Baby Cambridge: Potential Names and Godparents


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Awful name. George will not be fashionable anywhere, Alexander is fine and Louis will never be used, so what's the difference. But it is their child, so...of course, they may never have picked that name themselves.
As I previously pointed out, George is currently fashionable in England, and has been for many years.
 
I love the baby's names and I'm in no way surprised that George is the first name. IMO there are about five or six names they would have realistically used for a firstborn boy and future king and most of them - Charles, William, Henry, Edward, maybe James - are currently held by close family members.

I never thought they'd pick an untraditional or, (kill me), "creative" name.
 
They like the name - surely that is enough reason, for goodness sake!
 
The Telegraph has an article about how little George might change his name upon accession because a lot of other Kings have done so. Personally I kinda feel like HM on this issue. Little George will presumably be called George by friends and family, and will be known as Prince George, so why would he choose to go by Alexander all of a sudden when he becomes King? I can understand why George VI decided to reign as George instead of Albert, because he wanted to honour his father and I would be understanding if little Estelle in Sweden chose to go by Mary instead of Estelle because, unlike little George, she has a name that's less traditional. I don't know, I just think it's weird, I would personally feel very weird about one day just scrapping a name I've gone by for all of my life, in favour of one of my secondary names.

Anyone know how the "Louis" is pronounced?

Lou-ee, not Lewis (due to contrary belief - I've heard so many people pronounce it like that and I just wanna shake them and shout "LOU-EEEEEE!!!" because it really bothers me).
 
Last edited:
If Charles rules as King George than this future King may choose to reign as Alexander.



Maybe, though I seriously doubt it. ('Course, I only get ONE POINT with my WILLIAM CHARLES PHILIP LOUIS...)

To the contrary, seems to me the "George Alexander Louis" proves (1) what another poster said earlier, that the era of taking a regnal name other than the first name is over, because neither Alexander nor Louis will be chosen; (2) that making it only three names also reduces any chance of an interior name as the regnal name; (3) in contrast to my predictions that Prince Charles would eschew Charles III and take George VII, those who said that he would not confuse or alienate his public with a new, unfamiliar regnal name have been correct, and he will be FIRST NAME Charles III -- followed by FIRST NAME William V and FIRST NAME George VII. (But since I expect Will to live to age 97 I won't be around for Coronation of the latter...)
 
George is our youngest, born 1982, so I'm feeling pretty happy today
 
Some posters keep claiming that George is "old fashioned", "un-British" and "unfashionable everywhere" yet it is still one of the top 10-15 boys names in the UK which seems to suggest that it is still in current usage, is British and indeed still fashionable in the UK.
 
The Telegraph has an article about how little George might change his name upon accession because a lot of other Kings have done so. Personally I kinda feel like HM on this issue. Little George will presumably be called George by friends and family, and will be known as Prince George, so why would he choose to go by Alexander all of a sudden when he becomes King? I can understand why George VI decided to reign as George instead of Albert, because he wanted to honour his father and I would be understanding if little Estelle in Sweden chose to go by Mary instead of Estelle because, unlike little George, she has a name that's less traditional. I don't know, I just think it's weird, I would personally feel very weird about one day just scrapping a name I've gone by for all of my life, in favour of one of my secondary names.

Lou-ee, not Lewis (due to contrary belief - I've heard so many people pronounce it like that and I just wanna shake them and shout "LOU-EEEEEE!!!" because it really bothers me).

I'm with you here!

I rather like the little lads name ;)

I am a little disappointed that his great grandfather Philip is not in there, but all in all, it's pretty good.

They were quick in releasing his name, too
 
The Telegraph has an article about how little George might change his name upon accession because a lot of other Kings have done so. Personally I kinda feel like HM on this issue. Little George will presumably be called George by friends and family, and will be known as Prince George, so why would he choose to go by Alexander all of a sudden when he becomes King? I can understand why George VI decided to reign as George instead of Albert, because he wanted to honour his father and I would be understanding if little Estelle in Sweden chose to go by Mary instead of Estelle because, unlike little George, she has a name that's less traditional. I don't know, I just think it's weird, I would personally feel very weird about one day just scrapping a name I've gone by for all of my life, in favour of one of my secondary names.

I thought I knew a bit about British history so apart from Albert deciding to become George VI and Victoria going for her 2nd name - who else??? That isn't "a lot" as far as I can tell so who am I missing??
 
IIRC William was a good student as well so between both he and Kate the child shouldn't need to be referred to as 'farmer George'.


LaRae

Apart from the slurs that society intended towards the various, unpopular Georges, 'George' actually means 'farmer'.
 
Edward VII - he was baptised Albert Edward and the expectation was that he would reign as Albert Edward I but he decided to just use Edward and reigned as Edward VII.

As far as I am aware they are the only three - Victoria, Edward VII and George VI - but they have all been in recent years so it has become a bit more of a tradition with 3 of the last 6 opting for a different regnal name to their baptismal name.
 
But George was not the last King George's name. It was Albert. Prince George was his brother, who was bi-sexual, who had many lovers while having a wife and 3 children. Sort of a reprobate.


And the last member of the BRF to actually die on active duty - the last KIA Prince.
 
there is a song that has to do with the four unpopular Georges, can anyone tell me what the song name is and where I can find the lyrics?
 
I thought I knew a bit about British history so apart from Albert deciding to become George VI and Victoria going for her 2nd name - who else??? That isn't "a lot" as far as I can tell so who am I missing??

'A lot' obviously is bad phrasing from my side :lol: Edward VII was christened Albert Edward, but other than him you're right, there's just George VI and Queen Victoria.
 
I wonder if they will do the number thing when he is king or will they just start over.
 
I wonder if they will do the number thing when he is king or will they just start over.

No way. He'll be King George VII, or George VIII.

The "number thing" is very important.
 
Oh I love names, particularly how they sound together: "HRH Prince George Alexander Louis" :flowers:
 
I wonder if they will do the number thing when he is king or will they just start over.

What ever do you mean? If he comes to the throne as George he will be George VII, you cannot just roll back time and pretend there were not 6 other kings also named George.
 
I, like many others here, was kind of hoping they would steer away from the name George for a boy but the more I hear George Alexander Louis, the more it grows on me and I start grinning from ear to ear.

I think both of the parents put a lot of thought into this name and the most important factor I think is that this name when put to paper, news articles, schoolwork or what have you, be exclusively his own. Although all three of the names are rich in British history, this little prince is not "after" someone but one that will face the world and make a name for himself. The parents also probably realized that if they were to use names "after" someone, the kid would have to have quite a long list of names as to not exclude someone or hurt someone's feelings.

Welcome to the world George Alexander Louis!
 
I, like many others here, was kind of hoping they would steer away from the name George for a boy but the more I hear George Alexander Louis, the more it grows on me and I start grinning from ear to ear.

I think both of the parents put a lot of thought into this name and the most important factor I think is that this name when put to paper, news articles, schoolwork or what have you, be exclusively his own. Although all three of the names are rich in British history, this little prince is not "after" someone but one that will face the world and make a name for himself. The parents also probably realized that if they were to use names "after" someone, the kid would have to have quite a long list of names as to not exclude someone or hurt someone's feelings.

Welcome to the world George Alexander Louis!

I'm beginning to feel the same way. Little George will make his own way (and mane) in the world, and will be known for what he has done as a member of the British Royal Family.
 
And the last member of the BRF to actually die on active duty - the last KIA Prince.

He was on a plane headed to Iceland. Not to diminish his death, but he was not killed going to fight anything. He had his problems, but I think he was a good man, and how the family perceived this, I do not know. My husband's first name is George, never called that and he hates it, but a family name just the same.
 
Names come into and out of fashion; I don't think it's wise to choose a name for the sake of trendiness.

(I remember when Fergie wished to name her firstborn Annabelle, but the Queen nixed it and chose Beatrice...a much better choice, imo). Ane really, is Annabelle trendy now?
 
The Telegraph has an article about how little George might change his name upon accession because a lot of other Kings have done so. Personally I kinda feel like HM on this issue. Little George will presumably be called George by friends and family, and will be known as Prince George, so why would he choose to go by Alexander all of a sudden when he becomes King? I can understand why George VI decided to reign as George instead of Albert, because he wanted to honour his father and I would be understanding if little Estelle in Sweden chose to go by Mary instead of Estelle because, unlike little George, she has a name that's less traditional. I don't know, I just think it's weird, I would personally feel very weird about one day just scrapping a name I've gone by for all of my life, in favour of one of my secondary names.

Lou-ee, not Lewis (due to contrary belief - I've heard so many people pronounce it like that and I just wanna shake them and shout "LOU-EEEEEE!!!" because it really bothers me).

Edward VII - he was baptised Albert Edward and the expectation was that he would reign as Albert Edward I but he decided to just use Edward and reigned as Edward VII.

As far as I am aware they are the only three - Victoria, Edward VII and George VI - but they have all been in recent years so it has become a bit more of a tradition with 3 of the last 6 opting for a different regnal name to their baptismal name.

I think the idea in the Telegraph is that "a lot" of monarchs in Europe have done the name change, but they kind of miss the point that not a lot of English/Scottish/British monarchs have done it.

No English monarch ever changed their name and, to the best of my knowledge, only one Scottish monarch did so - Robert II was initially named John.

Three British monarchs, and one consort, have change their names - Victoria, Edward VII, George VI, and Mary, but none of them did so lightly or without reason.

Victoria was known by the public as Princess Victoria so it was only natural that she would go by that during her reign - although initially it was expected that she would use Alexandrina Victoria.

Edward was Albert Edward, with the expectation that he would reign using both (and that every monarch after him would be Albert Something). He chose to drop part of his name, which shouldn't have surprised anyone given his relationship with his parents.

Mary was, prior to her marriage, known as Princess Victoria Mary, but always went by May. Victoria was dropped when she became Queen consort because they didn't want to have the double first name and so as to not diminish Queen Victoria.

George came to the throne in a period of instability and took a lot of measures to appear reassuring and like he was going to continue the stability of his father's reign. The name was just one factor in that.

It's unlikely that Charles, William, or Baby George will change their names when they come to rule. They all are (or will be) well known in the public by their first names, they all have British Royal names, none of them have a double name, and none is likely to come to the throne amidst the chaos similar to the abdication crisis.

The likelihood of someone coming to the throne and hanging their name is slim. In my opinion it's only likely to happen if some disaster happens and an individual with a really non-traditional name becomes the monarch. If Zara somehow came to the throne she might chose to reign as Anne or Elizabeth, but Baby George? Not likely.
 
:previous:

I dont think Zara would reign as Baby George either :lol:
 
I like the selection of Alexander but am bummed that this means no future Princess Alexandra.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom