The Birth of HRH Prince George of Cambridge: July 22, 2013


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
It seems to be sinking in for me now... lol. I think like a lot of people I was in a happy state of shock. Now to gear up for another big day... hopefully one where we see the Royal Family Emerge and visit at the Lindo Wing.

I can't wait to find out the details of our new Heir... hair color... eye color... the next few months are going to be crazy! :)
 
I can't wait to find out the details of our new Heir... hair color... eye color... the next few months are going to be crazy! :)
Click to expand...
He is now bald and has blue eyes.
Will we even see his photos (I mean face) before the christening?
 
Last edited:
Kellin said:
He is now bald and has blue eyes.
Will we even see his photos (I mean face) before the christening?
Click to expand...

Has that been released? Not all babies are bald and blue eyed (although most are blue eyed).
 
As I predicted, a boy. Congratulations to the couple!
 
Kellin said:
He is now bald and has blue eyes.
Will we even see his photos (I mean face) before the christening?
Click to expand...

When the leave hospital he'll be all wrapped up but if the camera's are clever they'll get a shot. There's no guarantee he's bald or has blue eyes.

Kellin said:
When will they leave the hospital?
Click to expand...

When Catherine is allowed, nothing has been announced. When my sister gave birth the earliest she could leave was 24 hours after the baby was born. With Catherine, if it's safe to do so, she may leave this morning.
 
When the leave hospital he'll be all wrapped up but if the camera's are clever they'll get a shot. There's no guarantee he's bald or has blue eyes. __________________
Click to expand...
Did we see Williams face? No. I doubt parents and security will allow to photo a face.
 
Kellin said:
Did we see Williams face? No.
Click to expand...

So? The advancement in camera lenses between 1982 and now has been dramatic. You look at the recent baby births across Europe and you'll see various shots of the baby face. It's all in the angle frankly. I could be stood to the left of Catherine when she comes out and get a shot providing the babies head is on her right arm.
 
Countessmeout said:
Could name him something Scottish like Robert, and break tradition having his baptism in Scotland.

William-Born June 21, baptized August 4th baptized on queen mum's bday, at Buckingham palace
Harry- born September 15, baptized December 21
Bea-August 8 and not christened until December 20
Eug- even longer, Born March 23 and christened December 23
Louise- born November 8 christened the following April 23
James- born December christened in april
Peter-November 15, christened pretty quickly in December 22
Zara-not sure

Locations:
Buckingham palace: William, Peter
Saint James: Bea
Sandringham: Eugenie
Windsor: Harry, James and Louise

Interesting enough, while the other three were baptized like Will and Peter in the music room, of the queen's kids, only Edward was not. He was baptized like both of his children, at Windsor.
Click to expand...

Zara -born May 15 christened July 27 at Windsor (days before Charles & Diana's wedding)
 
Countessmeout said:
Could name him something Scottish like Robert, and break tradition having his baptism in Scotland.
Click to expand...


This child is the future Supreme Governor of the Church of England so the Archbishop of Canterbury is a must as is a baptism in the juristiction of the CoE - England not Scotland.
 
Iluvbertie said:
This child is the future Supreme Governor of the Church of England so the Archbishop of Canterbury is a must as is a baptism in the juristiction of the CoE - England not Scotland.
Click to expand...

Is that an actual requirement?

I would think that a fair number of post-reformation monarchs - notably the early Georges - wouldn't have been baptized in the CoE by the Archbishop of Canterbury. Although I can see how the Archbishop might be offended.
 
this is great news. i thought it was a boy also and had predicted he was going to born 21st july! not too far off!

i'm surprised that they said that the announcement was made a few hours after the birth because they wanted to bond with the child. to me those two things are not exclusive. i can understand they want to bond with the child, but calling the queen so that the announcement can be hung outside does not take very long. i think out of respect for the press and crowds gathered outside who have been waiting for 22 days already in the heat, waiting 4 hours for the announcement is a bit too long.

they also said they were going to announce the name "in due time". i wonder when this means exactly. again, i thought it would be thoughtful to release the name. that way, everyone knows everything, and there's no more speculation, and that will give them plenty of space and time to not have to bother with the public anymore regarding the birth. it would surely calm down the press and give them a bit more freedom. i see no point in extending the wait even longer, unless they actually liked the media attention.
 
carlota said:
this is great news. i thought it was a boy also and had predicted he was going to born 21st july! not too far off!

i'm surprised that they said that the announcement was made a few hours after the birth because they wanted to bond with the child. to me those two things are not exclusive. i can understand they want to bond with the child, but calling the queen so that the announcement can be hung outside does not take very long. i think out of respect for the press and crowds gathered outside who have been waiting for 22 days already in the heat, waiting 4 hours for the announcement is a bit too long.

they also said they were going to announce the name "in due time". i wonder when this means exactly. again, i thought it would be thoughtful to release the name. that way, everyone knows everything, and there's no more speculation, and that will give them plenty of space and time to not have to bother with the public anymore regarding the birth. it would surely calm down the press and give them a bit more freedom. i see no point in extending the wait even longer, unless they actually liked the media attention.
Click to expand...

It is highly likely that the families were told rather quickly, but that 4 hour delay gave the new family a chance to be a new family in private for literally the only time they will ever have as such. For 4 hours the new child was an anonymous person - that will never again happen in his life. The world had already waited 22 days, did another 4 hours really do any harm?

As for the name, it is very common for the name of a newborn royal to not be released right away. Harry's name was released 24 hours (or so) after his birth, William's not for a week, Charles' not for a month. I really doubt the media attention will ever truly die down, something that William and Catherine are likely very well aware of. Things will die down a bit, name or no name, once the trio has left the hospital.
 
Fascinating, Ish. Where were the early George's baptized? By a priest in London? Must have been a priest of the C of E if they were "heads" of the C of E. I think some people would rather have a different offciator than the Archbishop of Canterbury. Maybe they know one they like.
One can take a Scots name like Robert (it's actually a French name but the Scots kings were of a Norman culture when the Kings Robert ruled) without traveling to Scotland for the ceremony, but the suggestion to have it at Balmoral was very nice, I think. Why not?
 
As for the name, it is very common for the name of a newborn royal to not be released right away. Harry's name was released 24 hours (or so) after his birth, William's not for a week, Charles' not for a month.
Click to expand...
It will be an official press release, won't it?
 
Mariel said:
Fascinating, Ish. Where were the early George's baptized? By a priest in London? Must have been a priest of the C of E if they were "heads" of the C of E. I think some people would rather have a different offciator than the Archbishop of Canterbury. Maybe they know one they like.
One can take a Scots name like Robert (it's actually a French name but the Scots kings were of a Norman culture when the Kings Robert ruled) without traveling to Scotland for the ceremony, but the suggestion to have it at Balmoral was very nice, I think. Why not?
Click to expand...

Well, George I, George II, and Frederick, Prince of Wales (son of KGII and father to KGIII) were all born in Hanover, and were likely all baptized in a Lutheran church. George III was baptized on the day he was born by Thomas Secker, then Rector of St James and Bishop of Oxford. Secker also baptized George IV, but at that point he was Archbishop of Cantebury.
 
Royal Baby

Congratulations to Prince William and Kate. Long and healthy life for both and the baby.:flowers::flowers::flowers::flowers:
 
I think the last first female born in the direct-line was Charlotte of Wales and not Queen Victoria, it was her that was supposed to be Queen not Victoria.
 
Im hoping that we do get a glimpse of the babes face while leaving hospital. Im sure they will show him a bit. Im also hoping for a small photoshoot, a picture or two in about 2 weeks time like we've seen with other royal houses.

Is there a possibility the baby's name could be announced as the couple leave the hospital? I don't see them as a couple who would wait a few days or a week. I think leaving the hospital and announcing the name would be great!
 
Its quite possible that the baby could have hair and eyes that aren't blue... My baby picture is proof. I had enough hair that my mom put it in a little pink bow like pebbles lol. My eyes were more hazel then...but are now hazel brown. :)

I sadly will have to catch footage of them leaving the hospital later. I doubt they would announce the name as they leave... most sources we've read about say they were not sure yet and had a short list. And as crazy as it will drive us, I think its fair that this is something they keep to themselves for a while longer :)
 
kathia_sophia said:
I think the last first female born in the direct-line was Charlotte of Wales and not Queen Victoria, it was her that was supposed to be Queen not Victoria.
Click to expand...

The last female born in the direct line was Princess Victoria, later Princess Royal and German Empress, daughter of Queen Victoria.

She was heiress presumptive for about a year until her brother was born.
 
kathia_sophia said:
I think the last first female born in the direct-line was Charlotte of Wales and not Queen Victoria, it was her that was supposed to be Queen not Victoria.
Click to expand...

The last first born female born in the direct-line would have actually been Victoria, Princess Royal, eldest child of Queen Victoria.

Prior to her was Charlotte of Wales, daughter of the then Prince of Wales, later George IV.

Other first born females include Augusta of Great Britain, daughter of Frederick, Prince of Wales; Mary I, daughter of Henry VIII (as well as, arguably, his other daughter Elizabeth I); Elizabeth of York, daughter of Edward IV; and Empress Matilda, daughter of Henry II.
 
I hope we get to see some pictures of visitors or the couple soon :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Blog Real
Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna of Russia & Prince Franz Wilhelm of Prussia: 1976
Replies
1
Views
889
CyrilVladisla
CyrilVladisla
Marengo
  • Sticky
United Kingdom: Birthday and Anniversary Wishes 2024
2
Replies
57
Views
3K
Biri
B
Blog Real
King Lodovico I, King Lodovico II and Kingdom of Etruria
Replies
3
Views
619
Blog Real
Blog Real
Blog Real
Tatoi Royal Cemetery
Replies
0
Views
192
Blog Real
Blog Real
CrownPrincessJava
  • Sticky
Romania: Birthday and Anniversary Wishes 2024
Replies
0
Views
346
CrownPrincessJava
CrownPrincessJava

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom