Baby Cambridge: Musings and Suggestions


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Kate has other uncles I believe from her father's side, who have stayed well away from the limelight.
 
Kate's had a lot of family who've successfully stayed out of the limelight, or a least not overly abused the limelight. Gary's just... Gary's the type of relative that someone famous hopes to not have but pretty much every famous person has at least one of them.
 
Thanks for the link for the pictures of The Queen pregnant I had never seen most of them before. I'm surprised Gary hasn't chimed in before now I doubt he is that much in the know. But I would like a girl anyway.
 
Let's see if Sunday, 21st July, is the date?

Other '21st' Royal Birthdays:

The Queen - 21 April, 1926
Prince William - 21 June, 1982
The Late Princess Margaret - 21 August, 1930
 
21 would be a good date. Is it still Cancer then or does go into Leo? At this stage I think people just want the baby to come. I would like it soon because I go into hospital at the end of the month and I would love to know what it is before I go in.
 
Leo starts Tuesday 23 July.

Let's be honest, this Sunday, 21 July, could come and go just like all the other predicted dates. People have dismissed Carole's comments about a Leo baby, but it is now looking to be accurate.

I have no idea when she will go into labour?
The TV and Radio here in the UK never make any mention about the baby at all.
Apart from reporters at the Hospital, you would not even know she was due soon.

The TV/Radio only really focus on LIVE NEWS. Anything about the baby's due date, is just speculation, which they will not cover. So unless she goes into labour, as far as they are concerned, it is a non-story!

Don't rule out next week ---- I am certainly not putting any money on this week, as I still have my doubts. Is the baby late, or on time? Maybe Carole was spot-on after all ---- 24th July, or thereabouts!
 
Last edited:
I dont get the fuss they are creating by naming a date in the first place. If I was a royal woman and lets say due mid July, I'd have the press department say that I am due mid August. Nobody will be able to tell by the size of the bumb. The doctors usually give 2 weeks plus max on the due date, meaning the baby would arrive beginning of August the latest, still two weeks before the media goes into complete overload, camping outside hospitals and coming up with the most absurd speculations because they are bored and tired of waiting.
I'd hate all the fuss, reducing a woman to a birth process :yuk:
 
I'm back from a business trip to London and the only thing i can say is that people i've met didn't give a damn about all this baby fever. Same for the young people met in pubs and parties : they didn't care or were clearly fed up with all that circus...The only people concerned seemed to be the journalists , and i must say, US journalists for the most part...
 
I know that with Diana, Princess of Wales, everyone was interested in when William would be born. If it is true, they don't much care with the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, then I am surprised; because William has always been very popular with the public, being Diana's son, and Kate has done nothing to warrant any disapproval from the public. I do think the interest will spark-up once the baby is here. For those not interested, fair enough.
 
But we don't actually know that July 13th was the due date. That was just one tossed out by the media - there has never been an official due date.

If she was due on the 13th and they induce at 2 weeks overdue, she'd be induced in the 27th, but even that's not a guarantee that the baby would come on the 27th.

Oh ok, I thought it was mentioned by Kate or the Palace that it was the 13th.
 
Ugh Camilla's comment yesterday is getting twisted beyond belief on the television! Driving me insane.
 
Never mind what the baby's name is, it would be so funny if Kate and William had at least one daughter who resembled William and grew up to be Diana's image LOL!
 
I just hope the baby is not born on the 21st.

Too much royal stuff happening together at once is no fun. The Belgian abdication is far more interesting.
 
Never mind what the baby's name is, it would be so funny if Kate and William had at least one daughter who resembled William and grew up to be Diana's image LOL!

Well the term "funny" is not very appropriate ...
In some forums , people are expecting some kind of reincarnation of Diana, and now that's creepy !
 
I just hope the baby is not born on the 21st.

Too much royal stuff happening together at once is no fun. The Belgian abdication is far more interesting.

The Belgian abdication is going to be covered mainly by Belgium and be a minute affair. You can easily concentrate on the 20 minute ceremony, the waves, the pictures and let the potential birth pass by.
 
I'm hoping for a Leo baby! Leo people are known for their competent leadership skills lol. Just kidding.... But would be nice if the baby is a Leo.
 
Oh ok, I thought it was mentioned by Kate or the Palace that it was the 13th.

She said mid-July and the palace confirm. The Daily Mail said the 13th, the 13th is not even mid-July
 
July 17th- HRH Princess Victoria of Cambridge

That is my guess!
 
Last edited:
She said mid-July and the palace confirm. The Daily Mail said the 13th, the 13th is not even mid-July

"Mid July" is not an accurate measure, it's just an approximation. I would take it to mean a period from about the 11th to the 20th/21st of a month.
 
Mid July is the 10th-21st (some consider the 15th-21st mid July). I Think Doctors told Catherine her estimated Due Date (which for all we know could have been the 10th and that could mean she would be 41 weeks Tomorrow) but they (The Duchess and Buckingham Palace) decided to tell the media that it was Mid July instead which I can understand.

I can't see Catherine going 42 weeks and over. If Camilla said by the end of this week then she is probably right as she would know.more and what going in.
 
Last edited:
July 17th- HRH Princess Victoria of Cambridge

That is my guess!

I love the name Victoria but I don't think it would be a wise choice. There is already a Crown Princess Victoria who will be Queen of Sweden at some point in the future. Prince Charles is only a few years younger than King Carl Gustaf of Sweden and there is a possibility that William and Victoria could reign at the same time. If Victoria outlives William, then there could be two Queen Victoria's on the throne at the same time. The possibilities are slight, but still plausible. Has there ever been two monarchs with the same name on the throne at the same time?
 
The baby can choose any of it's middle names to reign under so she could be called Victoria and if she has Elizabeth or Alexander as a middle name she could use one of those. Besides does it really matter if there are two Queens of the same name it isn't like people are going to get them mixed up.
 
The baby can choose any of it's middle names to reign under so she could be called Victoria and if she has Elizabeth or Alexander as a middle name she could use one of those. Besides does it really matter if there are two Queens of the same name it isn't like people are going to get them mixed up.

You are Right and Crown Princess Victoria is 36. Baby Cambridge probably won't be on the throne until he is in his 40's or 50's which by then Crown Princess will be in her 70s or 80s so it doesn't matter. And actually the British Royal Family more famous some people's then may not know there is a Queen Victoria in Sweden. At most it will be less then 10 years if they are monarchs at the same time, Baby Cambridge will more likely reign at the same time tat when Estelle is the Queen of Sweden.
 
I love the name Victoria but I don't think it would be a wise choice. There is already a Crown Princess Victoria who will be Queen of Sweden at some point in the future. Prince Charles is only a few years younger than King Carl Gustaf of Sweden and there is a possibility that William and Victoria could reign at the same time. If Victoria outlives William, then there could be two Queen Victoria's on the throne at the same time. The possibilities are slight, but still plausible. Has there ever been two monarchs with the same name on the throne at the same time?

Why would we in the UK care what the name of a continental monarch is. If you go to your local pub and conduct a poll most could not tell you who the current continental monarchs are, let alone their heirs or their heirs heirs. Having 2 reigning monarchs with the same name would not be unsual, in fact the situation currently exists. Albert II of Belgium and of Monaco. We also had George VI of UK and George II of The Hellenes until 1947. If there is a Victoria of Cambridge she would become Victoria II and be much more famous than her distant relative Queen Victoria of Sweden who would be Victoria 1st if she used a regnal number at all. I doubt anyone would have a problem telling the difference between the future Queen of Sweden who would be 36 yrs older than the future Queen of UK. It is also likely that baby Cambridge would not even come to the throne for 50+ years by which time her Swedish counterpart would be in her late 80s.
 
Maybe grandma Middleton was correct about the baby being born under the Leo sign
We shall wait and see
 
Maybe grandma Middleton was correct about the baby being born under the Leo sign
We shall wait and see

I was wondering Where did Carole ever say it was Leo? It was one of her friends who said that Carole allegedly said Leo which I thought came from the Mailonline the same peoples who made up the July 13th date which wAs never confirmed by anyone.
 
Last edited:
I don't think it really matters what royals on the continent named their children, or are already named, in regards to what William and Catherine will name their child. If they have a daughter and want to name her Victoria, the fact the future queen of Sweden has that name won't matter to them one whit, nor should it.
 
Why would we in the UK care what the name of a continental monarch is. If you go to your local pub and conduct a poll most could not tell you who the current continental monarchs are, let alone their heirs or their heirs heirs. Having 2 reigning monarchs with the same name would not be unsual, in fact the situation currently exists. Albert II of Belgium and of Monaco. We also had George VI of UK and George II of The Hellenes until 1947. If there is a Victoria of Cambridge she would become Victoria II and be much more famous than her distant relative Queen Victoria of Sweden who would be Victoria 1st if she used a regnal number at all. I doubt anyone would have a problem telling the difference between the future Queen of Sweden who would be 36 yrs older than the future Queen of UK. It is also likely that baby Cambridge would not even come to the throne for 50+ years by which time her Swedish counterpart would be in her late 80s.

Speaking of polls in the local pub, at our local pub during trivia night teams were asked to give the surname of the BRF. Only a hand full of people knew. I wonder how many people in that UK pub could answer questions about the BRF, let alone the SRF.

As for confusing Baby Cambridge with any of the future queens in Europe, little chance of that. I am convinced it's a boy.
 
Kate's uncle Garry believes it is a Girl. If only I had 1,000 £/$ to place a bet on a baby Girl, I know I would double-my money ---- guaranteed! But alas I don't. All the bets are being placed on a Girl; coming from serious high-stake gamblers. I wonder if they have all been tipped off, that a Girl is coming!

I have no idea what they will call the new Princess!
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom