Results 6 to 10 of 16
October 15th, 2013 05:38 PM #6Member
- Join Date
- Oct 2013
October 15th, 2013 05:40 PM #8Senior Member
- Join Date
- Apr 2012
I love James and the Chatto boys' names
George was one of the only contenders that ticked all the boxes- regal name, no confusion over numbering with Scotland, no completely horrific forebearers, no immediate family member with the name, last couple of Georges were decent ... that woman was wrong in saying it was a ridiculous choice!
As times have changed and children are less often named after immediate family, there's a lesser chance of a child being named Henry/Charles/Philip/William etc, but there's no rule against it. There's apparently some superstition with the name John though. King John is widely regarded as a bad king and the last two princes to bear the name have died young. Supposedly, Diana was prevented from naming William 'John' after her brother becausse of this. But, no, George definitely doesn't have a bad image and was/is a perfectly fine choice for a future king!
October 15th, 2013 05:58 PM #10
William and Catherine couldn't have named their son Charles or Henry. Prince Edward, the Earl of Wessex, shares his name with his mother's cousin, Prince Edward, the Duke of Kent; and Charles Armstrong-Jones was named after his father's cousin, the Prince of Wales. I actually think it's quite likely that Henry will be used by either William, Zara, Beatrice or Eugenie seeing as Harry is called Harry and everyone know him as Harry.
I know that people are saying that Her Majesty must approve a name, but I honestly only think that's formalities. I don't think she would dream of saying no to a name (that is unless say William and Catherine had wanted to named George something like ... North South, Prince (Prince Prince of Cambridge, lol) or whatever). There is the rumour that HM and Charles nixed Diana's suggestion of John for William, but I don't think that's the truth (and if it is, can you blame them? King John was terrible and Prince Alexander John (1871) Prince John (1905) both died young. Besides Prince John just screams Prince John (Too late to be known as John the First, he's sure to be known as John the Worst!) from Disney's Robin Hood).
Last edited by shvibziks; October 15th, 2013 at 06:00 PM.Zelia • XXI • History student • Film and royalty enthusiastI run vesperlynds and everythingroyalty, and export names from Greenland and Inuit mythology
Henry Ásgeirr Lórien • Alexander Adelin Pemba "Sasha" • Atticus Aksel Ivik • Oscar Folke Igaluk
Cosima Ingrid Zenobia "Mimi" • Asta Ivalo Galadriel • Aviaaja Catherine Françoise "Avi" • Evelyn Estë Cleopatra "Elví"
GPs: Nor Valdemar Oisín • Saxo Edmund Bertil • Olga Agnes Lúthien • Fanny Alvaret Alatáriel
October 15th, 2013 06:14 PM #12
In the past, the present Queen's parents (then the Duke and Duchess of York) wanted to name the Queen's sister Margaret Ann. King George V couldn't stand the name Ann so he vetoed it. The Queen's sister was named Margaret Rose instead. The monarch does have the final say in the names but I think the Queen is more diplomatic than her more dictatorial grandfather. I don't think she would veto any "traditional" name unless there was a negative association that William and Catherine may not have been aware existed. There would definitely not be Prince Dweezil or Prince Pilot! I think the Queen's common sense would prevail if anyone lost their minds and wanted anything too modern or strange, especially for a baby that was direct in line to the throne. She was probably touched that they named him George. Her beloved father was King George VI even though his real name was Albert
Last edited by mischa; October 16th, 2013 at 06:37 PM.All the best,
October 16th, 2013 01:12 AM #14
See, everywhere I read said that they wouldn't be allowed to name him after an immediate family member who was still alive. But that's American media outlets so...yeah. I mean it made sense to me (I wouldn't want two guys named Charles or Henry in my immediate family, either. too confusing) so I didn't question it...but it's not a legitimate rule? That's good. I could definitely see them having a little Henry if they're allowed.
I couldn't see the Queen vetoing a name, either, unless Will & Kate went absolutely bonkers. She's pretty modern herself (idk any other queens who would parody a James Bond film for the Olympic Games opening ceremony)
What do you guys think are the chances of him honoring his mother in some way with their next child? Either by using Diana if it's a girl, or Spencer in some way if it's a boy? I know Spencer is kind of out there, but would that be allowed for a middle name at all?
This is all very fascinating.