The name says it all, is an old cliché.
In the case of the five-day-old Lilibet Diana Mountbatten-Windsor, the name says a lot, but it also raises many questions.
It begins with the tension between the opposing characteristics associated with the two women after whom the Duke and Duchess of Sussex named their second child.
Gina Thomas
Features correspondent based in London.
Follow I follow
The great-grandmother of the newborns stands for a sense of duty, restraint and a stiff upper lip, the grandmother Diana for feeling and the endeavor to free herself from the shackles of the institution that she felt wanted to clip her wings.
Now over the cradle of the little girl, who takes eighth place in the line of succession, a dispute has sparked over the question of whether Prince Harry and Meghan would have presumed to do something as intimate as the daughter's private nickname To bestow queen without consulting the namesake.
Not for kids
The BBC claims to have found out directly from the palace that the monarch had not been asked. According to the royal reporter, the "good source" insisted on this version. Prince Harry and Meghan fired back from California that the duke had called his grandmother as the first in the family before the official birth announcement. He told her that he and his wife hoped to name their daughter Lilibet in honor of the queen. "If they hadn't supported this, they wouldn't have used the name."
Through their lawyers, Harry and Meghan told the media that the BBC contribution was "false and defamatory". The assertions contained therein should not be repeated. Omid Scobie, a journalist and author of a recent book on the Sussexes widely regarded as the mouthpiece of the couple, suggested in a tweet that the BBC report may show how far the staff inside the palace may be at the same time as the rest the world had learned of birth, was removed from the personal affairs of the Sussexes.
Some interpret the naming as an attempt at overtaking after the dispute that caused the couple to move to America and from there drop "truth bombs" on the media. Skeptics see it as the shameless cannibalization of the Windsor brand, for which the children's book "The Bench", published by Meghan Markle on Monday, three days after the birth of Lilibet Diana, is an indication.
The Duchess of Sussex announced with American lard in the dedication that she had written the illustrated story for the man and boy who made their hearts beat. British critics were unimpressed by this. Prince Harry had traveled halfway around the world, leaving behind everything he was familiar with, and for what? A humble bank he could call his own, the Daily Telegraph scoffed, asking if Meghan and the publisher "who thought it appropriate to publish this grammar-defying series of pseudo-sermons" were all fooling them.
Apparently, said the reviewer, but that's the planet Sussex: Everything revolves around the brand, including raising the family. The story is not suitable for children, but is a self-help book for parents in need. In the last illustration, a bearded, red-haired father is sitting on a bench and feeding chickens with his young son. Behind it is a woman in a garden who is carrying her baby. The mother has turned her back on father and son. How is that to be interpreted?