Ordinals In The Titles Of Monarchs

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by Mbruno

When a regnal name was previously used both by Kings of Castile and Kings of Aragon, is the highest ordinal among the latter used to start counting the Kings of Spain bearing the same regnal name?

If I'm not mistaken, the situation wherein the regnal name of a King (or Queen) of Spain had been used on more occasions as a regnal name in Aragon than in Castile hasn't occurred to this date.

However, Spaniards count monarchs who reigned over Castile and Navarre in personal union as Juana I, Carlos I, etc., notwithstanding that earlier monarchs of the same names reigned over Navarre prior to its personal union with Castile. So it seems the policy is to number monarchs of Spain as monarchs of Castile, disregarding the other kingdoms.

Originally Posted by Mbruno

Incidentally, does that also apply to monarchs of United Kingdom with respect to previous kings of England or Scotland? For example, would a future King James of the United Kingdom be numbered James VIII instead of James III (assuming of course Scotland is still part of the UK at that time) ?

Guidelines drawn up by the British Parliament in 1952 suggested that the monarch choose the higher ordinal between the two kingdoms, although the monarch's use of regnal name and number are her prerogative.

https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal...e-scotland-spt

[Iluvbertie]

A future King James in the UK would be James VIII. This was determined in 1952 when the Scots objected to Elizabeth II being counted as II in Scotland when they had never had a Queen Elizabeth before. The agreement is now that the highest number will be used so James VIII in both England and Scotland and not James VIII and III. It would also be Henry IX in both countries even though Scotland has never had a King Henry.