The mother of all posts on Prince George - Macleans.ca
 

The mother of all posts on Prince George

Everything you need to know about the royal baby


 

As soon as Prince George entered the world at 4:24 p.m. on July 22, Maclean’s jumped into action. We offer comprehensive coverage of the royal birth, including a breakdown of notable numbers, a letter to the duchess of Cambridge, a look back at the duke of Cambridge’s own birth in 1982, and a view from our editors.

Click the photos for the stories.

COLOUR COMMENTARY ON THE ROYAL REVEAL
In which we imagine what might have transpired during the debut of a future queen
INFOGRAPHIC: THE ROYAL BABY
Key numbers on the future king, including total cannon shots fired after his birth
KATE VANQUISHES ‘BABY BUMP’ POLICE
Attention Twitterverse: This is what a healthy post-partum body looks like
THE ROYAL BABY: WHAT’S IN A NAME?
Why the royal couple picked the names George Alexander Louis for their son
THE ROYAL REVEAL, THEN AND NOW
How the first glimpse of Prince George compares to the introduction of Prince William, three decades earlier
DEAR KATE…
Leah McLaren offers some motherly advice from someone who’s been there. Sort of.
PHOTOS: CELEBRATING THE ROYAL BABY
From Canada to Japan, royal fans around the globe welcome a baby boy
EDITORIAL: LONG TO REIGN OVER US
The birth of Prince George means stability and security in the Commonwealth

 
Filed under:

The mother of all posts on Prince George

  1. Remarkable feat of journaism to create almost a fjull issue of MacLeans on the royal Birth and have it in our mailbox by Thursday this past week, just three days after the bhirth. Congratulations!

    • “fyull”

      and

      “bhirth”?

      I reckon you’d’ve said an article on Björk was bjuck!

      Nyuck, nyuck!

  2. in 2009 McLean’s posted a great article on how the Queen costs us more than the Brits pay. http://www2.macleans.ca/2009/07/14/queen-costs-us-more-than-the-brits-pay/ And now they give us 33 pages on the birth of a baby who has now already done everything he needed to do to become king: being born. In their editorial McLean’s finish with a” god save the Queen, and all the kings to come!” Are they serious? in 2013? When will we wake up to the fact that monarchy is an outdated medieval institution that needs to end? The same people who complain about welfare abuse don’t realize that the royal family is the worst welfare family on the planet.

    • “………the fact that monarchy is an outdated medieval institution……”

      You are so wrong that compared to you the concept of wrongness itself embodies a certain aura of correctitude. The institution of monarchy pre-dates the medieval period by a whole bunch! I am assuming you refer to the European Medieval period.
      If, conversely, you are referring to the medieval period of the “Later Stone Age” or “Upper Palaeolithic” – roughly coinciding with the appearance of behavioural modernity but before the advent of agriculture – then please ignore me.

      “…….the royal family is the worst welfare family on the planet…..”

      Though I loves me some hyperbolic rhetoric as much as the next girl, this is just too much. Besides, every school-girl knows that the worst welfare family on the planet is Madonna and her current bevy of narcissist enablers..

      • The very idea of royalty in this day an age is ridiculous. They produce nothing, do nothing, and get their fortune from tax dollars… hence they are just like welfare people. They get privilege from the simple fact of being born… does that seem normal to you? today? and as for your condescending history lesson, as I was aware of the beginning of “tribal governments” and the need back then for a king as they could not come up with nothing better but we should have evolved since then… I did refer to medieval time as it also refer to a period of darkness “La grande noirceur” and to me the fact that royalty still exist is an insult to the enlightenment that followed (and before you get there, I know, there were kings then too…) What I’m getting at is simple and even you should be able to understand: this is the year 2013, and being a fan of the royal family is no better than being a fan of the Kardashians. People who are famous for the sake of being famous and who do nothing for anyone. The media circus around the royal baby brought the word ridiculous to a new low. It’s about time we got rid of our ties to england and the royal familly. with the few millions we will save every year, I’m sure we could put that towards… ho… I don’t know, making sure every first nation reserve get drinking water? Their babies may not be royal, but they deserve as much.

  3. I’m a great admirer of the Royal Family. Everyone gets their money’s worth from them with their gracious public duties and giving up their privacy. I wouldn’t want to change places with them for one minute.

  4. What in hell is the problem with you, overkilling a story about a baby being born in the brittish monarchy. Do you not know that the majority of Canadians do not approve that our head of state is not a Canadian. Shame on you. We need a referendum , so we can reject the monarchy