Possible Names for the 2nd Child of the Duke & Duchess of Cambridge

[Molly2101]

I remember reading that Charles suggested Zara to Anne because it means "princess" in Arabic, but I'm not sure if that's true. A very fitting meaning for HM's first granddaughter, even though she isn't titled!

It has quite a few meanings - "day's awakening", "bright as dawn" "Princess". It was quite "out there" as a choice by the British royals but I am quite glad that Anne decided to break from tradition and chose a different name for her daughter. Even Peter isn't a royal name although it was much more traditional than Zara. Anne knew her children were not going to be future Royals so their names did not particularly matter. I was disappointed with Lady Louise's name to be honest. I would have preferred an Alice or Charlotte. I know Alice is one of her middle names but Lady Alice Mountbatten-Windsor sounded lovely. Louise, although coated in Royal family history in almost all the royal dynasties, was not particularly contemporary for 2003.

 

[kathia_sophia]

How many days with waited to know George's name after he was born?

 

[GracieGiraffe]

Let's not forget the reasoning behind Prince George's names - George for obvious reasons because one day he will be king and so it had to be something along those lines. Alexander Louis were chosen simply because they liked the names - well that's what I understood anyway.
So with that in mind and if William and Catherine stick with that name-choosing formula, the first name will be more traditional and the other names......well, anything goes I suppose! That hasn't helped has it!?

I always thought Alexander was a great way to honor the Queen - her second name is Alexandra.

 

[Frideswide]

Louise, although coated in Royal family history in almost all the royal dynasties, was not particularly contemporary for 2003.

I think that's in its favour. It's neither ten-a-penny nor hopelessly old-fashioned.

 

[Princess of Durham]

This is a first for me as I don't usually place bets/preferences but:
I'm voting for Charlotte for a girl and hoping for a David for a boy.

 

[Kellin]

Richard also has some negative past as a name? It hasn't been used for a long time.

Oh, I like name David very much. But it's very unlikely choice for a first name.

 

[cepe]

Richard also has some negative past as a name? It hasn't been used for a long time.

Oh, I like name David very much. But it's very unlikely choice for a first name.

Richard is the name of the current Duke of Gloucester

David is the name of Princess Margaret's son, the Queen's nephew and (importantly) QEQM's grandson.

This constant "that name cant be chosen because of history" is IMO just unrealistic.

Look across the entire royal family and names which have been called "impossible" have been chosen.


It's only followers and bloggers who think this is important - I think the Cambridges will choose a name they like - regardless of history.

 

[IloveCP]

How many days with waited to know George's name after he was born?

2 days after his birth.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I posted a full list of existing names within the current BRF down as far as the descendants of Princess Alexandra in post 991 in this thread.


If all those names are ruled out there are quite a few that can't be used including both Richard and David and almost all the other 'favourites' such as Albert, Arthur, Alexander and Alexandra. Even George was already in use when Prince George was born - and there is also a Louis in the extended family as well.

 

[amaryllus]

Arthur Phillip Richard

Born April 25

That is my vote.

 

[suztav]

As I posted on the other pregnancy thread ... tomorrow (April 23) is my bet. I also posted that I thought the name would be Charlotte Elizabeth Frances. I'm also thinking Alice Elizabeth Frances is a possibility. Alice for Prince Philip's mother; the Elizabeth for QEII and Frances is Diana's mother's name, as well as her middle name.

 

[Ish]

Zara was never going to be Royal in the same way Charlses boys or Andrews girls were. They could experiment out of the box.But Eugenie was a bit of a wildcard also- does anyone know why they chose that one?

Aren't Beatrice and Eugenie both names used by Queen Victoria for her daughters.

Beatrice was named for the youngest daughter of Queen Victoria (Beatrice), the Queen (Elizabeth), and Queen Mary (Mary).

Eugene was named for Victoria Eugenie of Battenberg (daughter of the Princess Beatrice her sister was named for), and for another of Queen Victoria's daughters (Helena).

Both names were unusual names while also having a royal history.

 

[Lady Nimue]

Olivia is a nice name, very mature.

 

[amaryllus]

So what about Peter then? No British Royal namesake with that!

 

[Ish]

In ye olde days, when most everyone was illiterate, it made sense to reuse the names of the good kings such as Edward, Henry or William. If the first one of his name was really bad then it disappears for a long time - John, Stephen. James and Charles were Stuart names. The Hanovers that replaced them aren't going to use their names for their children.

Since 1066, there have only been 9 names of Kings and 4 names of Queens. So with George, Elizabeth, Charles, William,George - its going to be 100+ years between repeated names. At least that is improving.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

The names didn't disappear because the monarch was bad - there are a good name "bad" monarchs whose names continued well after their reigns. They disappeared because the lines changed.

Stephen was never repeated because it wasn't his heirs that inherited - Henry II's descendants certainly weren't going to use the name of the man who tried to usurp the throne for their children.

We see John appear a few times in the Plantagenets, it just wasn't the name given the heirs - King John named his son after his father, Henry, and Henry III chose to go with a non-Norman name and named his first son Edward after Edward the Confessor - Edward I's son, grandson, and great-grandson then in turn each named their eldest son after themselves, but you see John pop up a few times in the name of younger sons, notably John of Gaunt.

The reason why names were often reused is more because that's what people did - they named their sons after themselves, their fathers, their other family members.

Richard is the name of the current Duke of Gloucester

David is the name of Princess Margaret's son, the Queen's nephew and (importantly) QEQM's grandson.

This constant "that name cant be chosen because of history" is IMO just unrealistic.

Look across the entire royal family and names which have been called "impossible" have been chosen.


It's only followers and bloggers who think this is important - I think the Cambridges will choose a name they like - regardless of history.

I don't think the Cambridges are going to not chose a name they like because it has a bad history - the Queen didn't let the history of the name Charles stop her from using it, nor did she let the recent history of the name Edward (nor did the Kents), nor did she let the fact that her father-in-law was an alcoholic stop her from using his name for her second son either. William has a less than perfect history either - having been used by the Conqueror, his son who many suspect was murdered, William of Orange who has a troubled history, and William IV who had no legitimate issue. Henry is the name of three usurpers, but the Wales' had no problem with using it, and despite the legacy of James II the Wessexes saw no reason not to use it. And let's not forget the fact that the current Duke of Gloucester shares both a name and a title with Richard III.

 

[amaryllus]

The Windsors don't like John because every one connected to them with that name has been unfortunate but that was long long time ago now so I believe it is due for a comeback !

 

[Ish]

I posted a full list of existing names within the current BRF down as far as the descendants of Princess Alexandra in post 991 in this thread.


If all those names are ruled out there are quite a few that can't be used including both Richard and David and almost all the other 'favourites' such as Albert, Arthur, Alexander and Alexandra. Even George was already in use when Prince George was born - and there is also a Louis in the extended family as well.

I would think we're not likely to see a name as a first name that is currently held by an HRH or one of the Middletons. Other names that are in use by extended family members might be up for grabs, particularly family members who are less well known. I think if it's a boy we're not likely to get a repeat English or British monarch's name - the only ones that aren't used by either an HRH, Wessex, or a Middleton are Stephen and John - but I think we could see a Scottish monarch's name come up - perhaps a David or a Robert. If it's a girl, then I'm thinking perhaps Victoria or Mary - purely on the basis of it's the name of a previous monarch, and it's not in use right now.

I still don't buy into not being able to use a name already in use within the family.

Considering the royal family tends to use traditional names they get used up pretty fast

Take James for example, yes Viscount Severn's name is James but its also the name of Kate's brother and she may like the name.

Plus HRH Prince James of Cambridge will not be confused with Viscount Severn either with the public or within the BRF.

We haven't really seen a lot of repeat names within the same generation among the Mountbatten-Windsors, which I think is why it's unlikely we're going to see a name that's in use. The fact that James is the name of both one of William's cousin and Kate's brother makes me think that they won't use it - not because it'll get confusing, but because it's a name that is already rather common in the close family.

The only name duplication among the HRHs right now is the two Edwards, and there's almost 30 years between the two of them. At one point there was 3 Prince Edward's (the Duke of Windsor, the Duke of Kent, and the Earl of Wessex), but there was a huge gap in age between each of them, so it was a bit different than reusing the name that already appears in that generation.

Let's not forget the reasoning behind Prince George's names - George for obvious reasons because one day he will be king and so it had to be something along those lines. Alexander Louis were chosen simply because they liked the names - well that's what I understood anyway.
So with that in mind and if William and Catherine stick with that name-choosing formula, the first name will be more traditional and the other names......well, anything goes I suppose! That hasn't helped has it!?

Alexander is the masculine version of one of the Queen's middle names, and of one of her great-grandmothers' names. It's also a name that has appeared in the DoE's ancestry, and is the name of one of William's Spencer cousins. Likewise, Louis is one of William's middle names, the name of the DoE's cousin (from whom the surname Mountbatten comes), and the DoE's maternal grandfather. Plus, it's the name of a Spencer cousin (as is George).

Really, with George's name, the Cambridges' managed to find a way to honour all sides of William's family and stick with tradition without being too obvious about it (asides from the first name).

 

[DukeofMontpelier]

I hope for a girl and that they honor her with the names of the last three Princess Royal because she will be the Next Princess Royal. She will be Mary Anne Louise. If the baby is a boy I say name him Albert Phillip Charles. That will be after the child's Great Grandfather and Grandfather as well as Queen Victoria husband.

 

[LauraS3514]

The Windsors don't like John because every one connected to them with that name has been unfortunate but that was long long time ago now so I believe it is due for a comeback !

Edward VII and Queen Alexandra's youngest son was Alexander John (Alix always referred to him as "Johnny") and he died the day after his birth in 1871; George V and Queen Mary's youngest was John Charles Francis and he died of epilepsy aged 13 in 1919. The name is reportedly considered unlucky because of these two unfortunate princes as well as "Bad" King John.

So what about Peter then? No British Royal namesake with that!

Peter Phillips was named after his paternal grandfather.

 

[Ish]

Sorry for offtop but i sometimes just don't understand this tradition to give heirs only used before names. The first Cambridge child could have had an unique name, he could have been The First. Prince Arthur or Albert... But they choose only from previouse reighing monarchs' names.
And we can predict that George's own children will have names Charles, Henry, Elizabeth/Catherine, Edward and so on. Even James is unlikely.

Most of the English/British monarchs who were first of their name weren't born in the direct line. Likewise, once primogeniture took place in Scotland the first of a name occurred when someone who wasn't born in the direct line inherited. Frequently, the heirs who were given a new name died before inheriting - and those who didn't changed their name.

 

[LauraS3514]

Beatrice was named for the youngest daughter of Queen Victoria (Beatrice), the Queen (Elizabeth), and Queen Mary (Mary).

Eugene was named for Victoria Eugenie of Battenberg (daughter of the Princess Beatrice her sister was named for), and for another of Queen Victoria's daughters (Helena).

Both names were unusual names while also having a royal history.

And Queen Victoria Eugenie was named after Queen Victoria's good friend Empress Eugenie of France.

 

[Ish]

And Queen Victoria Eugenie was named after Queen Victoria's good friend Empress Eugenie of France.

Ooh, I did not know that. But, a quick Wiki search shows that Empress Eugenie was Victoria Eugenie's godmother, and Victoria Eugenie's uncle, Louis, was the DoE's grandfather.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Alexander is the masculine version of one of the Queen's middle names, and of one of her great-grandmothers' names. It's also a name that has appeared in the DoE's ancestry, and is the name of one of William's Spencer cousins. Likewise, Louis is one of William's middle names, the name of the DoE's cousin (from whom the surname Mountbatten comes), and the DoE's maternal grandfather. Plus, it's the name of a Spencer cousin (as is George).

Really, with George's name, the Cambridges' managed to find a way to honour all sides of William's family and stick with tradition without being too obvious about it (asides from the first name).

All three of George, Alexander and Louis are names of members of the Windsor family as well as names of the Spencer's - so hits both sides at once - not just one as many people assume.

 

[Frideswide]

I hope for a girl and that they honor her with the names of the last three Princess Royal because she will be the Next Princess Royal. She will be Mary Anne Louise. If the baby is a boy I say name him Albert Phillip Charles. That will be after the child's Great Grandfather and Grandfather as well as Queen Victoria husband.

Not necessarily. "Princess Royal" is a title/style that is in the gift of the monarch, and is not automatically given. Princess Anne was 36 when the Queen honoured her with the title, although it could have been awarded at any time after the death of the previous Princess Royal in 1965. There can only be one Princess Royal at any time.

 

[Skippyboo]

Possible Names for the 2nd Child of the Duke & Duchess of Cambridge

I would think we're not likely to see a name as a first name that is currently held by an HRH or one of the Middletons. Other names that are in use by extended family members might be up for grabs, particularly family members who are less well known. I think if it's a boy we're not likely to get a repeat English or British monarch's name - the only ones that aren't used by either an HRH, Wessex, or a Middleton are Stephen and John - but I think we could see a Scottish monarch's name come up - perhaps a David or a Robert. If it's a girl, then I'm thinking perhaps Victoria or Mary - purely on the basis of it's the name of a previous monarch, and it's not in use right now.







We haven't really seen a lot of repeat names within the same generation among the Mountbatten-Windsors, which I think is why it's unlikely we're going to see a name that's in use. The fact that James is the name of both one of William's cousin and Kate's brother makes me think that they won't use it - not because it'll get confusing, but because it's a name that is already rather common in the close family.



The only name duplication among the HRHs right now is the two Edwards, and there's almost 30 years between the two of them. At one point there was 3 Prince Edward's (the Duke of Windsor, the Duke of Kent, and the Earl of Wessex), but there was a huge gap in age between each of them, so it was a bit different than reusing the name that already appears in that generation.







Alexander is the masculine version of one of the Queen's middle names, and of one of her great-grandmothers' names. It's also a name that has appeared in the DoE's ancestry, and is the name of one of William's Spencer cousins. Likewise, Louis is one of William's middle names, the name of the DoE's cousin (from whom the surname Mountbatten comes), and the DoE's maternal grandfather. Plus, it's the name of a Spencer cousin (as is George).



Really, with George's name, the Cambridges' managed to find a way to honour all sides of William's family and stick with tradition without being too obvious about it (asides from the first name).

Louis Mountbatten wasn't Philip's cousin but his uncle. He was his mother's youngest brother. The older brother who became Marquis of Milford Haven was named George.

I think a name that is in used in the extended family could be used especially if it's another boy. Michael for instance. Prince Michael of Kent is pretty down the line and out of spotlight that there could be another Prince Michael. No one would really confuse the two. The baby wouldn't be confused with his grandfather because Kate, Pippa and James probably don't call their dad by his first name.


Sent from my iPhone using The Royals Community

 

[fearghas]

Peter Phillips was named after his paternal grandfather.

I associate the name Peter with the Serbian royal family. While not relevant for this child, sometimes I think it would be easier if there was a traditional line for the names of firstborns, ie Alexander Peter as in Serbia and Christian Frederick in Denmark. Then every other child can have whatever name the parents want. Just as the Danish crown princely couple did.

 

[Frideswide]

While not relevant for this child, sometimes I think it would be easier if there was a traditional line for the names of firstborns, ie Alexander Peter as in Serbia and Christian Frederick in Denmark. Then every other child can have whatever name the parents want. Just as the Danish crown princely couple did.

Easier? It's not that difficult to choose a name.

I think that system is incredibly dull. I suppose it would save money on monogrammed towels and the like.

 

[Dman]

Di-nastically Speaking: Nice Post by Victoria Arbiter-
https://victoriaarbiter.wordpress.com/2015/04/23/di-nastically-speaking/

 

[Ephram]

If it's a boy: His Royal Highness Prince Edward Albert Arthur of Cambridge.


If it's a girl: Her Royal Highness Princess Alice Alexandra Frances of Cambridge.

 

[Kellydofc]

If it's a boy: His Royal Highness Prince Edward Albert Arthur of Cambridge.


If it's a girl: Her Royal Highness Princess Alice Alexandra Frances of Cambridge.

I like those so much I'll use them as a jump off for my final pick.

For a boy: Edmund Albert Philip

For a girl: Alice Charlotte Victoria (or some variation containing these names)