The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #41  
Old 02-14-2012, 02:50 AM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Top End, Australia
Posts: 321
But times move on. What was not appropriate in 1936 ie divorce, is accepted now.

Like both Georges, Charles now has a loving and supportive consort who works quietly in the background for her causes.

Personally I think it's sad that people still seek to define him solely by his failed marriage (which failed for two people not just one). He has done much good, particularly through the Princes Trust. He has also proved to be a good and loving father.

I'm sure both Georges would find much to admire in the present Prince of Wales.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #42  
Old 02-14-2012, 04:44 AM
HRHHermione's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Boston, United States
Posts: 2,015

Agreed completely
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #43  
Old 02-14-2012, 04:44 AM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,334
Another attempt to yet again bring up the past. I don't know if there is any subject more in need of people getting over it than this one. How about we make some more "who the heck cares" comparisons:
George VI named himself after a father who bullied and traumatized him in childhood.
George V and VI share there name with George III who went crazy, and George IV who was estranged from his wife for decades. I wonder if they were appaled by such behavior.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #44  
Old 02-14-2012, 05:53 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 1,804
I don't think he will chose George out of respect of his father. George is the name connected with the House of Windsor and I don't think Philip would want his son to publicily declare that he is not the son and heir of Philip Mountbatten but that of Elizabeth Windsor - which is a fact, of course, especially when it comes to Charles' kingdom, but not one that needs to be declared in such a forthcoming manner.

Naming their firstborn Charles shows me that the Mountbatten-Windsors have not had any problems with the fact that there already was a Jacobite Charles III.

It can be discussed if after the House of Stuart became extinct in the male-line in 1807 The Hanovers who were de facto kings of the Uk became the kings de jure as well as surely the next of kin heirs of the Stuarts (regardless of their religion) derived from the marriage of a princess (Henrietta Ann Stuart) who had signed away her inheritance rights on marrying to a French prince. In a case like that it would have needed a Royal act (and later an act of parliament) to reinstall them into the line pf succession which of course didn't happen, so that the Act of Settlement became the only valid Act to deal with the succession and it favoured the line which today sees Charles Mountbatten-Windsor as the heir.

But obviously for the queen and her husband, then Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh it was not a question - as they chose to name their son Charles, they accepted the defacto inheritance as the de jure one and thus for the Windsors Charles will be Charles III as Bonnie Prince Charlie never de facto was Charles III.

So I guess Charles will be Charles III.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #45  
Old 02-14-2012, 05:04 PM
Russophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Portland, United States
Posts: 4,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kataryn View Post

So I guess Charles will be Charles III.
Half the population of the US doesn't know who Charles 1 & 2 are anyway. I find Charles just fine, thankyouverymuch!
__________________
"Not MGM, not the press, not anyone can tell me what to do."--Ava Gardner
Reply With Quote
  #46  
Old 02-14-2012, 05:54 PM
KittyAtlanta's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: KittyLand Junction, United States
Posts: 2,815
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyger View Post
'George' is a - oh, lets just say its an old timey name. Not a favorite of mine. Stuffy.
Let's see; "modern" names for a king of England. King DeShawn? King Jared? King Keanu?

Uh...
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #47  
Old 02-14-2012, 06:00 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,261
Quote:
Originally Posted by KittyAtlanta View Post
Let's see; "modern" names for a king of England. King DeShawn? King Jared? King Keanu?

Uh...
LOL....thanks for that. Blue Ivy seems a gender neutral name that is very current, although it does sound like something you should go to a doctor to get cured.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #48  
Old 02-14-2012, 06:36 PM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,352
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
...How about we make some more "who the heck cares" comparisons:
George VI named himself after a father who bullied and traumatized him in childhood.
George V and VI share their name with George III who went crazy, and George IV who was estranged from his wife for decades. I wonder if they were appalled by such behavior.
Not forgetting George I who had his wife imprisoned in a German castle for 30 years until she died;
and George II, who wrote after the death of his son, Frederick Prince of Wales, "I am glad of it."
__________________
Seeking information? Check out the extensive Royal A-Z
Reply With Quote
  #49  
Old 02-14-2012, 10:18 PM
scooter's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: katonah, United States
Posts: 2,310
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyger View Post
'George' is a - oh, lets just say its an old timey name. Not a favorite of mine. Stuffy.
Well...Charles, Phillip, Arthur and George are pretty much all old timey names, no?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #50  
Old 02-15-2012, 02:34 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Los Angeles CA, United States
Posts: 1,075
I am reminded of the line in 'It's A Wonderful Life' when Donna Reed says to James Stewart in the heat of passion - 'Oh George, George, George - ' Nope - just doesn't work. Good film - but 'George'? No.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #51  
Old 02-15-2012, 02:38 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 1,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russophile View Post
Half the population of the US doesn't know who Charles 1 & 2 are anyway. I find Charles just fine, thankyouverymuch!
Dearest Russophile, as there is no majority in a vote (and by the US-citizens, no less ) needed but the decision is simply Charles' and his alone, it's interesting to see how the BRF deals with the past. I bet Charles knows exactly who Charles I. and II were and that they are not his ancestors! Well, maybe they are via a female line...

I personally prefer Charles, too.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 02-15-2012, 04:25 AM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,334
It has long been said that Charles is going with George VII. Is that rumor or fact? I highly doubt he will be Charles III because of the association with Charles I, but it's not like he will reign for long. Either name he chooses is boring and old, that's the BRF for you. I'm still pissed Edward VIII didn't choose to be King David, that would have been great.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 02-15-2012, 06:53 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,983
I wish you luck in moving beyond the abdication crisis of 1936.

As for Charles, to be known by anything other than his given name is beyond rediculous. Theres never been any association between the names George and Charles where the public is concerned. It's not even his second given name.

PR wise, I don't believe it would do him any great service and would only make him appear even more eccentric.

Here's hoping the matter of fact approach his mother had in relation to the question of her own regnal name is something Charles shall endorse for himself.
__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 02-15-2012, 07:05 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,427
We don't know what name he will use. Nothing official will be announced until the day of his accession - that is the day the Queen dies. He may choose one of his baptismal names or any other name he likes.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 02-15-2012, 07:09 AM
Duke of Marmalade's Avatar
Majesty
TRF Author
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Posts: 8,504
He is Charles, has always been and will always be. Changing his name would be ridiculous. It was ok in old times to do so in order to have tradition but in modern times it would be absurd, really.

I mean a man who cant cope with his given name, sorry but what is his purpose again?

People rolling their eyes will be one of the most understanding public reactions I guess.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 02-15-2012, 07:30 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 1,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
I'm still pissed Edward VIII didn't choose to be King David, that would have been great.
Really? With an abdication even before the coronation? That's great for you?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 02-15-2012, 08:39 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Edinburgh, United Kingdom
Posts: 95
Boring and old.

Xenia, i dont disagree with you that the traditional names favoured by the British royal family may appear " old and boring " but they do serve a purpose: continuity between the past and present. Other royal houses exercise similar conservatism, with no apparent ill-effect. The present King of Sweden, for example, is the 16th Carl Gustaf. I would say that continuity, and the personal link bewteen past and present, is the greatest strength of any Monarchy.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 02-15-2012, 08:42 AM
Duke of Marmalade's Avatar
Majesty
TRF Author
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Frankfurt am Main, Germany
Posts: 8,504
Quote:
Originally Posted by James VI View Post
The present King of Sweden, for example, is the 16th Carl Gustaf. I would say that continuity, and the personal link bewteen past and present, is the greatest strength of any Monarchy.
But his name IS Carl Gustaf and he wasnt Bertil or Carl Philip for over 60 years before he re-named himself.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 02-15-2012, 09:16 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 1,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke of Marmalade View Post
But his name IS Carl Gustaf and he wasnt Bertil or Carl Philip for over 60 years before he re-named himself.
In a way, yes. But the continuing name was "Carl" and it was taken over by "Jean-Baptiste" Bernadotte (John the Baptist") who added the Carl and kept the Johan-part. And Charles is called "George" since his birth, so I'm not sure you can compare/use this as contra-example.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 02-15-2012, 09:21 AM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Melbourne & Sydney, Australia
Posts: 3,983
Quote:
Originally Posted by James VI View Post
Xenia, i dont disagree with you that the traditional names favoured by the British royal family may appear " old and boring " but they do serve a purpose: continuity between the past and present.
To be known as George, perhaps somewhat in honour of a grandfather he knew only as a small child, and who hasn't been King in over 60 years, is not a sign of continuity I'm affraid.

George VI chose George as his regnal name as a sign on contunity with his father's reign; an attempt to instill an unsettled empire with a pacifying familiarity after the events of 1936.

One should hope Charles has enough confidence in his name and in himself to forgo any superstitious nonsense.
__________________

__________________

"Dressing is a way of life" - Monsieur Saint Laurent
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Monarchy under Charles hofburg British Royals 1770 08-14-2014 04:28 PM
Ruling Family of Abu Dhabi: Al Nahyan dynasty 2: August 2011 - dazzling Ruling Family of Abu Dhabi 215 08-03-2014 03:11 AM
Charles as King: Choice of Regnal Name Madame Royale The Prince of Wales and the Duchess of Cornwall 220 04-15-2014 03:56 AM
Queen Elizabeth II and Duke of Edinburgh current events 24: July 2011-June 2 2012 Zonk Current Events Archive 916 06-03-2012 08:03 AM
The Prince of Wales & The Duchess of Cornwall visit Denmark; March 24-27, 2012 Viv Royal House of Denmark 338 04-04-2012 03:41 PM




Additional Links
Popular Tags
birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events diana engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri habsburg hohenzollern infanta sofia jewellery jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympics ottoman pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince felix prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess of asturias queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit wedding william



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:27 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]