related to Diana or her family. Glad mother and baby came through safely, and happily toasted Canada's future King. Would have loved to see a girl take the throne without fear of a brother's birth, but I guess that can come along in another generation or two.

[Markie]

My guess for the baby's name is: Phillip Charles Michael Frances (Phillip for his g-grandpa, Charles for his grandpa, Michael for grandpa and Frances for his grandma Diana). I don't think they will have Spencer in there. Earl Spencer, Diana's brother has been quite outspoken against the Royals and I don't think the boys have had much to do with him, even when their mother was alive.

[WonderingInWA]

My guess for the baby's name is: Phillip Charles Michael Frances (Phillip for his g-grandpa, Charles for his grandpa, Michael for grandpa and Frances for his grandma Diana). I don't think they will have Spencer in there. Earl Spencer, Diana's brother has been quite outspoken against the Royals and I don't think the boys have had much to do with him, even when their mother was alive.

Well, but the male version of Frances is Francis, so who knows if they will go there. Yes, Diana's brother has been vocal about the royal family (and rightfully so, IMHO). Diana's father was Edward John Spencer, so maybe we will see something from his name. Diana adored her father by most accounts I have read.

[JenniferJuniper]

Well, but the male version of Frances is Francis, so who knows if they will go there. Yes, Diana's brother has been vocal about the royal family (and rightfully so, IMHO). Diana's father was Edward John Spencer, so maybe we will see something from his name. Diana adored her father by most accounts I have read.

I remember hearing that Diana wanted to name her first son John in honor of her father but the royals nixed it, supposedly because John has somewhat of a cursed royal history. The last Prince John, Queen Elizabeth's uncle, was an epileptic who was hidden away by the family and died at age 13.

[already hungover]

I predict Henry Phillip Louis George

[Miggy]

Not Henry - too easy confused with William's brother.

The bookies have James high up on the list but that seems unlikely to me too as William has a cousin James. Surely there are enough names in the UK not to double up.

I am hoping for Francis just because it would be a bit different to the traditional 5-6 names for kings. I've just been listening to that Horrible Histories song - William, William, Henry, Richard, Henry, Richard, John, etc. I hope he is given a name that no king has ever had before!

[walnut]

At least they give classy, properly spelled out and no bible-humping names to their children. And also, no offense, no ghetto names. Nothing creepy. Might be repetitive sometimes but still better than having a wide variety of ghetto spelled Ja-Q-Biblical name combos.

[purpleeee]

Just because you say "no offense" doesn't mean you're suddenly not offensive. I'm offended. You just called a whole group of people's names creepy, why would you do that?

[Patsy]

"There'sthisweirdhorseoutsideyourwindowlookingatyou" would be a creepy name.

[OkToBeTakei]

I read it as in 'nothing creepy,' as a different sentence. As in no creepy names. Separate as it was a separate sentence. But hey ho..whatever.

My post went pooooof! Did somebody cock-up a merge?

I am hoping for Alexander, Andrew or Louis.

I think it will be George, James or can't remember what I posted for the 3rd :lol:

I am no royalist but am happy enough living in this 'backward country' with it's centuries of history and cool historical sites to visit. Only the Queeny Bop receives money from the government. The tax that costs me personally is probably so pathetic as to be unnoticeable and contributes in the same was as my divi of the tax goes to the NHS and maintaining National parks and public swimming pools etc. In other words you gain more as a society than you lose.Lets face it who does not visit the Tower of London or Buck pally when going to London :lol:

Asking the Queen about the name is just an historical courtesy thing now, not a permission thing. I doubt they will go for anything bizarre. Purely because as discussed to death in other threads folks tend to stick within a demographic they are familiar with when naming. I doubt that Jaden or Kayden would be on their radar. It would be nice though if they picked a name they just like, which might not be a previous King or Royal. I think though it will be a traditionally spelt recognisable as a name type name.

With Scotland moving toward devolution they might be swayed toward my choices though of Alexander or Andrew :lol: King Angus sounds cool also :D

[bal maiden]

At least they give classy, properly spelled out and no bible-humping names to their children. And also, no offense, no ghetto names. Nothing creepy. Might be repetitive sometimes but still better than having a wide variety of ghetto spelled Ja-Q-Biblical name combos.

So, a ghetto being the Jewish quarter, and the newborn prince as the future head of the Anglican church, I think Moshe and Yitzak are off the list. Fear not, walnut.

Oh, that's not what you meant? Pray, expand your point...