Kate Middleton & Prince William Name Son George Alexander Louis

The Royal Baby Emerges!

We have a name! Kate Middleton and Prince William have named their son George Alexander Louis.

Kensington Palace made an official statement on Wednesday (July 24), saying that William and Catherine are now down to the business of getting “to know their son.” His title “will be known as His Royal Highness Prince George of Cambridge.”

Earlier in the day Queen Elizabeth II went to Kensington Palace to see the newborn as well as uncle Harry. CNN reports that the family left the palace after lunch time and are currently in the village of Bucklebury – where Catherine’s parents live.

British bookmakers Ladbrokes had George and James as favorites Wednesday, followed by Alexander, Arthur, Louis and Henry.

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, both 31, welcomed George at St. Mary’s Hospital on Monday in London at 4:24 p.m. He weighed 8 lbs., 6 oz. at the time of his birth.

Filed under: Featured,Kate Middleton,Prince William

Photo credit: FameFlynet

69 Comments »»

Post a Comment

  1. hopper

    Oh my goodness what a great name love George!

    Reply
  2. Annie

    BO-RING. So over them already.

    Reply
  3. Olivia

    His initials are GAL. What they, and the whole world really wanted. A little “gal”.

    Reply
    • Rose

      His initials are not GAL. His initials are GALC or GALW – depending on whether they give the baby the last name Wales or Cambridge.

      Reply
  4. Katie

    @Annie: Please don’t leave a comment if you’re so BO-RED of them… George is a great and strong name.

    Reply
    • NYCMommy

      Katie- I agree. I believe he is named after King George VI , Queen Elizabeth’s father. Its a great name for a king. :)

      Reply
    • Annie

      I don’t really have anything against the name George. I’m just bored and irritated by the whole “future King” thing. We fled monarchy and created a new country so we could be free to elect our leaders. It’s kind of hypocritical that we’re all cooing to the new King of England now.
      The poor baby didn’t ask for anything, and here’s this huge weight on his shoulders already.

      Reply
      • mrs. trumbell

        YOU didn’t flee any such thing. please.

        Reply
      • NYCMommy

        Annie- You do know the Queen or King of England don’t run the country don’t you??? UK has a parliamentary system of government. Queen is just head of state not head of government.

        BTW- Americans have been cooing over British Royalty for years. Definitely not a new thing. :)

        Reply
  5. Poppy

    This is splendid. Though I kind of hoped for Phillip to be one of the names

    Reply
  6. Sophia

    Aww, I was hoping for something a little more original – love the middle names though!

    Reply
  7. Lily

    I was hoping for Spencer. I thought that would have been a nice tribute.

    Reply
    • anon

      King Spencer? Really?

      Maybe George is absolutely their favourite name, but if not, it must be tough to have to take into account anything other than what they like the most.

      George is actually pretty common in the UK now – much more than it used to be.

      Reply
      • anonymous

        It’s not a good thing that it’s more common. And what’s wrong with King Spencer? God forbid they choose anything but the 5 typical ‘king’ names. He’d make a horrible king if he was named Spencer right?? Open your mind….

        Reply
        • anon

          I didn’t mean common in the way I imagine you took it – I meant it is more popular now than it has been. It’s not seen as old and stuffy anymore.

          People should be able to call their kids what they want to, but there was never any chance of Spencer being in there, and the fact that I think King Spencer sounds stupid doesn’t make me close minded. It just means I think it sounds stupid…

          Reply
          • anonymous

            It sounds “stupid” to you because it’s not something you’ve heard before, I bet any name that has not been a well-known Kings name sounds stupid to you, right? That’s the definition of close-minded.

          • anon

            reply to anonymous below – erm, no, it didn’t have to be a traditional name for me to like it – and for the record, I’m not wild about George. I don’t see why the fact that I don’t like Spencer as a name means I’m closeminded. I just don’t like it. Doesn’t mean I wouldn’t like a different name that wasn’t one of the ones the Royals tend to pick.

          • anonymous

            You didn’t say you didn’t like it as a name, and I didn’t say that would make you close minded. You implied that Spencer was not fit for kings name, am I wrong about that? erm.

    • laura

      Yeah, but I guess that for a royal there’s only much you can choose within. They probably had just 5-6 names to choose within!

      Reply
    • SiervaMaria

      I was hoping for Prince Ali Wong Rodriguez OR, Attila Sharif Tyrone da Shawn Jung Lowenstein but I’m George Alexander Louis’ got a nice ring to it. I like it!

      Reply
  8. klutzy_girl

    Meh. I was hoping for James or Arthur (which grew on me when people kept suggesting it). And then I got my hopes up for Spencer as a middle name too, but that’s okay.

    I do love Alexander, though. Wonder if they’re going to call him Alex or any variation of it.

    Reply
  9. nosoupforyou

    Ugh. George is a horrible name as are the appalling hats the royal women wear.

    Better names: Alexander.. Spencer.. Michael.. David.. Robert.. Stephen.. John.. Philip.

    Reply
    • AvaElizabeth

      King Stephen?
      King Spencer?
      King Robert?

      I don’t know..

      Reply
      • Jen

        Lol my thoughts exactly! You want the kings name to elicit strength and present a traditional image of a king, and those, well, they’re great names, but not for royalty.

        Reply
      • Anonymous

        It must be horrible to live that way, to be so narrow-minded.

        Just because you’ve never heard of a King Stephen or King Spencer doesn’t meant there is anything wrong with it, it just means you haven’t heard it.

        Reply
  10. anon

    It was never going to be James – that’s her brother – and Spencer is not traditional enough for a Christian name. This is the British royal family after all – it was never going to be anything less than standard (for the royals). Might be disappointing to many, but there it is.

    Glad they look so happy – can’t imagine it was what they wanted to do, to bring him out in front of all of those cameras, the noise, and the flashes.

    Reply
  11. SMH

    My guess was George or Alexander but Spencer would have been nice but its not traditional enough for them.

    Next up a girl named Diana ;-)

    Reply
  12. Anonymous

    Quite a disappointing name. James or Alexander would have sounded far more modern (for a couple that strives to be representative of a modern monarchy). Wish they had thrown a Spencer in there – there was certainly room for it.

    Reply
  13. Bink

    George will be the new Jayden! Lol

    Reply
  14. Clara

    The Queens late father, King George VI, was such a wonderful man who had such a heavy load put upon his shoulders due to his brothers abdication.
    The name chosen for the new Prince is therefore a fitting tribute to man who saved the monarchy and dedicated is life to the country the then Empire and family.

    Reply
    • bertie

      George VI was originally called Albert (“Bertie”), and just changed his name when he became king and Albert was considered too German at the time.

      I was secretly hoping for Albert. Prince Albert appears to have been a lovely man, as was George VI (“Bertie”). And Britain should be beyond the “sounds too German”-issue by now, especially considering all the King Georges were actually very German too ;)

      Reply
  15. laura

    People, even though Spencer would have been nice, or Diana for a girl, there’s no way they could or would have chosen it! They can’t choose a modern name, they have to choose within names that already belong to the dynasty…
    Monarchy is too traditional to expect something so out of the border! And they’re already being modern in many ways!

    Reply
    • Tess

      Is it really a rule, that they have to pick from the names that already belong to the dynasty? Or are you just saying they ‘have’ to because everyone else has and different is bad?
      It all seems pretty silly to me….

      Reply
  16. your mom

    Traditions are stupid!

    Reply
  17. Anonymous

    Very traditional as expected for the royal family. It’s a nice name overall but I’m just not a huge fan of Louis…would have liked to see Spencer or Henry instead.

    Reply
  18. Gemi

    So, can we call him Boy George?

    Reply
  19. kellsbells

    For those remarks talking about a tribute to the Spencers – as far as names go, there would never have been a ‘nod’ given to the Spencer side of William’s family.
    The name Diana may have be choosen as a second or third name had the baby been a girl but certainly Diana would not have been a first name.
    The Royals have been around a while, they know what they are doing when it comes to naming future Kings and Queens. For example ‘Edward’ would not have even made the name list because of the 1936 abdication of Edward VIII.

    I think George is a little too popular here in England, I would have liked to have seen Alexander or James but that’s my choice not theirs. The media will no doubt be calling him Georgie or Georgie-boy before he starts toddling. And I will cringe :(
    Anyway, at least he’s not named Charles/nn Charlie.

    A lovely young family though :) Huge congratulations!

    Reply
    • Marie

      That’s funny. James and Alexander are FAR more popular in the states. George, while a traditional name, is far less common. All are still great names though. :)

      Reply
  20. Elektra

    Love his name and no doubt he will carry out his duties much like his father and beloved late grandmother. Congrats to the royal family and God’s blessings on them always.

    Reply
  21. Lovely name! Very traditional and strong! Congrats to them again!

    Reply
  22. Sookie

    I like his name. There is nothing wrong with giving your baby a traditional name.

    Reply
    • Lily

      I totally agree with traditional names. I have a Dorothy, Olivia, Lucy. But I guess I was hoping for something a little less formal. I really wonder if she even had a say or if the Queen said “His name will be George” and they said “OK”.

      Reply
  23. Brian

    I was hoping for a different christian name: Alexander, Thomas, Christian, Christopher, Michael…I would even take Winston. They always use the same 3 or 4 names in the monarchy.

    George is on par with the name Leonard, Lance or Bernard in the States. You get beat up on the play ground with the name George…. Actually, Henry is also a bad name here too but Harry (Harry’s really name) is a cool guy so maybe it doesn’t matter.

    Reply
  24. Alexandra

    Sounds like a crusty old man name, I couldn’t imagine looking at a cute little baby and calling him ‘George’……Atleast it’s after his great-grandfather.

    Reply
  25. Monica

    What will his last name be?

    Reply
    • clair

      The Royal family rarely have to use surnames because they have other titles but when it is needed for example when they get married their name is ‘Mountbatten-Windsor’.

      Reply
  26. anon

    You never know, they might call him Alex in private, but George for official stuff – Harry, after all, is officially Henry, and King George VI was Bertie…

    As for those disliking Louis, this is a name that means a lot to the Windsors, especially to Prince Phillip and to Prince Charles (Phillip’s uncle, Charles’ godfather). There are generally pretty sound reasons why they pick the names they pick.

    Reply
  27. Hugh Jorgen

    Pity they didn’t name him Adolph Oliver Bush…

    Reply
  28. jenbaby

    the last name of the royals is WINDSOR, not Wales or Cambridge or even, Mountbatten-Windsor….just Windsor!

    Reply

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>