The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #341  
Old 06-07-2021, 06:02 PM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,324
Quote:
Originally Posted by TLLK View Post

Hoping that the birth of little Lili might be an opportunity for some bridge building to begin again between the Sussexes and the BRF.
I think we were all hoping that about Prince Philip's funeral, that maybe some good could come out of the sadness. But Harry chose to do the opposite.
__________________

  #342  
Old 06-07-2021, 06:07 PM
Archduchess Zelia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Posts: 2,943
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavs View Post
I "problematise" that because this a woman who only goes by that name to a few people, almost all of whom are now dead.
[...]Spain's King Felipe calls her Aunt Lilibet. David and Sarah call her Aunt Lilibet. It's a family nickname. And whether we like it or not, Lili is her family.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavs View Post
And I call shenanigans on that (...)
[...]But again, just your own assumptions. I think you misunderstood. Among other things, they've been "trashing" racist abuse. Among other things, they've been "trashing" poor and biased management. Saying they're "trashing everything she holds dear" is saying that those things are among the things she hold dear which I'd very much hope they aren't.
__________________

__________________
"Hope is like the sun. If you only believe it when you see it you'll never make it through the night."
Our Princess

  #343  
Old 06-07-2021, 06:28 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 6,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
The correct name is Lilibet, as they've named her that name.
No, it is not. If it was, there was no need for them to announce that her name is 'Lili'; even though her full legal name is Lilibet Diana.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moran View Post
Because we aren't going to know her personally. We aren't likely to attend her school and so on. And her name can be explained personally to the people who are actually going to socialize with her. Not the world who isn't likely to meet her in person.

In my culture, it isn't done. In yours, it is. I wonder about UK and US.
However, it is not a personal name in any way, shape or form. It is the name that she is to be known as. Just like Harry is known as Harry (not Henry) and Meghan is known as Meghan (not Rachel).

Maybe your culture indeed doesn't have this phenomenon of your 'official' name being a different one than your 'legal' name which might make it a bit hard to wrap your head around but indeed mine does, so I'm happy to explain. Harry and Meghan personally also are very accustomed to using names that differ from their official legal first names; in public life (including their wedding service!) - which nickname they use in private or among friends is a completely different ball game (those would never be used in a wedding service for example).

Something you might want to consider: Do you also call Harry 'Henry' whenever you refer to them, as according to your logic 'Harry' is too personal/private of a name to use - even though his parents introduced him as such to the world - just like Harry and Meghan did with their newborn daughter. If not, you might get used to Lili rather soon as the name she will be known by (per the wishes of her parents).

Quote:
Originally Posted by leene View Post
In the Netherlands it happens very often that a child has a "doopnaam" Baptismal name ( I don't know how you name it in English) but has a different name, as in Henry and Harry. Or Catharina and we name her Cathrien.
Or Martina Janna and we name her Marjanne. Or Johannes and we name the child Johan or Jan of Hannes and so on. It happens very often much more than in the UK. So for me Lilibeth Diana and calling her Lili sounds okay and I don't see the problem in telling that she will be called Lili.
Nice name!.

Althought I can understand that it raises eyebrows after all he said about his family.
However how many more can we say about a name

I wish them well and hope they have a good time the first weeks postpartum with their little girl and big brother Archie
The 'baptismal names' are the child's legal names (Lilibet Diana in this case - indeed). The name that is to be used, i.e., she is to be called by is also announced and is 'Lili'. So, that the name everyone is supposed to used when referring to her except for official documents when her full name is needed.

At least she is lucky that both her legal and her 'call name' are starting with the same letter (or in fact they are the first half and a bit of her legal first name). That's still my brother's frustration as in his case they are not... (nor in my father's case but in his case it is the more common 'short version' of the traditional name; so a bit easier to explain and nobody will bet an eye)
  #344  
Old 06-07-2021, 07:06 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Waterford, United States
Posts: 2,860
Iirc

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
I think we were all hoping that about Prince Philip's funeral, that maybe some good could come out of the sadness. But Harry chose to do the opposite.
Charles left for Wales pretty much immediately after the funeral, so he chose to do the opposite. (In the US, we’d say he left in “a New York minute”. Is there such a thing as a Windsor minute?)
__________________
"If you look for the bad in people expecting to find it, you surely will.”

Abraham Lincoln
  #345  
Old 06-07-2021, 10:48 PM
soapstar's Avatar
Super Moderator
Picture of the Week Coordinator
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hermosa Beach, United States
Posts: 5,864
This thread has been cleaned up and a bunch of back and forth bickering has been deleted. As with other threads about new royal babies, Lili's names will be discussed. Some people may like the name and some people may not. There is no need to take it personally, nor is there a need to fight over it.

Going forward please stick to discussing the name and stay away from lecturing your fellow members/assigning motives about why they do, or don’t like the name.
__________________
  #346  
Old 06-07-2021, 11:48 PM
AC21091968's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 1,347
Quote:
Originally Posted by ladongas View Post
Charles left for Wales pretty much immediately after the funeral, so he chose to do the opposite. (In the US, we’d say he left in “a New York minute”. Is there such a thing as a Windsor minute?)
Why is it always Charles' fault who did not make contact with Harry? Why can't Harry take up some responsibility/initiative and be motivated/committed? Why didn't Harry stay longer after Prince Philip's funeral if he is serious about healing the rift? Why did Harry continue to slag the royal family off in the documentary and podcast? Why did Harry not visited Balmoral and Sandringham in 2019? Why did the Sussexes decided to leave the UK if family connection is so important to them? Why should Charles fund the Sussexes' security when they claimed to be "financially independent"? Is Charles only a good father and grandfather, if he gives into all Harry & Meghan's demand? Let's not forget, Charles is the heir and need to consider the future of the monarchy as well not just family members, as well as possibly taking more position/roles after Prince Philip's death.

As far as concern, it's Harry & Meghan who are "throwing the fuel to the fire" by slagging off the Royal Family institution (calling them "oppressed by the system" and accusing "neglect) in the public media. If they truely want to demonstrate love and compassion for the royal family, they should not have done those interviews.

Had Harry & Meghan not done the Oprah's interview & documentary and the Armchair podcast, I would have a very different view to how they names their daughter.
  #347  
Old 06-08-2021, 01:09 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 2,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post
But Harry was a public figure. There were going to be stories about him in the paper, the RF would show him off at his christening and other things.. so since they wanted him to be called Harry rather than Henry, it made sense to say this when he was born and named. Lilibet is not a public figure.. Her pals at nursery and teacher will call her Lili, but that's something to tell them.. no real need to tell the whole world.

They will try to keep her out of the public eye but as the granddaughter of the future king of the UK she is a public figure just like Princess Charlotte is. Okay, it may some years now before she is HRH princess Lilibet of Sussex and maybe she will never use that name in public but she will held it, she will get a Coat of Arms and she will call the king of the UK her grand-daddy. If that isn't enough to make her a "public figure", I don't know what you need more?
  #348  
Old 06-08-2021, 01:21 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 2,766
Quote:
Originally Posted by AC21091968 View Post
Why is it always Charles' fault who did not make contact with Harry? Why can't Harry take up some responsibility/initiative and be motivated/committed? Why didn't Harry stay longer after Prince Philip's funeral if he is serious about healing the rift? Why did Harry continue to slag the royal family off in the documentary and podcast? (snip more questions about why the Sussexes did or didn't things)

Having thought a lot about these questions and why Harry did what he did. IMHO an important clue is in the press release about little Lili's birth. In it, Harry called his mother by her former title as "The Princess of Wales". That title stopped being hers when she divorced Charles and she lost her HRH as well. Harry, then a young boy, surely thought the same as we know his brother thought: when William is king, she will get it back. This tells me that losing a title is an important and humiliating thing for the Royals. I bet they used this to try to make Harry stay in the UK and within the fold. But he went anyway and lost not only Daddy's money, but his HRH as well, as he has now to commercialise to earn money and he can't use the HRH on doing so. So probably in his eyes, he and his beloved wife are not longer welcome in the Uk and thus he hit on the system within his father was raised (not the queen or Philip, but the Royal system) and tries to protect his children from that toxidity. IMHO, of course.

BTw - I love the idea that once the queen is dead, another "Princess Lilibet" will keep the memory of her great-grandmother, of the human behind the throne, alive!
  #349  
Old 06-08-2021, 02:10 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,324
I'm not sure why there's so much confusion over saying that her name is Lilibet but they're going to call her Lili. If they'd said that her name was Elizabeth but they were going to call her Lizzie, or her name was Jennifer but they were going to call her Jenny, presumably that would be OK? No-one refers to Prince Harry as "Henry", or to the Duchess of Cambridge's sister as "Philippa". It's a bit unusual to put it in the official announcement, but I wouldn't have thought it was so weird as to attract so much comment. A lot of families use a short version of a baby's full name right from the start.


Having said all that, Queen Victoria was known as Drina when she was a baby, so Lilibet may end up calling herself Bet, Betty, Di or anything else.


I still think using a nickname as a proper name is odd, though.
  #350  
Old 06-08-2021, 02:19 AM
Sunnystar's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Oregon, United States
Posts: 593
Quote:
Originally Posted by Heavs View Post
When Philip died we found out he didn't use Zoom and only had a phone. Where does that put Harry's endearing "Philip ends a call by closing the computer screen"? Nor do I think they were having cosy zooms with HM whilst Harry was telling the world she was a bad parent who made his father a terrible person.
Did we find out he didn't use Zoom? There's nothing inconsistent, IMO, with Harry saying "Philip ends a call by closing the computer screen" since you can use Zoom on your phone or a tablet. You leave the virtual room the same way - by closing the app/browser. I'm not going to slag on Harry and assume he was lying when he gave that "endearing" anecdote. Sure, we can all parse his words to the nth degree but "closing the computer screen" is essentially the same thing as closing the app/browser whether you're participating via phone or computer. Plus, while he might not have had a computer of his own, we know that HM has a tablet, so, again, Philip could have been sharing a tablet with HM and just closed the app/screen when he was done with the video chat.

I'd like to believe HM, Charles and the rest of the family have had a chance to see Lili via video chat/Zoom/Facetime/Messenger already - technology is really a wonderful thing when you consider that even when Harry and Meghan were born you would have to wait for "film at 11" and now so many of us have the ability to communicate almost instantaneously. I imagine, if they've had a chance to chat already, that Charlotte and George were fairly excited to go to school today and tell their friends about their new baby cousin who lives a long, long ways away!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
I'm not sure why there's so much confusion over saying that her name is Lilibet but they're going to call her Lili. If they'd said that her name was Elizabeth but they were going to call her Lizzie, or her name was Jennifer but they were going to call her Jenny, presumably that would be OK? No-one refers to Prince Harry as "Henry", or to the Duchess of Cambridge's sister as "Philippa". It's a bit unusual to put it in the official announcement, but I wouldn't have thought it was so weird as to attract so much comment. A lot of families use a short version of a baby's full name right from the start.


Having said all that, Queen Victoria was known as Drina when she was a baby, so Lilibet may end up calling herself Bet, Betty, Di or anything else.


I still think using a nickname as a proper name is odd, though.
I don't think it's weird either. My older niece and her husband had their first baby 11 months ago. We knew she was going to be named Penelope well before her birth. We also knew that she was going to be called Penny. I distinctly recall the drive-up baby shower last June where a longtime friend of hers mentioned that her cousin had just had a baby girl who was also named Penelope but were calling her Poppy and my niece telling her "we're calling ours Penny."

And, I agree, I can't be completely only board with using a nickname as a proper name. It is odd. But, I also know "not my kid, not my decision." Heck, as an occasional fiction writer, I've had friends/collaborators/readers question the choices of names I've given to characters - and my characters are like my kids since I don't have any kids of my own. Their names are my decision. You put your own hopes and aspirations into selecting a name for your child, whether its real or fictional.
  #351  
Old 06-08-2021, 02:35 AM
CyrilVladisla's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Conneaut, United States
Posts: 7,029
By naming their daughter Lilibet, was it Prince Harry's and Meghan's intention to get in the good graces of the Queen?
  #352  
Old 06-08-2021, 02:55 AM
Newbie
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 6
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kataryn View Post
Having thought a lot about these questions and why Harry did what he did. IMHO an important clue is in the press release about little Lili's birth. In it, Harry called his mother by her former title as "The Princess of Wales". That title stopped being hers when she divorced Charles and she lost her HRH as well. Harry, then a young boy, surely thought the same as we know his brother thought: when William is king, she will get it back. This tells me that losing a title is an important and humiliating thing for the Royals. I bet they used this to try to make Harry stay in the UK and within the fold. But he went anyway and lost not only Daddy's money, but his HRH as well, as he has now to commercialise to earn money and he can't use the HRH on doing so. So probably in his eyes, he and his beloved wife are not longer welcome in the Uk and thus he hit on the system within his father was raised (not the queen or Philip, but the Royal system) and tries to protect his children from that toxidity. IMHO, of course.

BTw - I love the idea that once the queen is dead, another "Princess Lilibet" will keep the memory of her great-grandmother, of the human behind the throne, alive!
When I Googled "Princess Diana", I found that although she lost the HRH honorific, she did keep the Princess of Wales title. Quote: "Diana retained her title of “Princess of Wales” and her apartments at Kensington Palace, but she agreed gave up the title “Her Royal Highness” and any claim to the British throne."

I think "Princess Lilibet" sounds like a fairy story princess, not a real little girl, but wouldn't have any problems if they'd called her "Princess Lili/Lily" in honour of HM The Queen's pet name. It just rankles with me. Harry and Meghan seem so self-absorbed that they probably just don't see anything beyond their bubble.
  #353  
Old 06-08-2021, 03:24 AM
JR76's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Malmö, Sweden
Posts: 3,478
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sue Lemon View Post
When I Googled "Princess Diana", I found that although she lost the HRH honorific, she did keep the Princess of Wales title. Quote: "Diana retained her title of “Princess of Wales” and her apartments at Kensington Palace, but she agreed gave up the title “Her Royal Highness” and any claim to the British throne."

I think "Princess Lilibet" sounds like a fairy story princess, not a real little girl, but wouldn't have any problems if they'd called her "Princess Lili/Lily" in honour of HM The Queen's pet name. It just rankles with me. Harry and Meghan seem so self-absorbed that they probably just don't see anything beyond their bubble.
Diana didn't keep the title Princess of Wales, but like the divorced wives of peers she could go by her ex-husband's title (Diana, Princess of Wales) until an eventual new marriage. This is why Sarah Ferguson is still styled as Sarah, Duchess of York.
  #354  
Old 06-08-2021, 03:27 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 16,526
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sue Lemon View Post
When I Googled "Princess Diana", I found that although she lost the HRH honorific, she did keep the Princess of Wales title. Quote: "Diana retained her title of “Princess of Wales” and her apartments at Kensington Palace, but she agreed gave up the title “Her Royal Highness” and any claim to the British throne."

I think "Princess Lilibet" sounds like a fairy story princess, not a real little girl, but wouldn't have any problems if they'd called her "Princess Lili/Lily" in honour of HM The Queen's pet name. It just rankles with me. Harry and Meghan seem so self-absorbed that they probably just don't see anything beyond their bubble.
Diana never had any kind of claim to the throne at all. Both Diana and Sarah used the styling of a divorced wife of a title holder which is Diana, Princess of Wales and Sarah, Duchess of York. It is a courtesy title that they can retain until they remarry. It denotes that Diana was at one time, The Princess of Wales but is divorced from the title holder. The Queen is the one that stripped the HRH from both Diana and Sarah and that precedent will stand should Meghan and Harry divorce. Actually, when you see Meghan using the styling of Meghan, Duchess of Sussex, she is actually using a styling that she would if she and Harry were divorced.

When Charles becomes king, Lili will be Princess Lilibet of Sussex just like Princess Beatrice of York and Princess Eugenie of York. Just like Harry is actually Prince Henry, Duke of Sussex. Her name will be read as "Lilibet Diana" on the day she marries. That is, unless Charles changes things up.
__________________
To be yourself in a world that is constantly trying to make you something else is the greatest accomplishment. ~~ Ralph Waldo Emerson ~~
  #355  
Old 06-08-2021, 03:56 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,110
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kataryn View Post
Having thought a lot about these questions and why Harry did what he did. IMHO an important clue is in the press release about little Lili's birth. In it, Harry called his mother by her former title as "The Princess of Wales". That title stopped being hers when she divorced Charles and she lost her HRH as well. Harry, then a young boy, surely thought the same as we know his brother thought: when William is king, she will get it back. This tells me that losing a title is an important and humiliating thing for the Royals. I bet they used this to try to make Harry stay in the UK and within the fold. But he went anyway and lost not only Daddy's money, but his HRH as well, as he has now to commercialise to earn money and he can't use the HRH on doing so. So probably in his eyes, he and his beloved wife are not longer welcome in the Uk and thus he hit on the system within his father was raised (not the queen or Philip, but the Royal system) and tries to protect his children from that toxidity. IMHO, of course.

BTw - I love the idea that once the queen is dead, another "Princess Lilibet" will keep the memory of her great-grandmother, of the human behind the throne, alive!
They didn't lose the HRH titles, they were asked not to use them for business purposes.
I am not going to say anymore as this is the thread for Lili, not Harry and Meghan.
  #356  
Old 06-08-2021, 04:00 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hallo girl View Post
They didn't lose the HRH titles, they were asked not to use them for business purposes.
I am not going to say anymore as this is the thread for Lili, not Harry and Meghan.
There's nothing to say about Lili at present. She's only a few days old..I hope she's happy and well but there is one ting I'd love to know. Why would Harry want his daughter who is going to grow up in hte US, as an American, to have a title which is of no use to her, and which will remind him forever of the family that he finds so unkind and toxic that he had to leave the UK to escape them

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
I'm not sure why there's so much confusion over saying that her name is Lilibet but they're going to call her Lili. If they'd said that her name was Elizabeth but they were going to call her Lizzie, or her name was Jennifer but they were going to call her Jenny, presumably that would be OK? No-one refers to Prince Harry as "Henry", or to the Duchess of Cambridge's sister as "Philippa". It's a bit unusual to put it in the official announcement, but I wouldn't have thought it was so weird as to attract so much comment. A lot of families use a short version of a baby's full name right from the start.


Having said all that, Queen Victoria was known as Drina when she was a baby, so Lilibet may end up calling herself Bet, Betty, Di or anything else.


I still think using a nickname as a proper name is odd, though.
Its not that so much. Its the choice of a nickname which only a few people use for the queen as the child's full name. If they liked the name Lili so much, its an OK name.. If they wanted to honour the queen, why not use one of her other names as well as Lili and Diana? She has 3. I can see that Lili Elizabeth Diana would mean she had 2 names that sounded rather close but she coudl have been Lili Alexandra Diana... but the name they've chosen has ensured that royal watchers will be talking about the baby's name, and this will mean they are talking about Meg and Harry...

Quote:
Originally Posted by ladongas View Post
Charles left for Wales pretty much immediately after the funeral, so he chose to do the opposite. (In the US, we’d say he left in “a New York minute”. Is there such a thing as a Windsor minute?)
I doubt if he drove off from the church to Wales. He and Harry had time when they were both in the UK before the funeral.. but it doesn't sound as if they managed to talk...
  #357  
Old 06-08-2021, 04:51 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: Manchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,324
Quote:
Originally Posted by Denville View Post


Its not that so much. Its the choice of a nickname which only a few people use for the queen as the child's full name. If they liked the name Lili so much, its an OK name.. If they wanted to honour the queen, why not use one of her other names as well as Lili and Diana? She has 3. I can see that Lili Elizabeth Diana would mean she had 2 names that sounded rather close but she coudl have been Lili Alexandra Diana... but the name they've chosen has ensured that royal watchers will be talking about the baby's name, and this will mean they are talking about Meg and Harry...
It's such a specific nickname as well: I've never heard it used for anyone else. There are loads of people called Bertie, for example, or Alix (although it'd usually be spelt Alex). Lord Mountbatten was Dickie, which is rather weird when your name is Louis but used to be very common as a nickname for Richard. But Lilibet is unique to the Queen.
  #358  
Old 06-08-2021, 04:58 AM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,088
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alison H View Post
It's such a specific nickname as well: I've never heard it used for anyone else. There are loads of people called Bertie, for example, or Alix (although it'd usually be spelt Alex). Lord Mountbatten was Dickie, which is rather weird when your name is Louis but used to be very common as a nickname for Richard. But Lilibet is unique to the Queen.
I think that it is really very much the queen's name.. Many people get a pet name in babyhood but it fades out as they get older but the queen's used that name all her life.. It seems odd IMO for a grown woman but its a name she likes and has kept. So for H and Meg who clearly are NOT happy with the RF, to take hold of it and use it as a name for their baby seems Odd to say the least. As for Mountbatten, I think that his second name was Nicholas but there were so many Nickies in royal families that instead he got the rhyming name Dickie and it stuck to him for life.
  #359  
Old 06-08-2021, 05:26 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Nov 2020
Location: N/A, Bulgaria
Posts: 347
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody View Post
However, it is not a personal name in any way, shape or form. It is the name that she is to be known as. Just like Harry is known as Harry (not Henry) and Meghan is known as Meghan (not Rachel).

Maybe your culture indeed doesn't have this phenomenon of your 'official' name being a different one than your 'legal' name which might make it a bit hard to wrap your head around but indeed mine does, so I'm happy to explain. Harry and Meghan personally also are very accustomed to using names that differ from their official legal first names; in public life (including their wedding service!) - which nickname they use in private or among friends is a completely different ball game (those would never be used in a wedding service for example).

Something you might want to consider: Do you also call Harry 'Henry' whenever you refer to them, as according to your logic 'Harry' is too personal/private of a name to use - even though his parents introduced him as such to the world - just like Harry and Meghan did with their newborn daughter. If not, you might get used to Lili rather soon as the name she will be known by (per the wishes of her parents).
My culture doesn't have the phenomenon of an "official" name being different from a "legal" one indeed but that isn't the matter and neither is yours having it. As far as I see, you're just as British (or American, for that matter) as I am. It seems strange for a British prince issuing an official announcement for the birth of a child to serve it on a silver platter to the greedy public who isn't going to be part of this child's life the way it was always meant to be part of Harry's. If his parents wanted him to be known as Harry, they didn't have much choice but make it clear to everyone who was going to be part of his life. In his case - the British public that Harry and Meghan claim to abhor for their children. The same public Harry resented for daring to grieve his mother. So, you don't get to enter my personal space because you didn't know my mum but hey, I'll give you my daughter's official name as if she's going to be part of your lives? Looks strange. We could go without knowing it. Who knows when he's going to throw it back in our face?

The reason I asked for UK and US posters is it normal there is this - it's their culture, not mine and not yours. That's how it should be judged. We don't have the phenomenon of a string of first names here either. I'm Moran, not Moran + a string of first names. But I don't find the string strange because from hundreds of books, movies and textbooks I know it's a normal thing in certain countries. I've just never heard of a name different from a legal one being included in an official announcement in the UK when the child isn't going to grow up in the public eye.
  #360  
Old 06-08-2021, 05:52 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Aug 2020
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 176
Well, they announced her name as Lilibet "Lili" Diana. So what is naturally happening because of that is that people as well as the media call her Lilibet, Lili or Lilibet Diana (some maybe even Lili Diana).

As time passes, one may stick more than the others and when she is an adult, she will probably also have an idea of her own as to what she would like to be known as. It might be Lili, Lilibet, Diana or even something else such as Betty. Her official name does allow for quite a few different versions.

For now, most headlines I've seen said Lilibet.
__________________

Closed Thread

Tags
birth, harry and meghan


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Birth of Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor: May 6, 2019 JessRulz The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family 1495 04-04-2020 06:26 AM




Popular Tags
abu dhabi america archie mountbatten-windsor background story baptism biography birth britannia british british royal family brownbitcoinqueen buckingham palace camilla camilla parker-bowles camilla parker bowles china chinese ming dynasty asia asian emperor royalty qing commonwealth countries countess of snowdon customs daisy doge of venice doll duchess of sussex duke of cambridge duke of sussex edward vii elizabeth ii family life family tree fashion and style george vi gustaf vi adolf harry and meghan highgrove house of windsor jack brooksbank jewellery king willem-alexander książ castle line of succession list of rulers luxembourg meghan markle monarchy nepal nepalese royal jewels plantinum jubilee prince charles of luxembourg prince constantijn prince harry princess alexia (2005 -) princess ariane princess catharina-amalia princess chulabhorn walailak princess ribha queen consort queen maxima queen victoria royal ancestry spain speech sussex suthida swedish queen taiwan tradition unfinished portrait united states of america wales welsh


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 07:54 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises
×