Huffpost Style

Royal Baby's Birth Certificate Officially Signed By Prince William (PHOTOS)

Posted: Updated:

There were newspaper covers, collectors editions of magazines, commemorative coins and more memorabilia than anyone in England could buy. But as it turns out, the royal baby still needed a traditional birth certificate to mark the occasion.

Rebecca English of the Daily Mail reports that Prince William formally "registered" his son, Prince George, at Kensington Palace in front of a Registrar from Westminster Register Office on Friday morning.

Only Will signed the registry, not Kate, as it requires only one parent's signature (and he signed it "William" -- how informal). But the certificate form is filled with lots of fun details about the whole family. Here are our favorites, as revealed by the BBC's Peter Hunt:

  • Where it asked Prince William to list his job, he wrote "Prince of the United Kingdom."
  • For Kate's job, William listed "Princess of the United Kingdom." Note: In 1982, there was no place for Diana to list her occupation.
  • In addition to being the Duchess of Cambridge, Kate is also Princess William of Wales.
  • Georgie's name is officially H.R.H. Prince George Alexander Louis of Cambridge (no, not Baby-G as we had hoped).

OK, it's official: There is no cooler job than "Princess of the United Kingdom." We've never been more jealous. See the actual certificate -- and William's handwriting! -- in the photos below.

Man of the hour:

William and Kate announce their new son
Share this
Current Slide

Want more? Be sure to check out HuffPost Style on Twitter, Facebook, Tumblr, Pinterest and Instagram at @HuffPostStyle.

Around the Web

Parents' joy as their "princess" is born on same day as royal baby

Royal baby prince named George

A party fit for a newborn Prince

Royal baby footman returns to India after visa reportedly expires

Prince George: what Cameron, Clegg and Miliband gave the Royal baby

Royal baby news: BBC presenter Kate Humble frustrated that young people are ...

How to paint a royal baby: why we need a new kind of portrait this time