agree, bedknobs - and MM's attitude is life must go on - she looked positively radiant on her ship......the interview with the Duck and Duckess of Wessex in the DT magazine yesterday confirmed this as being her want.
To give the child that first name is crass and insensitive imho. G and C have been trashing the Royal Family for quite a while now with no thoughts to the privileges they were given so I suppose we can only expect them to show such a lack of good taste.
Well, probably for the same reason the Duke of Sussex is called Harry when his birth name is Henry. Family preference. Many kids have abbreviated names, or nicknames.
Naomi - I wouldn't have criticised them for that - but I do criticise them for the hypocrites they've proven themselves to be.
And what's hypocritical about naming your child after your grandparent. My son carries his great-grandfather's name as a middle name. (Nothing as extravagant as Lilibet though, just a plain and simple Robert). The Sussexes claimed to have a good relationship with Her Maj, so it seems a fitting tribute. I'm sure she is thrilled for some good news after the last few months she's had.
Sheis named after her great-grandmother and grandmother. I think plain Elizabeth would have been more fitting and regal than the incredibly twee 'Lilibet'.
I tend to agree JD, but if it's what the Queen's family and close friends have called her for the past 90 years, I can understand it. It is possible the Sussexes spoke to Her Maj about it beforehand (or maybe even Phil when he was still around) to discuss their plan and Lilibet was the preferred option.
Anyway, when push comes to shove it's their choice. Archie isn't exactly a regal name either!