Monday, July 22, 2013

Royal Baby update

You can follow who is coming and in out (no one we know at present) at the Lindo Wing.

10:54 am.  (3:54 p.m.)   No news yet.   The Duchess of Cambridge's labor is "proceeding normally."


Michelle said...

this link has two pieces of information that i wonder about. first it claims that a royal baby usually has three names, which is typically not true for those who are expected to take the throne. (the queen being an obvious exception, but she wasn't expected to reign at the time of her birth.) also, it says that the queen must approve of the name(s) before they are official. is that true?

Marlene Eilers Koenig said...

The Queen can veto. George V vetoed the duke and duchess of York's first choice for their second daughter. They wanted Ann but George V didn't like it, so Ann became Margaret Rose.

The Hannovers brought in the extra royal names, didn't exist before this in England. Elizabeth's children have four names. So does Charles and Edward's kids. The York princesses have three names. Edward VIII had 7 names The Kent kids have a number of names. Edward VII had 2 names, his siblings had at least 3. There is no rule

Michelle said...

wow, i didn't know that about Princess Margaret! i do remember hearing about King George IV (as Regent) preventing Queen Victoria's parents giving her the names of their choosing, but i didn't know it happened in more recent times. and to think that George V did it simply because he didn't LIKE the name! it's one thing to prevent a rebel royal from using a ridiculous name not seen as fitting for a royal, but really! i can't see the current Queen doing that though.