Christina Hollis—Royal Baby Fever!

False alarm—this is Prince George
Pic by Christopher Neve/Jaqen via Wikimedia

As I write this, devoted royalists are getting ready to welcome the arrival of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge's second child—a little brother or sister for Prince George. Nobody except the Royal Household knows the due date, but it's expected to be in the second half of this month. Babies don't take much notice of predictions, anyway. 

There are already two important dates in the Royal Family's diary for April. It's Queen Elizabeth's real birthday on April 21st, as opposed to her Official birthday. That's held on a Saturday in June. This is England, after all—there's a better chance of good weather for the Sovereign's birthday parade if it's held in what we call "summer".

William and Kate's fourth wedding anniversary falls on the 29th April. Like the rest of us, they'll be wondering where the time went. If they've got any sense, they'll have a quiet celebration alone together, before the new baby arrives. Royal parents may be able to avoid some of the walls we poor commoners run up against such as sleepless nights, but as Prince William said; "The first baby is a life changer. The second baby is a game changer."

At least this royal addition won't be pushed straight onto the throne of England, unlike King Henry VI. Son of the "Once more unto the breach..." warrior made famous by Shakespeare, Prince Hal II lost his father when he was only nine months old and too small to be left alone with a cat, much less a kingdom. Henry VI's life, along with his kingdom, was run first by regents—and then later by his wife (according to staunch supporters of the House of York).

James Francis Edward Stuart, also known as "The Old Pretender" or "The King Over The Water" was another royal baby famous for all the wrong reasons. His mother, Mary of Modena, must have had a very traumatic labour. Depending on who you believe, her child was either a) stillborn and replaced with a healthy baby boy smuggled into the lying-in room inside a warming-pan, or b) produced under the full glare of publicity, to the cheers and leers of seventy eye witnesses. Whatever his beginnings, the child ended up disappointed. He was son of King James II of England and Ireland (King James VII of Scotland), who was later deposed. 

Find out more at http://bit.ly/1GQPIIq

Whether the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge's child is a boy or a girl, while they'll have all the disadvantages of growing up in the media spotlight, they'll also have many enormous advantages. The most useful (apart from the obvious) is a father who grew up in the same public goldfish bowl, and knows all the pitfalls. The Royal Family also has a huge, international army of enthusiastic fans. I used to work with a woman who not only sent hand-knitted baby clothes to Buckingham Palace for every new arrival, she baked and posted celebration cakes to them, too!

I'm guessing Baby Cambridge will be a girl, especially as there's a rumour the duchess has been spotted carrying a tin of pink paint. For all we know, she's renovating the royal chicken coop, but it's harmless fun. 

If the gloss-watchers are right, I like the sound of "Sophie Victoria Elizabeth". How about a game of guess the Royal Baby's name? For the chance to win a copy of my latest contemporary romance, Her Royal Risk, leave your suggestion as a comment below. During the weekend of 18th-19th April I'll pick one name at random—that way it can't be influenced by William and Catherine's eventual decision!

There are no babies in my April release for The Wild Rose Press, Her Royal Risk, but there is plenty of sexual chemistry, conflict, and one of those electrifying moments when somebody bursts into church and shouts "Stop!" 

You can find out more here, and keep in touch with all my works in progress by visiting my author page on Facebook and clicking "like", or following me on Twitter.