Baby Cambridge: Potential Names and Godparents

[Argie]

Canada is much the same, with the exception of the Dutch. Except when royals wed, or visit us, the BRF are the only ones to make the news here. Because Bea and her sisters lived in Canada during the war with their mother, and one was born here, we have a connection to the Dutch royals.

I am a teacher and I made sure the picture of the Queen is posted in my classroom. Not many of my colleagues have it though. On the other hand, many of my students were interested in England's history, and I found Youtube series related to Elisabeth l and we watched them in class. But, in reality, I fault the educational system here, as the curriculum does not include any history but Canada's and a bit of world history related to the world wars. Very spotty.

 

[Meadow]

I don't like John as a name I always think of a toilet. (I'm sorry for anyone called John blame my mother she is the one who pointed it out and insisted on calling our next door neighbour Flush) It won't surprise me if they go a little out of the box. Kate and William are supposed to be more modern and really it is about time a new name get's on the list. Some names appear to be taboo but I think the Queen will aprove as long as there are middle names he or she can use when they reign. I still like Charlotte and Alexandra for a girl. Boys names I always find difficult you want something strong and manly I like George for a boy although I do think of Mr Roper from George and Mildred. LOL The royals seem to have nicknames for each other so chances are the baby will too. I don't think Pippa has any chance of being picked as a name can you imagine the headlines? She already get's way too much attention.

 

[Countessmeout]

I am a teacher and I made sure the picture of the Queen is posted in my classroom. Not many of my colleagues have it though. On the other hand, many of my students were interested in England's history, and I found Youtube series related to Elisabeth l and we watched them in class. But, in reality, I fault the educational system here, as the curriculum does not include any history but Canada's and a bit of world history related to the world wars. Very spotty.

Odd, Western Canada must be different. We studied very little Canadian history. We studied a lot about the explorers, but mainly European and world history. Even in social studies, little Canadian politics, mainly world.

 

[amaryllus]

I should add the Romanov, well Anastasia really, legend has a lot of appeal in the states and the goth/vampire sub culture will know of vlad tepesh.

 

[Argie]

Odd, Western Canada must be different. We studied very little Canadian history. We studied a lot about the explorers, but mainly European and world history. Even in social studies, little Canadian politics, mainly world.

Biiiiiig deal, much more beneficial to students, IMO. It certainly gives them a global perspective. Ontario is very conservative narrow-minded, although you wouldn't expect it.

 

[Countessmeout]

Are you sure that's why they were vetoed?

The names vetoed reportedly included Georgina, Charlotte, and Augusta - all names already seen in the BRF (well, Georgina being a female version of George), and Charlotte being the name the Prince Regent used for his own daughter.

The way I've always read that story it seems more like the Prince Regent was just being a dick and trying to have his niece given a less-royal name.

Interestiing, as the name Alexandrina is arguaeably more royal than Georgiana is. It was in honor of her godfather Emperor Alexander I. And while perhaps not British, Victoria as well was a royal name on the continent.

The prince regent would not have expected his daughter to be queen, when she was born. Like most men, he would have expected to have a few sons to follow along the line. Augusta was a name used in lesser branches, and was foreign, which is why it is rumored she was Alexandrina Victoria and not Victoria first. Victoria unlike Charlotte, they knew at her birth, she would see the throne or a huge chance, so the choice of her name was far more serious. It's along the lines of Zara or even Eugenie, names appropriate for those removed from the throne, but not likely the heir to the throne. There was no reason to believe either Zara or Eugene would be queen when they were born, so less pressure on the name choice. Same would go for Charlotte, and holders of the name Augusta.

 

[Ish]

Odd, Western Canada must be different. We studied very little Canadian history. We studied a lot about the explorers, but mainly European and world history. Even in social studies, little Canadian politics, mainly world.

In Canada education is a provincial matter, not a federal one.

In BC we study European history - primarily British - in grade 8/9, some American and Canadian history in grade 10, an devote all of grade 11 to Canadian history.

The way it works is basically chronological - a bit of ancient history, the Conquest, then go to the Protestant Reformation and the Tudors, the English Civil War, the Enlightenment and the French Revolution, the American Revolution, then Canadian history starting with a background on Aboriginals then going into early settlers, the lead up to confederation, and 20th century history from a Canadian perspective (mostly just the world wars).

 

[Countessmeout]

Biiiiiig deal, much more beneficial to students, IMO. It certainly gives them a global perspective. Ontario is very conservative narrow-minded, although you wouldn't expect it.

Actually I'd think studying the history of one's own country is Important. You can have a global perspective without ignoring one's own history. I can name more presidents of the USA, then I can Prime Minsters of Canada. I find that a bid sad.

 

[Ish]

Interestiing, as the name Alexandrina is arguaeably more royal than Georgiana is. It was in honor of her godfather Emperor Alexander I. And while perhaps not British, Victoria as well was a royal name on the continent.

The prince regent would not have expected his daughter to be queen, when she was born. Like most men, he would have expected to have a few sons to follow along the line. Augusta was a name used in lesser branches, and was foreign, which is why it is rumored she was Alexandrina Victoria and not Victoria first. Victoria unlike Charlotte, they knew at her birth, she would see the throne or a huge chance, so the choice of her name was far more serious. It's along the lines of Zara or even Eugenie, names appropriate for those removed from the throne, but not likely the heir to the throne. There was no reason to believe either Zara or Eugene would be queen when they were born, so less pressure on the name choice. Same would go for Charlotte, and holders of the name Augusta.

I wouldn't say that it was known Victoria was likely to make it to the throne when she was born. At the time her father was 4th in line - behind his three elder brothers. That she was a girl made it even less likely, as did the fact that the Duke of Clarence had had ten illegitimate children, 9 of whom survived infancy, proving himself to be rather fertile.

It seems to me to be more likely that after the Duke of Kent died without male issue and the Duke of York died they figured it was a high possibility that Victoria would be Queen. Before then her coming to the throne was somewhat of a longshot.

For the Alexandrina Victoria I think the big thing was that it wasn't a Hanoverian name. The Prince Regent wouldn't let them use any of the names in common use in the family. I googled it, and found this:

Thus when Victoria was born, it was not known whether she would ever be Queen or not. It is clear the Prince Regent hoped she would not[...]

Soon after his daughter's birth the Duke of Kent wrote to his eldest brother, the Prince Regent, requesting the child be christened Victorie Georgina Alexandrina Charlotte Augusta. Each of the names held special, royal significance. Victorie was the name of the child's mother. Alexandrina was the female form of the name of the Russian Emperor, just as Georgina was the female form of the name of the King and Prince Regent. Charlotte and Augusta were the names of past female members of the English royal family.

The Prince Regent wrote back to his little brother to say that he could not allow the name Georgina for he would not place the name before that of the Russian Emperor, but not could he allow it to follow[...]

When the time came for the child's name to be announced, the Prince Regent announced "Alexandrina." The Duke of Kent urged that another name be added, suggesting Elizabeth. The Prince Regent refused, but said the child could also have her mother's name if it did not proceed the name of the Emperor of Russia. Thus the child was officially named Alexandrina Victoria.

http://suite101.com/article/queen-victorias-christening-a37680

 

[BritishRoyalist]

I wouldn't say that it was known Victoria was likely to make it to the throne when she was born. At the time her father was 4th in line - behind his three elder brothers. That she was a girl made it even less likely, as did the fact that the Duke of Clarence had had ten illegitimate children, 9 of whom survived infancy, proving himself to be rather fertile.

It seems to me to be more likely that after the Duke of Kent died without male issue and the Duke of York died they figured it was a high possibility that Victoria would be Queen. Before then her coming to the throne was somewhat of a longshot.

For the Alexandrina Victoria I think the big thing was that it wasn't a Hanoverian name. The Prince Regent wouldn't let them use any of the names in common use in the family. I googled it, and found this:

http://suite101.com/article/queen-victorias-christening-a37680

Actually Victoria was fifth in line to the throne at birth behind her Father, Two Brothers (Including William IV and the other Prince Fredrick who died in 1827) and the Prince Regent (George IV)

1. The Prince Regent George IV
2. Prince Frederick Duke of York and Albany
3. William IV
4 Prince Edward Duke of Kent and Strathem
5. Princess Victoria

 

[Ish]

Actually I'd think studying the history of one's own country is Important. You can have a global perspective without ignoring one's own history. I can name more presidents of the USA, then I can Prime Minsters of Canada. I find that a bid sad.

I agree completely.

Knowing the history of one's country is a part of knowing how your country came to be. It's a good way to help foster a sense of nation identity.

Plus there's the idea that there are no new ideas in Canadian history and the problems that we're dealing with today are the direct result of choices made 100 years ago.

 

[Countessmeout]

I wouldn't say that it was known Victoria was likely to make it to the throne when she was born. At the time her father was 4th in line - behind his three elder brothers. That she was a girl made it even less likely, as did the fact that the Duke of Clarence had had ten illegitimate children, 9 of whom survived infancy, proving himself to be rather fertile.

It seems to me to be more likely that after the Duke of Kent died without male issue and the Duke of York died they figured it was a high possibility that Victoria would be Queen. Before then her coming to the throne was somewhat of a longshot.

For the Alexandrina Victoria I think the big thing was that it wasn't a Hanoverian name. The Prince Regent wouldn't let them use any of the names in common use in the family. I googled it, and found this:



Queen Victoria

Charlotte was dead, and the Prince Regent and Duke of York were both married to women past child-bearing age, as well as estranged. The Duke of Clarence married on the same day as Victoria's father. They had both rushed to marry, knowing that their children were highly likely to see the throne. The Duke of Clarence had two daughters, but both died, one right after baptism, and one when she was a few years old. He had numerous other still born babies. It didn't matter if Victoria was a girl, except if her father had a son after her. Any nephews from a younger brother of her father, would not inherit before her. Her gender did not play any role, except in her own family. And in his fifties, Edward and others would likely have considered the chances of him having more than one child. When he died, the Duke of Clarence had yet to have a living birth.

 

[Argie]

I agree completely.

Knowing the history of one's country is a part of knowing how your country came to be. It's a good way to help foster a sense of nation identity.

Plus there's the idea that there are no new ideas in Canadian history and the problems that we're dealing with today are the direct result of choices made 100 years ago.

I completely agree. However, I do fault the curriculum in Ontario for not giving the students a global perspective on history as well. Canada, as a country, does not exist in a vacuum, did not appear from nowhere and our young history is the direct result of other countries' histories. In Europe, children are taught both their country's history and world history in depth. Better educated children, better informed minds do make better citizens and much wiser voters, after all.

And on the same note, here, they make children memorize the names and capitals of the American states (grade 5 or 6, I believe). I will never understand why (other than USA being our good friend and neighbor )).

 

[Argie]

Charlotte was dead, and the Prince Regent and Duke of York were both married to women past child-bearing age, as well as estranged. The Duke of Clarence married on the same day as Victoria's father. They had both rushed to marry, knowing that their children were highly likely to see the throne. The Duke of Clarence had two daughters, but both died, one right after baptism, and one when she was a few years old. He had numerous other still born babies. It didn't matter if Victoria was a girl, except if her father had a son after her. Any nephews from a younger brother of her father, would not inherit before her. Her gender did not play any role, except in her own family. And in his fifties, Edward and others would likely have considered the chances of him having more than one child. When he died, the Duke of Clarence had yet to have a living birth.

None of the British Queens were meant to become queens and yet, they were among the best!

 

[Ish]

Actually Victoria was fifth in line to the throne at birth behind her Father, Two Brothers (Including William IV and the other Prince Fredrick who died in 1827) and the Prince Regent (George IV)

1. The Prince Regent George IV
2. Prince Frederick Duke of York and Albany
3. William IV
4 Prince Edward Duke of Kent and Strathem
5. Princess Victoria

I know she was 5th in line, I said her father, the Duke of Kent, was 4th in line, after his 3 elder brothers, the Prince Regent, the Duke of York, and the Duke of Clarence.

Charlotte was dead, and the Prince Regent and Duke of York were both married to women past child-bearing age, as well as estranged. The Duke of Clarence married on the same day as Victoria's father. They had both rushed to marry, knowing that their children were highly likely to see the throne. The Duke of Clarence had two daughters, but both died, one right after baptism, and one when she was a few years old. He had numerous other still born babies. It didn't matter if Victoria was a girl, except if her father had a son after her. Any nephews from a younger brother of her father, would not inherit before her. Her gender did not play any role, except in her own family. And in his fifties, Edward and others would likely have considered the chances of him having more than one child. When he died, the Duke of Clarence had yet to have a living birth.

You're missing my point here.

Victoria - like every other Queen Regent in British history - was not expected to inherit the throne at birth. While it would have been considered a possibility then, it would have been an unlikely one. Her father was still alive and believed to be capable of having more children, most importantly sons who would have inherited over her. Her uncle, the Duke of Clarence and future William IV, was older than her father, had a young bride, and was expected to have children - that the Clarence's had lost one infant already didn't necessarily mean that they couldn't have more children. It had, after all, been a live birth and infant mortality wasn't exactly uncommon.

The idea that it was known that Victoria was likely to be queen at her birth is based on a hindsight bias - we know she became Queen because her uncles didn't produce the legitimate children necessary to inherit, but that wasn't evident at her birth. At that point it would have been expected that the Dukes of Kent and Clarence would have had more children, regardless of their age.

 

[IloveCP]

Here are my final guesses:

Girl:

Mary Diana Carole Elizabeth
Victoria Diana Carole Elizabeth
Alexandra Diana Carole Elizabeth
Charlotte Diana Carole Elizabeth

Boy:

Albert Charles Michael Philip
George Charles Michael Philip
Edward Charles Michael Philip

 

[Molly2101]

My guess are Charlotte, Alexandra or Alice for a girl. Arthur, George, Alexander or Louis for a boy.

 

[Lenora]

As today is St.Madeleine, according to Catholic Calendar, it will be nice to name the baby Madeleine, if it's a girl.

 

[helenbeee]

I think they might use Francis for middle names for either girls and boy but maybe not for first name it just doesnt go with the Prince Princess title.

 

[ladongas]

Maude Alexandra Frances Elizabeth

Richard Charles Phillip Michael

 

[Lenora]

Maude Alexandra Frances Elizabeth

Richard Charles Phillip Michael

Is Maude-English variant of Madeleine?

 

[christythedreamer]

Ok I change my mind again,


Girl: Alexandra Elizabeth Victoria Diana/Frances
Boy: George Albert Philip Charles

 

[ladongas]

Is Maude-English variant of Madeleine?

Lenora- if we can believe Wikipedia (and other sources), Maud or Maude is a variant of Mathilda. Princess Maud of Wales, daughter of Edward VII, became queen of Norway when she married King Haakon.

 

[Lenora]

Lenora- if we can believe Wikipedia (and other sources), Maud or Maude is a variant of Mathilda. Princess Maud of Wales, daughter of Edward VII, became queen of Norway when she married King Haakon.

Thank you for explanation.

 

[jen121419]

Final guess is a girl named Alice.

 

[lise]

I like Charlotte for a girl and Alexander for a boy

 

[georgiea]

Final Name: Philip Charles Henry Michael. Born on the cusp of Cancer/Leo.

If not above name then a person who is very close to William and Catherine. They might use only the first initial like Catherine's mother did with Catherine.

Hope it is today and not a very long labor.

 

[susiewong]

Charlotte Elizabeth Diana Carole is my guess

 

[Spheno]

I hope for Alexandra or Rachel for a girl and Alexander or Richard for a boy.
I simply like these names.

 

[QueenMathilde]

I see Alexandra's wining the betting pool for a girl and I kind of like that name. George for a boy - hmmm, it's OK but it wouldn't be my top name. I wonder if they will give it "Diana" for one of the middle names. Surely they wouldn't give it any of Camilla's names - that would have the Diana fans spitting mad.