Gender & Names for Kate & William's 3rd Child

[Biri]

I am sure he had respect for his great-grandpa, whom he resembled in character.

 

[CyrilVladisla]

Jean could be used for a Princess. Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother had an ancestress Jean, Countess of Strathmore (d. 1778), who was the wife of Thomas, 8th Earl of Strathmore.

 

[Frideswide]

Queen Jean has a ring to it.

 

[Juliette2]

I don't believe they will use Jane, or Jean or any variation.

 

[Biri]

William's maternal aunt is named Jane (and her husband, Sir Robert Fellowes, was the Queen's secretary).

 

[LauraS3514]

Eh, I bet he was just pleased to be able to dump the name Albert.
The continuity thing made a good excuse!

He was always known as Bertie to his family - until the day he died.

 

[MaiaMia_53]

The Queen doesn't veto names, but may offer advice. In the case of Annabel, she reminded the Yorks that "Annabel's" is a very famous London night club which was often featured in gossip columns and might have embarrassing associations. So they had second thoughts. I hadn't heard that Beatrice was the Queen's suggestion.

Wow, whoever suggested the name Beatrice was spot on, as Beatrice of York shares a resemblance to the earlier namesake who was Queen Victoria's youngest daughter, chiefly their eyes.

As for Cambridge baby #3, the time draws nearer. Kate will likely soon cease her public appearances. She does seem to appear a bit tired lately, but she's also carried this pregnancy so well, looking quite happy and at ease since the early stage ended. Her clothes designs have been quite gorgeous and flattering, especially on the Scandinavian tour.

I have a hard time guessing the gender. Let's say a girl: Margaret Carole Frances.

If perchance a boy: Peter Michael Philip.

 

[Pranter]

I tend to think she'll go thru the rest of the month at least.


LaRae

 

[Countessmeout]

This isn't true. Like any other British citizen, the sovereign may legally use any name s/he likes.

What about Princess Margaret Rose, who for some time was second in line to the throne? Neither of her names had previously been a BRF regnal name.



The reason for this was tied up with the abdication. Bertie chose to use the same regnal name as his father, to give the effect of continuity.

The idea being more a 'royal' name (and a British royal name) then a reignal name. Or all girls close to the throne would have to be Anne, Mary, Elizabeth or Victoria (Jane or Mathilda a little less). And technically there was a Queen Margret of Scotland, known as the maid of Norway, though she died before she ever got to Scotland. Beyond her there are numerous queen consorts. In Scotland the wives of Malcolm III, Alexander III, James III and James IV. In England the wives of Henry VI and Edward I.

Actually they wanted to name her Anne Margaret, so they would have used a reignal name, but it was vetoed by George V.


I don't think we have anything to worry with the Cambridges. They like their boring but popular names. I don't even see them branching into the older pre-Georgian family tree.

 

[MaiaMia_53]

He was always known as Bertie to his family - until the day he died.

Right. Just as King Edward VIII was always known as David by his family, til the day he died. ?

 

[Frideswide]

The idea being more a 'royal' name (and a British royal name) then a reignal name. Or all girls close to the throne would have to be Anne, Mary, Elizabeth or Victoria (Jane or Mathilda a little less). And technically there was a Queen Margret of Scotland, known as the maid of Norway, though she died before she ever got to Scotland. Beyond her there are numerous queen consorts. In Scotland the wives of Malcolm III, Alexander III, James III and James IV. In England the wives of Henry VI and Edward I.

Actually they wanted to name her Anne Margaret, so they would have used a reignal name, but it was vetoed by George V.


I don't think we have anything to worry with the Cambridges. They like their boring but popular names. I don't even see them branching into the older pre-Georgian family tree.

Sadly I agree. I would like to think they might surprise us with something different, but they do seem to be unimaginative. Let's be clear, by 'different' I don't mean anything unsuitable.

Why shouldn't it be a name that hasn't been used in the immediate BRF before? There was a first time for every regnal name and it is dull to recycle the same handful because of precedent. Andrew was a new name, so it can be done!

 

[MaiaMia_53]

Sadly I agree. I would like to think they might surprise us with something different, but they do seem to be unimaginative. Let's be clear, by 'different' I don't mean anything unsuitable.

Why shouldn't it be a name that hasn't been used in the immediate BRF before? There was a first time for every regnal name and it is dull to recycle the same handful because of precedent. Andrew was a new name, so it can be done!

All families have rituals and traditions they adhere to, quite often especially re naming children. I think for the royals, using family names, especially for immediate heirs to the throne is a tradition that is bound to continue.

Some families today tend to go in the opposite direction with wild, weird and wacko names, especially some families involved in entertainment business: e.g., Apple Martin; North West, etc. I do like Suri Cruise (both of her names are unusual), and Shiloh Jolie-Pitt (although she wishes to be called John, and her parents are cool with her finding out and being comfortable with personal identity and gender).

It will be interesting to see if Meghan and Harry adhere to traditional family name choices when they have children.

 

[Countessmeout]

Sadly I agree. I would like to think they might surprise us with something different, but they do seem to be unimaginative. Let's be clear, by 'different' I don't mean anything unsuitable.

Why shouldn't it be a name that hasn't been used in the immediate BRF before? There was a first time for every regnal name and it is dull to recycle the same handful because of precedent. Andrew was a new name, so it can be done!

Andrew may have been new to the BRF but it wasn't some new name. It was of course for Philip's father. And the patron saint of Scotland. It was only new as a first name, as it was among Edward VIII's middle (along with Christian, he had all four patron saints of the UK). Its not exactly picking some random new name. And if tragedy struck (and almost did) and he had been heir to the throne, he had middle names he could have chosen to reign by (Edward and Albert).

All families have rituals and traditions they adhere to, quite often especially re naming children. I think for the royals, using family names, especially for immediate heirs to the throne is a tradition that is bound to continue.

Some families today tend to go in the opposite direction with wild, weird and wacko names, especially some families involved in entertainment business: e.g., Apple Martin; North West, etc. I do like Suri Cruise (both of her names are unusual), and Shiloh Jolie-Pitt (although she wishes to be called John, and her parents are cool with her finding out and being comfortable with personal identity and gender).

It will be interesting to see if Meghan and Harry adhere to traditional family name choices when they have children.

True, and I prefer when royals choose royal names, at least close to the throne. But there is such a wide variety of royal names in the BRF. Be nice if they ventured earlier then Georgian.

 

[King of the Jungle]

The Scottish options are numerous:

Bruce Malcolm Stirling
Donald James Duncan
John David Edgar

Mary Catherine Sybilla
Margaret Joan Euphemia
Marjory Allison Maud

Likely contenders..or not?

 

[Countessmeout]

The Scottish options are numerous:

Bruce Malcolm Stirling
Donald James Duncan
John David Edgar

Mary Catherine Sybilla
Margaret Joan Euphemia
Marjory Allison Maud

Likely contenders..or not?

All Scottish name? Not likely at all

They could perhaps include a Scottish name, 1 I would think most, as a nod to going to school there. But Bruce (surname), Stirling (castle), Marjory and Allison (Non royal) seem out there.

 

[Denville]

Eh, I bet he was just pleased to be able to dump the name Albert.
The continuity thing made a good excuse!

Why woud he wish to "dump" his name, which he was called by? If he hadn't liked it, he could have chosen one of his other names to be called by in the family.. as an adult.. but he remained Bertie all his life. I don't greatly like Prince albrt the consort, but Bertie probably had a different view of him and of course of his Grandfather Edward VII.

 

[Denville]

All Scottish name? Not likely at all

They could perhaps include a Scottish name, 1 I would think most, as a nod to going to school there. But Bruce (surname), Stirling (castle), Marjory and Allison (Non royal) seem out there.

certaanly not likely that they would choose all Scottish names.. If anything they might pick one from Scotland and say one from Wales.. in honour of the various parts of the UK. But neither Harry nor William went to school in Scotland anyway, they went to Eton.

 

[Queen Claude]

Prince William (and Catherine) graduated from the University of St. Andrews in Scotland.

 

[Frideswide]

Andrew may have been new to the BRF but it wasn't some new name. It was of course for Philip's father. And the patron saint of Scotland. It was only new as a first name, as it was among Edward VIII's middle (along with Christian, he had all four patron saints of the UK). Its not exactly picking some random new name.

Exactly - that was my point. It was new as a first name in the BRF.

Anyway what's wrong with choosing a "random" new name, as long as it has suitable dignity?

And if tragedy struck (and almost did) and he had been heir to the throne, he had middle names he could have chosen to reign by (Edward and Albert).

But why should he?

 

[suztav]

I wouldn’t be surprised at a Caroline or an Alice for a girl. Perhaps a Michael or a Philip for a boy.

 

[LadyCatharine]

William does like the name Alice

 

[Somebody]

William does like the name Alice

Did he tell you so?

 

[Countessmeout]

Exactly - that was my point. It was new as a first name in the BRF.

Anyway what's wrong with choosing a "random" new name, as long as it has suitable dignity?

But why should he?

Because royalty is all about history and tradition-and stay relevant by keeping those traditions though with modernity. Thankfully we will never see a Princess Stirling because someone thought it was regal sounding.

New names come into the family time to time. But not random selection from a 'top 100 names' list. Other then further from the throne like Zara. They come in through family. Like Victoria, which came in through her mother (why she was named Alexandrine, as Victoria was too German). Andrew not some random name. It was a name with both royal history in the BRF, even if middle, as well as being Philip's father's name.

Now if we saw them choose say a middle name from the Middletons, that would be different then just some random popular name.

 

[Frideswide]

There really is no need to repeat yourself about the connections of the name Andrew, of which I am well aware. I never said it was a "random" name.

You say "Because royalty is all about history and tradition-and stay relevant by keeping those traditions though with modernity."
I say that it doesn't have to be so rigid. We have recently seen children born into the direct lines of the royal families of Sweden and Denmark given names that (as far as I'm aware) aren't traditional family names.

Your argument is based on what has happened in the past. But the modern day BRF has moved with the times and there is no reason whatsoever why new names can't be introduced.

Examples of "random popular names" that would not be out of place include Olivia and Grace, Thomas and Daniel. (I am not saying that they are likely to be chosen by the Cambridges.)

 

[CyrilVladisla]

Thomas could be used for a son. King Edward III had a son Prince Thomas, Duke of Gloucester.

 

[Countessmeout]

There really is no need to repeat yourself about the connections of the name Andrew, of which I am well aware. I never said it was a "random" name.

You say "Because royalty is all about history and tradition-and stay relevant by keeping those traditions though with modernity."
I say that it doesn't have to be so rigid. We have recently seen children born into the direct lines of the royal families of Sweden and Denmark given names that (as far as I'm aware) aren't traditional family names.

Your argument is based on what has happened in the past. But the modern day BRF has moved with the times and there is no reason whatsoever why new names can't be introduced.

Examples of "random popular names" that would not be out of place include Olivia and Grace, Thomas and Daniel. (I am not saying that they are likely to be chosen by the Cambridges.)

The only name in Sweden in the direct line, as in heir to the throne's child, is Estelle. And Estelle was not a random name. No it isn't a royal name, but it was for Countess Estelle Bernadotte. I assume you mean Athina in Denmark, and she is the fourth child of the second son, she was born tenth in line to the throne.

We also cant compare British royal family to other families. Different royal families, different ways of handling things. BRF is far more traditional in ways.

Naming your child for a family member (Estelle or Andrew) even if not royal, is not comparable to choosing a random name from the cute name list.




Thomas is not a random name. It meets both categories: family and royal

Thomas is a family name:
-Kate's maternal grandmother Dorothy Harrison's father was Thomas
-Dorothy's maternal grandfather was also named Thomas
-there are a number of Thomas in Michael's tree further back as well

Thomas is also a royal name:
-Edward I had a son named Thomas with his second wife. He was named after St Thomas of Becket
-Edward III had a son Thomas, his fifth son to reach adulthood, Duke of Gloucester
-John of Gaunt had a son Thomas, Duke of Exeter. younger half-brother of Henry IV
-Henry IV had a son Thomas who was Duke of Clarence. He led many of his brother's military campaigns (died in one)


If nothing else these two like predictable royal, and Georgian names. As a first name it would be ground breaking if they chose a family name from before George I.

 

[Frideswide]

OK, strike Thomas then

I think it's perfectly clear what I mean.

"Naming your child for a family member (Estelle or Andrew) even if not royal, is not comparable to choosing a random name from the cute name list."

"Cute name list"? What on earth are you talking about?

 

[wyevale]

I like the idea of a Thomas.. Prince Tommy !

My Paternal Grandfather was a Thomas, so the name is dear to me..

 

[royal rob]

I like the idea of a Thomas.. Prince Tommy !

My Paternal Grandfather was a Thomas, so the name is dear to me..

Yes I think Thomas would be great It’s in my family too

 

[CyrilVladisla]

I like the idea of a Thomas.. Prince Tommy !

My Paternal Grandfather was a Thomas, so the name is dear to me..

Thomas could be used as the son's middle name.