The Birth of HRH Prince George of Cambridge: July 22, 2013

[Ish]

Think of all the confusion there must have been in the Royal Family back in the 1860s, 70s, 80s, 90 s and early 1900s with all of the Victoria's, Alberts, Edwards, Louise's, Beatrice's, Alice's, Alfred's, Leopold's, Alexandria's, etc.

A lot of them went by middle names or other nicknames.

I read a novel once about Victoria during the reign of William IV and it has her thinking of her two Cousin Georges as George Cambridge and George Cumberland.

 

[QueenMathilde]

You know - someone at the DM said something along the lines of hearing a rumor that Charles wanted to be "King George" when he became king. I thought I'd read the same thing and I thought I'd read it - where else? - in the DM. Had anyone else heard this?

 

[COESpiral]

It's the Daily Mail. Always take anything referenced by the Daily Mail with a boulder-sized grain of salt.

 

[HRHHermione]

You know - someone at the DM said something along the lines of hearing a rumor that Charles wanted to be "King George" when he became king. I thought I'd read the same thing and I thought I'd read it - where else? - in the DM. Had anyone else heard this?

According to Richard Palmer, Clarence House has categorically denied that Charles intends to reign as George, so I think we can consider that a false rumor.

His source: http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2005/dec/27/monarchy.michaelwhite

 

[Ish]

You know - someone at the DM said something along the lines of hearing a rumor that Charles wanted to be "King George" when he became king. I thought I'd read the same thing and I thought I'd read it - where else? - in the DM. Had anyone else heard this?

The idea is based on this one article that was released years ago. While it's never been confirmed by Charles in any way, it's been repeated a lot.

The idea is basically that the Queen made a mistake in naming him Charles and so he'll one day rectify it. Which... You know... A little ridiculous.

I think given as he's a 60+ year old man who's not always known for toeing the line and doing what his mother may want, if he had a problem with his name and wanted to be remembered in history as George he would have changed his name by now.

 

[QueenMathilde]

According to Richard Palmer, Clarence House has categorically denied that Charles intends to reign as George, so I think we can consider that a false rumor.

His source: Charles denies planning to reign as King George | UK news | The Guardian

I didn't think they'd pick the name if Charles was going to use it. So Charles is just going to be "King Charles the whatever". I didn't see a reason for him to change his name in the first place.

 

[Ish]

I didn't think they'd pick the name if Charles was going to use it. So Charles is just going to be "King Charles the whatever". I didn't see a reason for him to change his name in the first place.

The third.

Charles will be the third, William the fifth, and George the seventh.

 

[EllieCat]

It's also a name that wasn't in use, which is nice. Baby George doesn't have to share with anyone.

There's George, Earl of St Andrews. Whose second name is Philip, incidentally. But i doubt the two Georges will have all that much to do with each other.

 

[wbenson]

There's George, Earl of St Andrews. Whose second name is Philip, incidentally. But i doubt the two Georges will have all that much to do with each other.

Yes, the Kents and Gloucesters are all quite distant relatives to Prince George. Their common ancestors are little George's great-great-great-grandparents.

 

[QueenMathilde]

This is the last one of these I'm going to post, promise. But the little kids I work with would love this. I am tempted to order it for them.

HappyLand Royal Baby Set : HappyLand Royal Baby Set : Early Learning Centre UK Toy Shop

 

[monarchist-us]

The idea is based on this one article that was released years ago. While it's never been confirmed by Charles in any way, it's been repeated a lot.

The idea is basically that the Queen made a mistake in naming him Charles and so he'll one day rectify it. Which... You know... A little ridiculous.

I think given as he's a 60+ year old man who's not always known for toeing the line and doing what his mother may want, if he had a problem with his name and wanted to be remembered in history as George he would have changed his name by now.

Great summary, IMO.

The Charles-as-George (or George-as-Something-Else) possibility is probably a bored DM looking for clickbait.

Yeah, Prince Charles can reign as "King George VII"....or "King Edward IX"....or "King Arthur"....or "King Chumbawumba" if he so chooses. But that doesn't mean that he will. Like you said, he's used the name Charles for 64+ years. If he wanted to be known as something else, he would have decided that a long time ago.

 

[Polly]

The Prince of Wales has mentioned to many people, on many occasions, in many settings in many countries, that he will be known as King George when he is crowned. He doesn't fancy being Charles III because Charles I was beheaded and he thinks that it's unlucky! This being so, I can't blame him, though I really prefer the name 'Charles'.

 

[Lumutqueen]

So much for Louis being too French eh guys?

Lovely name for a very handsome boy!

 

[HRHHermione]

The Prince of Wales has mentioned to many people, on many occasions, in many settings in many countries, that he will be known as King George when he is crowned. He doesn't fancy being Charles III because Charles I was beheaded and he thinks that it's unlucky! This being so, I can't blame him, though I really prefer the name 'Charles'.

No he hasn't. That rumor is based on one article that was written several years ago and that Clarence House denied.

 

[Mariel]

Anyway, Charles is well past the beheading age of his ancestors. He will die of something else, one surmises, at some point. He is not worried about losing his head.

 

[monarchist-us]

No he hasn't. That rumor is based on one article that was written several years ago and that Clarence House denied.

Amazing how much leg a rumor based on one barely-sourced article can get, isn't it?

 

[Ish]

The Prince of Wales has mentioned to many people, on many occasions, in many settings in many countries, that he will be known as King George when he is crowned. He doesn't fancy being Charles III because Charles I was beheaded and he thinks that it's unlucky! This being so, I can't blame him, though I really prefer the name 'Charles'.

Do you have a source for that? Like one where there's a direct quote of someone identified saying as much?

The only sources I've ever read said that Clarence House denies that there is a plan and that the regnal name will be announced when the time comes.

http://m.guardian.co.uk/uk/2005/dec/27/monarchy.michaelwhite

According to a article released today, CH has said that Charles has no intention of ruling as George, although it doesn't seem to have any citation and I can't find a comment from CH on the matter.

http://www.royalcentral.co.uk/blogs/prince-george-king-george-vii-or-viii-12843

 

[Ish]

Amazing how much leg a rumor based on one barely-sourced article can get, isn't it?

Hey, James II lost this throne based on a rumour that his newborn son was a warming pan baby, despite the fact that there were over 70 witnesses to the birth.

 

[cmbruno]

Well, Charles II had a merry life and was really lucky. On the other hand, George III had porphyria and lost 13 colonies ... This is nonsence!

 

[Ish]

Well, Charles II had a merry life and was really lucky. On the other hand, George III had porphyria and lost 13 colonies ... This is nonsence!

There is also the idea that Charles Stuart, aka The Young Pretender or Bonnie Prince Charles, was known by his followers as Charles III. This also comes up with James (the Old Pretender was James III), Henry (the last person to actually claim the Jacobite throne was the Old Pretender's younger son, Henry IX/I), and Francis (the current claimant, Franz of Bavaria would be Francis II).

What people who support that idea seem to fail to realize is that it doesn't matter what Charles' regnal name is - Charles III, George VI, Chewbacca I - the Jacobites won't recognize him.

 

[Iluvbertie]

The first time I heard the Charles as George VII was back in the 60s - my Year 5 teacher discussed it with us and why it was possible. It was relevant then because he had only just left Geelong Grammar to return to the UK after his two terms at school downunder.

It has reemerged many times since in many different papers etc but has never been confirmed as having ever been said by Charles.

 

[Polly]

No he hasn't. That rumor is based on one article that was written several years ago and that Clarence House denied.

I see. Those to whom he's allegedly suggested this while visiting Australia are all wrong then?

He may well change his mind, of course, and I hope that he does, but it's far from being a rumour in the various realms.

More: those whom I know who believe it wouldn't have a clue what the Daily Mail was/is.

 

[Ish]

I see. Those to whom he's allegedly suggested this while visiting Australia are all wrong then?

He may well change his mind, of course, and I hope that he does, but it's far from being a rumour in the various realms.

More: those whom I know who believe it wouldn't have a clue what the Daily Mail was/is.

Polly, do you have a source? With quotes?

 

[britishboy]

Official baby photos

Does anyone know who has got the rights to the first official baby photos, have heard rumours it is OK and when they will take them and publish them.

 

[dazzling]

Does anyone know who has got the rights to the first official baby photos, have heard rumours it is OK and when they will take them and publish them.

I doubt they'll give the rights to one specific magazine like celebrities. The pictures are most likely to be released to everyone the same time.

 

[Osipi]

I see. Those to whom he's allegedly suggested this while visiting Australia are all wrong then?

He may well change his mind, of course, and I hope that he does, but it's far from being a rumour in the various realms.

More: those whom I know who believe it wouldn't have a clue what the Daily Mail was/is.

I wouldn't say that this idea has definitely never crossed Charles' lips but its also not a fact that is known to be written in stone when Charles does become King.

From the past several posts, I've gleaned that the remarks were perhaps said and heard while Charles was at school in Australia. At that age, Charles probably remembered his grandfather George VI very well, knew of the love and admiration the entire family had for him and had watched his own mother become Queen at such a young age. Like Prince William is to have said he'd give his mother back her HRH when he becomes King (which we know most likely will never happen), Charles, as a teenager, probably felt he'd take the name George VII as King in memory of his grandfather.

As the years passed and Charles developed a wonderful role for himself as Prince of Wales, watched his mother reign as Queen for over 61 years now, I would suggest that Charles has found his own identity and will continue to be known as Charles through his own reign.

This is precisely why I am so happy that the wee Prince George of Cambridge wasn't named in honor or after someone already making a mark on the Monarchy, but a name of his own (with historical relevance) to forge the trail ahead with and create his own special unique mark on the world. He sure has a wealth of wonderful individuals to learn from.

 

[figtreecrossing]

It is to my delight that I discovered today, Prince George of Cambridge will become King of England with Jewish ancestry.
Sorry if this has already been posted.
Cranmer: Prince George of Cambridge: is a Jew destined to ascend the Throne?

 

[Jacknch]

The rights to the official photos will surely remain either with the royal family or the photographer (who may well pass the rights on to the royal family). I can think of no conceivable reason why OK! magazine would be granted rights to anything remotely related to royalty (unless said royal was untitled, hard up and about to get married thus needed the money, in which case they ought not be catagorised as royalty at all!)

 

[britishboy]

they royal familyy will own the rights e.g. the copyright and the right to sell them but I was under the impression they sold official ones to one media outlet to publish. The betting sites have had bets for which magazine/paper will get to publish them and I was wondering when they will come out

 

[monarchist-us]

I doubt they'll sell any rights to photographs and if they do, they'll donate the proceeds to charity. Otherwise, that makes them look bad.