The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #101  
Old 09-25-2012, 09:23 AM
Catherine J's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Halifax, Canada
Posts: 218
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke-of-Earl View Post
Well whatever name the Prince of Wales decides on, he will make a excellent king when his time comes IMO.

I agree. To quote Tolkien, he will be the "the deep breath before the plunge". After the very long and successful reign of his mother, HMtQ, and before the much anticipated reign of his son, HRHPW, Prince Charles will provide a critical bridge between the old and the new. He will be that middling Monarch who must connect the threads - a task not to be underestimated or relegated to unimportant. The seeds of change and/or continuity will be planted with his actions - it is likely that Charles and William will be the closest of all Monarchs and Heir Apparents in terms of deciding which bits and pieces must stay and which bits and pieces must go. They are in a historically rare position.

The only other Monarch with such longevity as HMtQ was Queen Victoria and it is well reported that she did not share much by way of duties or education with her heir, Edward VII - who only reigned, what, ten years or so.

Given Charles' age he will also not have a long reign, as reigns go, and it will be a matter of necessity to train William over a shorter period of time, thus a more intense participation, I predict.

I am looking forward to Charles' reign. He is, above all else, I believe, a kind and decent man and we could do worse than that in a Monarch. He is a thinking man who, from all evidence, has a genuine interest in making things better - for lack of a more erudite term.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #102  
Old 09-25-2012, 10:26 AM
Jacknch's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Grundisburgh, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,762
I still think that Charles will be King Charles, but I wonder how people would feel if he chose a double-barrel regnal name....King Charles George for instance or dare I say King Charles Philip. King Philip George or maybe King Arthur George............
__________________

__________________
J
Reply With Quote
  #103  
Old 09-25-2012, 10:29 AM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425


That would be a first for Britain, but certainly not impossible. Charles George I doesn't sound too bad to be honest.
However, I would still prefer him to reign under the name he has been known for nearly six decades.

On the other hand, I can understand why would George appeal to him: it's a bit like Denmark with its Christians and Fredericks - about continuity and tradition.
Reply With Quote
  #104  
Old 09-25-2012, 10:29 AM
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada
Posts: 1,181
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacknch View Post
I still think that Charles will be King Charles, but I wonder how people would feel if he chose a double-barrel regnal name....King Charles George for instance or dare I say King Charles Philip. King Philip George or maybe King Arthur George............
I never gave it any thought but I do like the sound of these names
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #105  
Old 09-25-2012, 07:58 PM
padams2359's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: New Orleans, United States
Posts: 388
It has been 463 years since Charles I was executed. I am unaware of the family calling by any of his other names. I think it will be Charles III. I think he will take that one from his mother as in her reply when asked what her regal name will be. "Well Elizabeth of course." Had his grandmother been alive when he ascended to the thrown, George VII would definitely have been a possibility. Based on the health of the Queen, Charles can be looking at ascending somewhere in his 70s.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #106  
Old 09-25-2012, 08:42 PM
MARG's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Christchurch, New Zealand
Posts: 3,979
Charles has been "Charles" for 64 years and I don't see him changing it when he takes the throne. I can just see him on a State Occasion being announced as His Majesty King George the VII or some such, and looking around for "George". Seems pretty daft!
__________________
MARG
"Words ought to be a little wild, for they are assaults of thoughts on the unthinking." - JM Keynes
Reply With Quote
  #107  
Old 09-25-2012, 08:45 PM
Suzzanah's Avatar
Commoner
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hallsville, United States
Posts: 18
Dear Patrons of R.F.,
Any person who rules may have the option of choosing their name and title. Often they list their name and are given a title. There is also the possibility that both title and name may be selected for them by another royal or as part of a state ceremony. In any case, a given name at birth may change in childhood or not at all. Titles may do the same. This is clear when you find adults with the title "Infanta ....." in Spain. Obviously an adult is no longer an infant. The most important thing is clear and concise use of name and title. There are so many Charles and George out there as well. Often a royal has a family lineage name, a middle name and the name of a parent. In any case when the correct name is listed, everyone will know it.
__________________
Suzzanah
Reply With Quote
  #108  
Old 09-25-2012, 09:51 PM
PrincessKaimi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hilo, Malibu, United States
Posts: 1,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke-of-Earl View Post
IMO, I think many people throughout the realms would bust out their best 'side eye' if the Prince of Wales chose a regnal name other than King Charles III.
This.

There is no way I can see it any other way. For him to expect anyone inside or outside his realm to know him as anything but Charles would make him seem to be some sort of aloof, arrogant, silly King. The tradition of changing one's name might not have gone away until recently, but this is an age in which his identity is well cemented, for better or for ill, as Charles (out of all the names his mother gave him, he is known as Charles).

Charles III one day.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #109  
Old 09-25-2012, 09:53 PM
PrincessKaimi's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Hilo, Malibu, United States
Posts: 1,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jacknch View Post
I still think that Charles will be King Charles, but I wonder how people would feel if he chose a double-barrel regnal name....King Charles George for instance or dare I say King Charles Philip. King Philip George or maybe King Arthur George............
That would be very cool, Charles Philip especially. It would be a little break out for him, and not so disturbing as calling himself William or Harry or George.

Or Richard.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #110  
Old 09-25-2012, 10:02 PM
AdmirerUS's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 2,476
I like him as Charles. He does not care what I think, though. :)
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #111  
Old 09-25-2012, 10:06 PM
Catherine J's Avatar
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Halifax, Canada
Posts: 218
I'm convinced :)

Charles III, it should be.

Spaniels will be all the vogue again :)


Interesting conversation.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #112  
Old 09-25-2012, 10:09 PM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,445
Up until Victoria pretty much every English/British (don't know about Scottish so am deliberately writing it this way for a reason) has used their first Christian name as their regnal name but since Victoria it is 50% - Victoria, Edward VII and George VI all used a different name while George V, Edward VIII and Elizabeth II have used their first names.

I do think Charles will be Charles III but I also wouldn't be surprised if he took George VII as his name either. It will be entirely his choice at the time.

Regardless of what his name is officially on documents etc he will still be called Charles by his family.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #113  
Old 09-25-2012, 10:39 PM
AdmirerUS's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 2,476
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Up until Victoria pretty much every English/British (don't know about Scottish so am deliberately writing it this way for a reason) has used their first Christian name as their regnal name but since Victoria it is 50% - Victoria, Edward VII and George VI all used a different name while George V, Edward VIII and Elizabeth II have used their first names.

I do think Charles will be Charles III but I also wouldn't be surprised if he took George VII as his name either. It will be entirely his choice at the time.

Regardless of what his name is officially on documents etc he will still be called Charles by his family.
Dear Iluvbertie - you are the best. You bring clarity and context to every discussion.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #114  
Old 12-01-2012, 01:37 AM
Gentry
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Houston, United States
Posts: 75
If Prince Charles ascends the throne is it possible that the House of Windsor will become the House of Mountbatten, his father's naturalised family name?

I read that Queen Victoria was of the House of Hanover through her father Prince Edward, Duke of Kent. And that her son King Edward VII was of the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha through his father Albert, Prince Consort. Since children usually take the name of their father I'm under the assumption that Charles's accession will bring in the Mountbatten Dynasty.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #115  
Old 12-01-2012, 01:50 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,445
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRHThePrince View Post
If Prince Charles ascends the throne is it possible that the House of Windsor will become the House of Mountbatten, his father's naturalised family name?

I read that Queen Victoria was of the House of Hanover through her father Prince Edward, Duke of Kent. And that her son King Edward VII was of the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha through his father Albert, Prince Consort. Since children usually take the name of their father I'm under the assumption that Charles's accession will bring in the Mountbatten Dynasty.

In 1960 The Queen issued a change declaring that the House name would remain Windsor while the non-royal grandchildren would have the surname of Mountbatten-Windsor.

Following that for Charles to take the House name to Windsor would require a declaration from him to overturn his mother's declararation.

In the case of Edward VII there had been no previous declaration of a House name different to the expected name so Edward automatically took the name of his father whereas Charles, if he has a surname at all it is not just Mountbatten but Mountbatten-Windsor of the House of Windsor.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #116  
Old 12-01-2012, 02:39 AM
vkrish's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 842
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
Up until Victoria pretty much every English/British (don't know about Scottish so am deliberately writing it this way for a reason) has used their first Christian name as their regnal name but since Victoria it is 50% - Victoria, Edward VII and George VI all used a different name while George V, Edward VIII and Elizabeth II have used their first names.

I do think Charles will be Charles III but I also wouldn't be surprised if he took George VII as his name either. It will be entirely his choice at the time.

Regardless of what his name is officially on documents etc he will still be called Charles by his family.
Charles should be just Charles III.
Nothing else.
The age of using unknown middle names/ancestors' names is over.
Today it is all about how you are noticed and identified by the ordinary Tom, Dick and Harry. And they all have known him as Charles his entire life. So no point in changing now for some ceremonial purpose citing certain archaic superstition.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #117  
Old 12-01-2012, 02:47 AM
Iluvbertie's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Bathurst, Australia
Posts: 8,445
If he is more comfortable being known officially as George VII then he has that right - everyone else is able to change their name if they want to do so and so should he if he is so inclined.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #118  
Old 12-01-2012, 08:03 AM
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: alpine village, Germany
Posts: 1,804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
In 1960 The Queen issued a change declaring that the House name would remain Windsor while the non-royal grandchildren would have the surname of Mountbatten-Windsor.

Following that for Charles to take the House name to Windsor would require a declaration from him to overturn his mother's declararation.

In the case of Edward VII there had been no previous declaration of a House name different to the expected name so Edward automatically took the name of his father whereas Charles, if he has a surname at all it is not just Mountbatten but Mountbatten-Windsor of the House of Windsor.
If we talk about dynasties, Charles is a Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Gluecksburg just like the Norwegian king, the Danish queen and the former king of Greece. This dynasty is a cadet branch of the dynasty of Oldenburg, one of the oldest dynasties of Europe.

As for the name of the Royal House, HMN decided that even though her husband came from such a noble dynasty, it should still be the House of Windsor as created in 1917 instead of the "House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha" as it was before. The main line of Hm, as in Charles, William and William's main line descendants will stay Windsors, as they have Royal rank. All other male-line descendants will eventually be known as Mountbatten-Windsor, because once the Royal dukes' descendants cease to be Royals themselves (like it just happens with the Kents and Gloucesters), they need a surname and this will be Mountbatten-Windsor. Okay, as it is, we will only see James Severn's children fall out of the Royal rank and will carry the name of Lord/Lady christian name Mountbatten-Windsor (apart from the oldest son, who will hold a courtesy title of either father or grandfather), but one day Harry's male-line grandchildren will need a surname and they will be Lord/Lady X Mountbatten-Windsors as well.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #119  
Old 12-01-2012, 11:29 AM
Artemisia's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: Yerevan, Armenia
Posts: 5,425
Quote:
Originally Posted by HRHThePrince View Post
If Prince Charles ascends the throne is it possible that the House of Windsor will become the House of Mountbatten, his father's naturalised family name?

I read that Queen Victoria was of the House of Hanover through her father Prince Edward, Duke of Kent. And that her son King Edward VII was of the House of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha through his father Albert, Prince Consort. Since children usually take the name of their father I'm under the assumption that Charles's accession will bring in the Mountbatten Dynasty.
Queen Victoria did indeed come from the House of Hanover and was the last Monarch of Hanoverian dynasty. When she married Albert of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, she personally continued to belong to the House of Hanover; however, their children automatically took their father's surname (name of the House), thus establishing the short-lived House of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (Edward VII was the only King to belong to it because his son, George V, changed the name of the House to Windsor).


As things are now, it is expected that Prince Charles will belong to the House of Windsor upon his accession to the Throne.

That is in accordance with the Letters Patent of 1952, which declared that "I and My children shall be styled and known as the House and Family of Windsor, and that my descendants who marry and their descendants, shall bear the name of Windsor." The declaration of 1960 stated that those of her and Prince Philip's descendants who do not have the style of Royal Highness and the title of Prince or Princess will bear the surname Mountbatten-Windsor. The latter obviously doesn't concern Prince Charles who is both a Prince and a Royal Highness.

However, it should be noted that the dynastic name is entirely at the will of the Sovereign and any future Monarch can change it. Thus, Charles may chose to continue with the House of Windsor (as is expected), or opt to honour his father by changed the name of the Royal House to Mountbatten-Windsor or Windsor-Mountbatten, or even go for just Mountbatten.
Reply With Quote
  #120  
Old 12-05-2012, 03:20 AM
AnnEliza's Avatar
Nobility
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Seattle, United States
Posts: 316
I don't know, Charles George or a similar double name sounds more like a pope's name.
I hope he will be Charles III. Not that an American has a say.
__________________

__________________
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 1877 08-27-2014 11:16 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
abdication birth charlene chris o'neill crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events duchess of cambridge dutch royal history fashion grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta leonor infanta sofia jordan king abdullah ii king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander luxembourg olympic games ottoman poland pom prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince constantijn prince felipe prince felix prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess alexia (2005 -) princess anita princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess claire princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden visit wedding winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:11 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]