William and Kate's baby!

The [name]Duke[/name] and Duchess of Cambridge {aka [name]William[/name] and [name]Kate[/name]} have announced that they are expecting a baby.

What names do you predict?

Also, for some entertainment, check out this #UnlikelyRoyalBabyNames trend on twitter: x.com

:slight_smile:

Any name that isnā€™t already taken in the family now could be be a first name.

For the first time, gender doesnā€™t apply! Yeah! Irregardless of whether the baby is a boy or a girl, it will be third in line to the throne after the Prince of Wales and Prince William so Iā€™m hoping it will be a future queen!

[name]Diana[/name] (I wonder if they would have the courage to use it!)
[name]Alice[/name]
[name]Amelia[/name]
[name]Charlotte[/name] (although [name]Diana[/name]'s brother the [name]Earl[/name] of [name]Spencer[/name] just had a Lady [name]Charlotte[/name] [name]Spencer[/name])
[name]Victoria[/name]
[name]Adelaide[/name]
[name]Caroline[/name]
[name]Matilda[/name]
[name]Eleanor[/name]
[name]Mary[/name]
[name]Helena[/name]

Off [name]Mischa[/name]'s list I like [name]Matilda[/name] or [name]Eleanor[/name] but I will be back to this thread for more when I have time. I wonder if they have to follow any rules etc.?

I think [name]Diana[/name] would be a middle name if itā€™s a girl - I think [name]Elizabeth[/name] may also be one as well. As this child will be third in line to the throne regardless of gender, I think they have to stick with traditional royal names.

I quite fancy [name]Diana[/name] [name]Elizabeth[/name] [name]Caroline[/name] as the middles, after both mothers and the [name]Queen[/name]. Not sure on a first yet though Iā€™m quite liking [name]Mary[/name] on the front of that lot.

For boys, [name]Charles[/name] is likely to end up as a middle, and possibly [name]Michael[/name] as well - [name]Kate[/name]'s fatherā€™s first name. Itā€™s unlikely to be a first that a prominant royal already bears - so no [name]Edward[/name], [name]Henry[/name], [name]Charles[/name], [name]Andrew[/name], [name]Philip[/name] or [name]William[/name]. [name]Both[/name] [name]William[/name] and [name]Charles[/name] have [name]Arthur[/name] as a middle name so thatā€™s a possibility to be passed on to a first son, not sure about where it originates from though.

Iā€™d like [name]Arthur[/name] or [name]George[/name] as a first, both havenā€™t been used for ages.

[name]Mary[/name] [name]Diana[/name] [name]Elizabeth[/name] [name]Caroline[/name] or [name]George[/name] [name]Charles[/name] [name]Arthur[/name] [name]Michael[/name] are my picks.

I agree with above. [name]Mary[/name] (and all the middle names) and [name]George[/name].

Are there any rules? Maybe she would choose [name]Clara[/name], like some lady chooses [name]Zara[/name].

I agree she might choose [name]Elizabeth[/name] or [name]Diana[/name], but why [name]Mary[/name]?

Also, for some entertainment, check out this #UnlikelyRoyalBabyNames trend on twitter: https://twitter.com/search?q=%23UnlikelyRoyalBabyNames&src=tren

:slight_smile:

[name]Dinah[/name] [name]Elizabeth[/name]

I expect something really beautiful and elegant.

As a side note, I hope the paps leave her alone. Let her enjoy her pregnancy in peace, especially since she has hyperemesis gravidarum. Give her a break.

I donā€™t think they would give her a first name after any living prominent royal, so [name]Anne[/name], [name]Elizabeth[/name] and I would say [name]Margaret[/name] are probably all out. [name]William[/name] has a cousin called [name]Louise[/name] so any variant on that would be out as well. [name]Victoria[/name] I think could be a possibility but I think being [name]Queen[/name] [name]Victoria[/name] II would be a lot to live up to. [name]Mary[/name] was the name of the [name]Queen[/name]'s grandmother, and is one of her middle names.

There are lots of other lovely and classical names than [name]Louise[/name] and [name]Victoria[/name].

My guess is [name]Eleanor[/name] for a girl- [name]Eleanor[/name] of [name]Aquitaine[/name] was queen 850 years ago, so her story seems distant enough not to be a burden to a modern member of the royal family (not that it would necessarily be a burden!). [name]Queen[/name] [name]Eleanor[/name] just plain sounds right, plus itā€™s the sort of name that would give her family the option of a private nickname.

We had a couple of [name]Queen[/name] [name]Marys[/name] at the beginning of the modern age, and Iā€™m not sure that Iā€™d want to be [name]Queen[/name] [name]Mary[/name] III when the first [name]Mary[/name] is still known as ā€˜Bloody [name]Mary[/name]ā€™ and the second one is somewhat of a traitorous character to the Scots.

[name]Alice[/name] is another possibility, I think, given that it is a [name]Royal[/name] family name currently in fashion, and it has the benefit of not having an obvious historical precedent. On the other hand, [name]Alice[/name] is almost a trendy name, and Iā€™m not entirely convinced that ā€˜[name]Queen[/name] [name]Alice[/name]ā€™ quite stands upā€¦Other more remote possibilities could include [name]Margaret[/name] (though that could be tricky in [name]Scotland[/name]- [name]Margaret[/name] I in [name]England[/name], II in [name]Scotland[/name]?), [name]Alexandra[/name] (royal precedent, excellent etymology for a queen, but a little much- [name]Princess[/name] [name]Alexandra[/name], [name]Queen[/name] [name]Alexandra[/name]? Too much [name]Victoriana[/name]!), [name]Charlotte[/name], [name]Helena[/name], and, remotely, [name]Matilda[/name] or [name]Emma[/name].

I agree with [name]Elizabeth[/name] [name]Diana[/name] [name]Caroline[/name] as obvious middles, but some combination including [name]Alexandra[/name], [name]Margaret[/name], [name]Frances[/name], [name]Alice[/name], [name]Mary[/name], [name]Anne[/name], or [name]Catherine[/name] also make a lot of sense. Best guess is [name]Eleanor[/name] [name]Diana[/name] [name]Elizabeth[/name] [name]Caroline[/name]; runner up is [name]Charlotte[/name] [name]Frances[/name] [name]Alexandra[/name] [name]Mary[/name].

Boys are interesting- do they stick with one thatā€™s been done- [name]George[/name] VII? [name]Charles[/name] IV? [name]Edward[/name] or [name]Henry[/name] IX? [name]One[/name] with a much more major numbering issue (never mind sticky historical connotations) - [name]James[/name] III/VIII? [name]Stephen[/name], [name]John[/name], and [name]Richard[/name] seem unlikely because of the popular perception of the last monarchs with those names. I think [name]George[/name] and [name]Edward[/name] are the best bets from the basic list of already-done English kings, but a seventh or ninth is more than a little dull to contemplate (granted the ā€˜ninthā€™ part is unprecedented for the Commonwealth crown).

If they do decide to go out on a limb and pick a ā€˜newā€™ name, clearly it would have to be a family name and/or one with deep, deep British roots. [name]Arthur[/name], [name]Philip[/name], [name]Michael[/name], [name]Alexander[/name], [name]Frederick[/name], [name]Albert[/name], and [name]David[/name] are the obvious ā€˜familyā€™ names. [name]Arthur[/name] is just wayyy too much to put on a person who will be [name]King[/name] of [name]England[/name]. [name]David[/name], [name]Louis[/name]/[name]Lewis[/name], and [name]Alexander[/name] are eliminated for reasons similar to [name]Arthur[/name]; [name]Michael[/name] and [name]Philip[/name] are sensible middle names, but somehow I cannot imagine them as the first name of a child born to that couple; [name]Frederick[/name] and [name]Albert[/name] I think are a bit too [name]German[/name]/Prussian, especially when you start sticking ā€˜[name]Prince[/name]ā€™ and ā€˜[name]King[/name]ā€™ in front of them-- though [name]Albert[/name] is the best of the lot. There are a couple of very old names that I think could potentially work for a late 21st-century British king- [name]Edmund[/name] and perhaps [name]Alfred[/name]. There are a handful of pre-1066 [name]Edmunds[/name], but long enough ago that they are arguably more myth than history, if known at all, for most. The more immediate association of course is the [name]Edmund[/name] who is a ā€˜kingā€™ of [name]Narnia[/name]ā€“which, I think, works. [name]Edmund[/name] is certainly the most interesting of the four children, and modern [name]Britain[/name] certainly takes pride in its literary tradition (hello, Olympic opening and closing ceremoniesā€¦). [name]King[/name] [name]Alfred[/name] is of course the (semi-legendary, the Victorians had a bit of a love affair with him) king of the Anglo-Saxons who is mostly credited with establishing education as the basis for a successful kingdom/economy, among other things. There are worse precedents, anyways :slight_smile:

Best guess hereā€¦going out on a limb with [name]Edmund[/name] [name]Arthur[/name] [name]Philip[/name] [name]Michael[/name]; runner-up safe bet would be [name]George[/name] [name]Alexander[/name] [name]William[/name] [name]James[/name].

I predict [name]Alexandra[/name] or [name]Elizabeth[/name] for a girl and [name]George[/name] or [name]Arthur[/name] for a boy.

If a firstborn girl was to be named [name]Mary[/name] (and should she become [name]Queen[/name] one day), sheā€™d be [name]Queen[/name] [name]Mary[/name] III. Besides, Her [name]Majesty[/name]'s grandmother was [name]Mary[/name] of Teck, wife of [name]King[/name] [name]George[/name] V.

Oh Iā€™d love it if they used [name]Diana[/name] as the first name! Iā€™m certain itā€™ll be used as a middle at least though.

Though [name]Diana[/name] seems like an obvious choice for a seconday name for a girl, I do hope they use [name]Frances[/name]/[name]Francis[/name] instead and that way they could honour [name]Diana[/name] with a boys name too. [name]Frances[/name] was [name]Diana[/name]'s middle name and [name]Francis[/name] is [name]Michael[/name] Middletonā€™s middle name. The name [name]Francis[/name] also have relations on the royal side of the family, Her [name]Majesty[/name]'s great-grandfather was [name]Francis[/name], the [name]Duke[/name] of Teck.

[name]Diana[/name] will probably be a middle if itā€™s a girl. Itā€™s not royal enough, and the english are pretty traditional. [name]Victoria[/name] or [name]George[/name] maybe.

I think theyā€™ll stay away from the names of the other royal heirs to the throne: so no [name]Eleanor[/name] ([name]Lenore[/name] in Spain), [name]Amelia[/name] (catharine- [name]Amalia[/name] in Netherlands), [name]Elizabeth[/name] (belgian princess), [name]Alexandra[/name] ([name]Ingrid[/name] [name]Alexandra[/name] in Norway), or [name]Estelle[/name] (sweden).

The feminist in me want a girl, but poor little [name]Prince[/name] [name]Christian[/name] will be quite lonely with all these girls around. Or lucky?

Iā€™m liking [name]George[/name] or [name]Mary[/name].

Iā€™d like it to be a girl but, due to her extreme morning sickness and my own pregnancy experience, I suspect sheā€™s having a boy!!

I imagine they will go with [name]George[/name] or [name]Frances[/name] for a boy - Iā€™m not sure about for a girl, possibly something old fashioned but ā€œunexpectedā€ to the Royals - similar to [name]Fergie[/name]'s choices with [name]Beatrice[/name] & [name]Eugenie[/name] - I think [name]Diana[/name] or [name]Frances[/name] will definitely be in there somewhere though.

@[name]Ottilie[/name] - drat, I forgot about [name]Lenore[/name] in Spain. Humbug. The notion of a 21st-century [name]Queen[/name] [name]Eleanor[/name] has been delighting me all day :slight_smile: Iā€™ll have to switch my bet to [name]Charlotte[/name] or [name]Caroline[/name]. [name]Victoria[/name] doesnā€™t seem all that likely to me, though it seems to be a top bet everywhere; wishful thinking on my part?