The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   The Duke and Duchess of Sussex and Family (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f34/)
-   -   Birth of Lilibet “Lili” Diana Mountbatten-Windsor: June 4, 2021 (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f34/birth-of-lilibet-lili-diana-mountbatten-windsor-june-4-2021-a-48720.html)

Denville 06-08-2021 01:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lea (Post 2406380)
Maybe random, but interesting!! :flowers:

its quite understandable. In the Victorian era and a bit later, families were large and they used a lot of the same names. Victoria had several grand daughters called Victoria as well so they used nicknames to distinguish them. Victoria Melita was "Ducky"... Helena was Lenchen, her daughter Helena Victoria was Thora. Pss Victoria of Wales was Toria.
Now most royals have only 2 or 3 children.. and mostly, they have a broader range of names.. so there's no need to make up pet names for them. THere are a couple of Georges, and Jameses... i n the present RF but by and large there aren't that many doubled up names.

lea 06-08-2021 02:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Denville (Post 2406383)
its quite understandable. In the Victorian era and a bit later, families were large and they used a lot of the same names. Victoria had several grand daughters called Victoria as well so they used nicknames to distinguish them. Victoria Melita was "Ducky"... Helena was Lenchen, her daughter Helena Victoria was Thora. Pss Victoria of Wales was Toria.
Now most royals have only 2 or 3 children.. and mostly, they have a broader range of names.. so there's no need to make up pet names for them. THere are a couple of Georges, and Jameses... i n the present RF but by and large there aren't that many doubled up names.

That is quite understandable, thanks! :flowers:

Somebody 06-08-2021 02:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ladyjolene (Post 2406338)
I have many friends who are teachers and, as others have pointed out here, that poor girl is going to be spelling out her name to everyone. It will get tiresome. She'll introduce herself as Lilibet. The response will be, "Elizabeth?" "No, it's Lilibet." When we named our daughter, we thought long and hard and didn't want to give her a name that would give her a headache. They also did Archie no favors with that name especially since they moved to the US--not a popular name here. A bit like Johnny Cash's "Boy Named Sue."

There won't be confusion about the name Lilibet as she will introduce herself as 'Lili'. Nonetheless, she most likely will have to explain that it is written with an 'i' at the end and not with 'y' (at least, that's what she would need to do if she wasn't world famous because of her parents - so, I'm not too worried about her in that respect).

lea 06-08-2021 02:29 PM

Even if the Queen isn’t thrilled with Harry’s behavior, I don’t think it rules out that she could have given approval for her nickname to be used. She evidently forgave Charles for his direct attack on her parenting skills, why couldn’t she also forgive Harry?

I also don’t think the Queen is as fragile as some seem to think. Or even perhaps as innocent? I would bet that she doesn’t see herself or anyone else in the family as perfect.

In a strange way it’s refreshing to see Harry attacked over his behavior. For a while I thought it was only Meghan who was going to take the blame for their actions.

Mirabel 06-08-2021 02:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lea (Post 2406389)
Even if the Queen isn’t thrilled with Harry’s behavior, I don’t think it rules out that she could have given approval for her nickname to be used.

I really doubt they even asked the Queen for permission.

Also, if it's true that Harry was invited to lunch with the Queen when he's in the U.K. for the unveiling of the Diana statue, she would be wise to have a disinterested person of standing present throughout.

Otherwise, who knows what Harry will say later?
Time to protect herself!

lea 06-08-2021 03:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mirabel (Post 2406391)
I really doubt they even asked the Queen for permission.

Also, if it's true that Harry was invited to lunch with the Queen when he's in the U.K. for the unveiling of the Diana statue, she would be wise to have a disinterested person of standing present throughout.

Otherwise, who knows what Harry will say later?
Time to protect herself!

It certainly wouldn’t hurt, although I’m not sure she would use that information if her policy is not to respond?

Denville 06-08-2021 03:45 PM

She responded when Harry did his first interview and remarked that "recollections may vary". I dont think she'll trust Harry again for a long time....

Mademoiselle Lilo 06-08-2021 03:51 PM

Welcome to the world little Lili
Glad to know the Duchess and baby are in good health

_Heather_ 06-08-2021 04:35 PM

So, I'm no fan of Harry and Meghan and I'll be the first to admit that I find much of their behavior questionable and worthy of some serious side-eye and a bit of shade throwing. That said, racism is never, ever okay and it's even less okay when it is aimed at children, in this case a newborn. While I suspect that the columnist thought she was being "edgy" and making fun of Harry and Meghan rather than Lili, she wasn't. She was just simply outing herself as a racist. Though the article does imply that this is not the first time she's been involved in these kinds of incidents. And the fact that she flatly refused to apologize is...well...I'm not really sure I have the words even though these sorts of people are rarely apologetic and even less rarely do they see their own errors and shortcomings. And for an added touch of "wow, really" she even went so far as to call Lili "it." Not "the baby" or "she" or even "the child" but "it." Anyway, here's the article in case anyone cares to read it.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/julie...b0fcee71a07a9e

ACO 06-08-2021 04:48 PM

And a lawyer she was exchanging tweets with was suspended and now the bar association is doing an investigation. People letting their dislike of Harry and Meghan affect their professional life. It has been happening quite a bit these days.

Heavs 06-08-2021 05:04 PM

Julie Birchill's tweet was extremely wrong, as were others along similar lines but they've been fired/suspended.

I think it doesn't stop there being legitimate discussion about Lili's actual name and her parents thoughts and motivations for it both potentially positive and less positive.

camelot23ca 06-08-2021 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by lea (Post 2406389)
Even if the Queen isn’t thrilled with Harry’s behavior, I don’t think it rules out that she could have given approval for her nickname to be used. She evidently forgave Charles for his direct attack on her parenting skills, why couldn’t she also forgive Harry?

I also don’t think the Queen is as fragile as some seem to think. Or even perhaps as innocent? I would bet that she doesn’t see herself or anyone else in the family as perfect.

In a strange way it’s refreshing to see Harry attacked over his behavior. For a while I thought it was only Meghan who was going to take the blame for their actions.

I don’t think the Queen is fragile and I definitely don’t think she believes anyone in her family is perfect - the 90s alone would have cured her of that notion!

I assume Harry would have at least given her notice about the baby’s name. I’d be interested to know whether he asked for permission or presented the name choice as a done deal. It would put her in an awkward position either way; if your grandchild comes to you and asks if he can use your private family nickname for his daughter, is there really a way to say “I’d actually rather you didn’t” without potentially causing hurt feelings?

The Queen is over 90 years old and most likely a pragmatist. Would she be ok with a future King Archie or Queen Lillibet? Probably not, in the same way she wouldn’t have accepted a future King Peter or Queen Zara. But Peter, Zara, Archie and Lillibet are private citizens - their names really have no bearing on the monarchy. I suspect the Queen will stand up for the interests of the monarchy as best she’s able, but has a higher threshold for making a fuss about her personal wishes as a family member.

Maybe the Queen was happy with the choice of name. Or maybe she wasn’t but was aware that Harry and Meghan would be quite capable of publicly expressing their displeasure if she said no, and didn’t feel it was worth stirring up a hornets nest by saying no.

Alison H 06-08-2021 05:50 PM

I don't think it's the fact that Lilibet isn't a "proper" name that would be bothering her, more the fact that it's her private, intimate, family nickname, being used by people who've said that her family are racist, uncaring, neglectful, and bad parents, just after the death of her husband of 74 years. But we'll never know how she feels about it, because she doesn't go around discussing her private business on TV talk shows.

CyrilVladisla 06-08-2021 07:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mirabel (Post 2406391)
I really doubt they even asked the Queen for permission.

Also, if it's true that Harry was invited to lunch with the Queen when he's in the U.K. for the unveiling of the Diana statue, she would be wise to have a disinterested person of standing present throughout.

Otherwise, who knows what Harry will say later?
Time to protect herself!

Would the disinterested person of standing be a lady-in-waiting?

Royalist.in.NC 06-08-2021 07:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TLLK (Post 2406367)
I need to send you a pm so we can discuss the various student names that have appeared on our rosters. :lol:

Absolutely! I can only imagine! :rolleyes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by _Heather_ (Post 2406402)
So, I'm no fan of Harry and Meghan and I'll be the first to admit that I find much of their behavior questionable and worthy of some serious side-eye and a bit of shade throwing. That said, racism is never, ever okay and it's even less okay when it is aimed at children, in this case a newborn. While I suspect that the columnist thought she was being "edgy" and making fun of Harry and Meghan rather than Lili, she wasn't. She was just simply outing herself as a racist. Though the article does imply that this is not the first time she's been involved in these kinds of incidents. And the fact that she flatly refused to apologize is...well...I'm not really sure I have the words even though these sorts of people are rarely apologetic and even less rarely do they see their own errors and shortcomings. And for an added touch of "wow, really" she even went so far as to call Lili "it." Not "the baby" or "she" or even "the child" but "it." Anyway, here's the article in case anyone cares to read it.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/julie...b0fcee71a07a9e

Oh gosh! This article about the racist tweet - how awful!:sad:

Sunnystar 06-08-2021 08:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alison H (Post 2406308)
I used to know someone to whom everyone referred as "Michele with one l", because that was how she always introduced herself! Why her parents didn't just call her Michelle, I don't know. The Snowdons' daughter is Margarita, because Margaret, whilst a very popular name in the first half of the 20th century, was very old hat by the time that Margarita was born.

Liz, Lizzie, Liza, Eliza, Bet, Betty, Bess, Bessie, Bessy, Betsy and Beth are all used as shorts for Elizabeth: it's been such a popular name over the years that there are umpteen versions of it.

But Lilibet is a private family nickname.

Incidentally, the Queen Mother's childhood nickname was Buffy, long before anyone was into vampire slayers. I'm not sure why, but I suppose that a little kid might say Elizabuff, and that could easily become Buffy. At least they didn't use that!

My middle name is Michele - and it was a deliberate choice by my mom. Our last name has two Ls in it and she felt that one set of double Ls in my name was enough. Personally, I like the less common, but traditional French spelling of Michele vs Michelle. :-)

I knew an Elizabeth when I was a teenager who went by the nickname of Buffy. When she was a small child her dad wanted to call her Beth/Bethy (and he did, now that I recall) but one of her brothers had difficulty with the "th" and it turned into an F sound, so Bethy became Buffy. Now, once she went away to college where no one knew her as Buffy she chose to introduce herself as Beth and successful changed her nickname so that she is known as Beth.

Frelinghighness 06-08-2021 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alison H (Post 2406172)
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.

Wow you really missed the point. They used an intimate nickname that only super close family members used, for example her recently deceased husband, after publicly trashing the entire family enterprise. Why name your baby after an enterprise that you think is so toxic and also announces her birth with letterhead showing royal emblems if all you do is try to show how you want to be free from it

soapstar 06-08-2021 11:26 PM

A number of posts have been deleted. Let’s stick to discussing the new baby and not start comparing Meghan to other royals, or turn this into a discussion about the media. Further off-topic comments will be deleted.

Kervjacque 06-09-2021 12:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alison H (Post 2406093)
They won't be putting "Lili" on the birth certificate. It's a bit confusing that the announcement said "Lilibet "Lili" Diana", but that was just to show that she'd be known as Lili. Harry's birth certificate says Henry Charles Albert David, but he's only ever been "Harry". That's nothing unusual. When I was at school, there were loads of Kates, Debbies, Mandys, Daves, Andys, Mikes, etc, whose birth certificates said Katherine, Debra, Amanda, David, Andrew or Michael but who'd never been known by the full versions.


It does seem to be a trend now to use a nickname/short name as the official name, e.g. Teddy rather than Edward or Beth rather than Elizabeth. I'm not a great fan of that idea, but each to their own.


Fairly random point :-) , but the last two or three generations of royals have been unusually nickname/abbreviation-free. If you go back to the early 20th century, you can get extremely confused as you read about Ducky, Sunny, Moretta, Sandro, Greek Georgie, Lenchen, Ena, etc etc etc!

This is what happened to me! reading some biographies, I at first was getting the hang of the nicknames but, the way the nicknames kept coming, was a mental train wreck! hhahaha

muriel 06-09-2021 02:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mirabel (Post 2406391)
I really doubt they even asked the Queen for permission.

We seem to have an answer to that question!

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-57408163


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:05 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises