...and he's born! A baby boy has arrived, and everyone seems safe and healthy.
I know there are names such as James (two kings) and George (six kings, including the popular George VI) as possibilities, but I would just love to see Arthur as his name. So far there's been only one Arthur in line for the English throne (not counting THE King Arthur), and he was Henry VII's older son. His death as a teenager freed up his betrothed, Katherine of Aragon, to be affianced to the next son, Henry. And therein lies a tale of lost Queens, a split in the Church, and all manner of historical derring-do. But I think that the good vibes from the original Arthur should be considered once more. After all, William and Kate have been residing in Wales. What better way to stress this than to name their son after the Once and Future King of the Britons?
I'm seeing lots of people predicting Philip for a first name. I think that would be nice but also a surprise. I can see it being a name for a second son or Harry's son or for one of the York girls to use for a boy rather than for the future king.
And, of course, the crazed Diana fans are about the web yelling for the baby to be named Spencer. I'm sure they will blame Camilla if it is not. And it won't be.
My bet is still on George for a first name. James is likely ruled out as it is the name of Prince Edward's son and Kate's brother.
Hmmm. I would think that Philip could be a middle name, as it is with Charles and William himself, but I'm fairly certain that it would never be the first name of a future king because of Philip II of Spain, who was not only the husband of Mary I, Elizabeth's Catholic older sister, but also later initiated the Armada in 1588. He was practically the bogeyman in England for decades.
Spencer would be nice. I guess it could be a middle name, although somehow I doubt even that. I can't remember another family's surname used in the long chain of names of royal family members. They seem all to be first names: Charles Philip Arthur George, William Philip Arthur Louis (I think), and so on. Wouldn't it be interesting if one of the middle names was Francis, the masculine version of Diana's middle name? Too bad there's no masculine version of Diana.
As for the new prince, I just hope they don't keep us waiting to know his name for too long. Charles' name was not announced for a month. One of Andrew's daughters was two weeks or more and William's name wasn't announced for a full week. Harry's was announced when they left the hospital. I hope that is the case here!
That's a good point you make about Harry's getting "custody" of the names. I did not realize that Harry had inherited the ring! That makes it extra meaningful that Kate ended up with it, doesn't it? It passed through several sets of loving hands to get to her. What's nice is that the two brothers seem to be such a tight team, and each one seems to look out for the other. Whatever mistakes Diana made, she did a splendid job of bringing up her sons, and Charles played a significant part in that as well.
I must say, I'm surprised at how involved I feel in this event. I think it's just such a relief to have an international story that isn't based on war or greed.
Edited later in the day:
The best joke I've heard so far about the baby came from American weather anchor Al Roker on TV--If the baby sees his shadow on the day he's brought out of the hospital, we'll have six more weeks of summer. (Somehow that really tickled my funnybone.)
I guess Weezer is not an appropriate name for the new little prince.
The photos have been so darling.
Weezer...hey, the little munchkin needs a nickname, doesn't he?
A guy I went to school with took this photo of the TV screen:
He added the following caption to it:
"The baby is called leave....king leave...nice ring to it"
Seriously, though, I have been giving some thought to a possible name.
If they were going to use the same name as a previous monarch, I would prefer it to be one that wasn’t used as frequently on the list of English monarchs, such as a 2nd Stephen, a 2nd John, or a 4th Richard.
Notice how I did not mention Charles (so far 2) or William (so far 4 for England/3 for Scotland). That is because these are the names of the baby’s grandfather and father. I have always thought it was silly having families where close relatives have the same name. Like, imagine having a family get-together, say at Christmas. Somebody shouts the name, and 2 people respond.
I kinda liked the idea of a “King Michael”, but that was before I found out that Kate Middleton’s Dad was called Michael.
Of course, there is a way around this confusion – refer to the child by it’s middle name. That is what happened with my uncle. He was named after his Dad, but has always been called by his middle name. In fact the same thing happened with the current Queen’s uncle, Edward VIII. He was named after his Uncle, Prince Albert Victor (who, for some reason, was known as “Eddy”), but was always referred to by his middle name, David. Then, when he became King, Prince David reverted back to his first name, Edward.
Personally, I am not a big fan of names being recycled over and over again. Like, do we really want to have the prospect of a 9th Henry, a 9th Edward, or a 7th George?
Mind you, I suppose 9 is not as bad as the 19 monarchs with the name “Louis” that they had in France. Then there is the small matter of Popes, where the highest count is 23 for the name “John”!
Which brings us to the small matter of something else I don’t like – assuming a different name when you take office. This happens most frequently with Popes. The trend was started by the second Pope John, because his real name was Mercurio, and it wouldn’t have looked good to have a Catholic leader having the same name as a Roman God! And unfortunately, the trend it caught on. To the extent that, were it not for non-Johns assuming that name, there would only be 10 Pope Johns! (Which is still a lot, but more manageable than 23!)
It also happened with the current Queen’s Dad, George VII. His first name was actually Albert, and he was known as Prince Albert. But, when he became King after his brother’s abdication, he crowned using his middle name. Funnily enough, it was exactly the same with George VII’s Granda, Edward VII. His first name was also Albert, but he too was crowned using his middle name.
From what I can find out, it was Edward VII’s Mum that started this trend of being crowned using your middle name. Queen Victoria’s first name was actually Alexandrina.
Which brings me to a name I would love to see given to the new baby – Alexander. I have always loved pretty much all names that can be shortened to “Alex” – Alexander, Alessandro, Alexei, Aleix, Alexandra, Alexandrina, Alexis, etc. Plus, they could use the line that he was named after Edward VII’s wife, Alexandra of Denmark (who would be the new baby’s Great-Great-Great Granny!)
Oh, and it is not as if there hasn’t been a King Alexander in Britain before. 3 Kings of Scotland were called Alexander.
Prince Charles has a lot of connections with Scotland – not least following in Prince Phillip’s footsteps by going to school there (although, admittedly, Charles didn’t like Gordonstoun!) So, perhaps we should consider names of Scottish Kings.
Obviously, I would not inflict “King Macbeth II” on the wee fella. Nor would I suggest he could be become a 4th King Donald (he would be plagued with too many Disney jokes at school!) But, perhaps he could be a 5th King Malcolm; or a 4th King Robert; or a 4th King Kenneth (my Dad’s name!); or a 3rd King David (my middle name!); or even a 2nd King Edgar.
The most common name for Kings of Scotland was James (7 of them). But, I do not think that name would go down very well. King James VII of Scotland (who was also King James II of England and Ireland) is still a very controversial character, especially here in Northern Ireland. I won’t go into it all, but suffice to say that he was the last Catholic King of Britain and Ireland.
Another name I liked was naming the wee fella after his Great-Granda, Prince Philip. But, again, much as I like the current Prince Philip and the sound of “King Philip”, the prospect of a King Philip would not be very popular in England. As Olympia has already pointed out, the last King Philip that features in British history, King Philip II of Spain, sent the Spanish Armada to invade England during the reign of Queen Elizabeth I. So, rather than accepting the name as being a tribute to the current Queen Elizabeth’s husband, some people will twist the story and say it is a reference to the previous Queen Elizabeth’s nemesis. So, better not take that chance!
One name that my Dad thinks will be used (albeit as a middle name) is Louis, after Louis Mountbatten, Prince Philip’s Uncle. Prince Charles was very close to Lord Mountbatten, but he was murdered in 1979. When Prince William was born in 1982, he was given Louis as a middle name in tribute. However, Prince William never knew Lord Mountbatten, so he may not feel a strong enough connection to name his own son after him.
So, on balance, I’m going for Alexander, with at least one out of Michael, Charles, Philip, Louis and Albert featuring as middle names!
Maybe it was too many Prince Albert in a can jokes or just the smoking tobacco association that caused these guys to want to dissociate themselves from the name?
A typical kid's phone prank from the 1950's. You called a store. You asked, "Do you have Prince Albert in a can?" Then you said, "Geez, then you better let him out," and hung up.
the photos of the beautiful family!