Prince John (1905-1919)

[Iluvbertie]

Originally Posted by Harry's polo shirt

Can people who become king change their name still? like how the Pope does.

If the story from 1952 is correct - yes.

The report was that the present Queen was asked, shortly after being told that she was Queen, what name she would use - her reply 'My own of course' (or words to that effect). The implication is that she could choose any name she wished.

There have also been many reports over the years that Charles is considering reigning not as Charles III but George VII. These are usually from a 'friend' or 'source close to the prince'. We will have to wait until his Accession Council to find out for sure.

[jackie68]

i recently read that Prince Bertie took the name George (VI) in honour of his father. It was meant to bring the people back to the Monarchy after the abdication.

[Leslie2006]

Jackie, I've heard the same thing.

Just to put them here, the boys names and birth dates were:

Edward Albert Christian George Andrew Patrick David (born June 23, 1894) Prince of Wales, later Edward VIII
Albert Frederick Arthur George (born December 14, 1895) Duke of York, later George VI
Henry William Frederick Albert (born March 31, 1900) Duke of Gloucester
George Edward Alexander Edmund (born December 20, 1902) Duke of Kent
John Charles Francis (born July 12, 1905)

[HM Queen Catherine]

Originally Posted by chrissy57

If the story from 1952 is correct - yes.

The report was that the present Queen was asked, shortly after being told that she was Queen, what name she would use - her reply 'My own of course' (or words to that effect). The implication is that she could choose any name she wished.

There have also been many reports over the years that Charles is considering reigning not as Charles III but George VII. These are usually from a 'friend' or 'source close to the prince'. We will have to wait until his Accession Council to find out for sure.

The Prince of Wales may indeed choose George as his regnal name, because of the history associated with Charles I and II. I suppose it is considered an unlucky name for a British monarch.. much like there will assuredly never be a Richard IV or Edward IX.

But honestly, even though he has the right to choose, he has been Prince Charles for so long that it would almost be ridiculous not to use his own name.

I sincerely hope that if he decides not to be known as Charles III, though, that he picks a different name. I'm tired of George.. maybe Philip.. or Arthur, perhaps?

[pacomartin]

Originally Posted by chrissy57

There have also been many reports over the years that Charles is considering reigning not as Charles III but George VII. These are usually from a 'friend' or 'source close to the prince'. We will have to wait until his Accession Council to find out for sure.

I don't know if you realize this, but the speculation goes back to his christening when he was 5 weeks old.

Originally Posted by Time Magazine Nov. 29, 1948

Chicago bookies quoted odds of 3 to 5 that Princess Elizabeth would name her baby George. Other odds: even money on Philip, 6 to 5 on Albert, 2 to 11against Louis, 100 to 1 against Jake.

Originally Posted by Time Magazine Dec. 27, 1948

In a semicircle of chairs, amid banked roses, heather and myrtle in the Palace music room, sat the family, a handful of old retainers, a sprinkling of ladies and gentlemen in waiting, and the godparents. Resplendent in gold cope and miter before a silver-gilt font, the Archbishop of Canterbury reached out gingerly to take the baby, swathed in four yards of silk and Honiton lace.
"Name this child," he said. Princess Margaret answered firmly and clearly, "Charles Philip Arthur George." "I baptize thee in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost," said the Archbishop, dabbing water from the font on the baby's brow. Young Prince Charles gurgled demurely, and ten well-scrubbed choirboys in Tudor uniforms of scarlet and gold sang out O Worship the King. Afterwards there was tea and christening cake, and everyone drank the baby's health in champagne.

Royal Displeasure. The whole Palace was in fine fettle. Throughout the ceremony King George rested his ailing foot on a cushion, but he limped not at all, exchanged jokes on all sides and refused to sit down during the official picture taking. Old Mrs. Bill, who had been the palace housekeeper when George himself was a baby, bussed the King enthusiastically on the cheek and he returned the greeting in kind.
Princess Margaret was happy as a grig in her new role as chief godparent,* and Princess Elizabeth herself, rosy-cheeked and radiant once more, was only a little shy about her new motherhood. She proudly displayed a new gold, sapphire and ruby clip presented her by Philip in honor of the occasion. Only Prince Charles himself showed any displeasure at the proceedings. When the photographers turned their battery of lights full in his face, he bawled hugely and had to be pacified by a Georgian silver rattle which was appropriately produced by a well-accoutered cameraman.
Like the baptism, the choice of the prince's name was a purely family affair. Notably missing was the ubiquitous "Albert" which Victoria had insisted upon in the names of her sons and grandsons. Gone were the names of the patron saints of Ireland, Scotland and Wales borne by the last Prince of Wales, Edward VIII.

Charlie's Aunt. The baby's first name "Charles" was picked by Philip and Elizabeth partly for its Scottish associations (although the Stuarts first got it from their French relatives), partly because it was borne by many of Philip's Danish ancestors, and mostly because the young parents just liked it. King George, whose final approval was necessary, gave it without a moment's hesitation, and London's papers promptly dubbed the new heir "Bonnie Prince Charlie."
In any case, the baby would probably ascend the throne as George VII (the present King was known as Albert when he was a prince). Ebullient Princess Margaret pointed out the only possible drawback to the new name. "Now," she said, "I suppose they'll call me Charlie's Aunt."

[IloveCP]

John sure is something.It's sad that he was so isolated.

[Roderick]

Originally Posted by IloveCP

John sure is something.It's sad that he was so isolated.

The prince was not as isolated as many believe. He lived at a beautiful farm with his beloved nanny. He had at least one regular playmate [a girl of a similar age] and his family particularly the brothers nearest to him in age would visit him often. He would also go to the `big house` on occasion to see his parents. Although his life was short and he had health problems it was not a sad or deprived one otherwise.

[XeniaCasaraghi]

I also don't like how people portray Prince John as being neglected by his parents because of his illness. From what I have read, he was just as loved by his parents as his other siblings. Both George and Mary were not the most loving and affectionate parents, so the apparent neglect John suffered from his parents just happened to be normal family interactions between the parents and kids.

[Molly2101]

I just recently watched the BBC drama "The Lost Prince" and I have developed a deep sympathy for young Prince John and Queen Mary. Due to the era Mary could not really show a great deal of maternal love toward her children; were they not predominantly raised by Nannies? It must have been so hard to know your youngest son, the baby of your family, was suffering with seizures and you had no way to cure them. Even though she was the Queen, she was still a mother and would have definitely had those maternal emotions and feelings, so knowing your son was so ill must have killed Mary, deep down.

I am not sure whether to believe the statement that John never saw his parents when he was sent to Sandringham, but if that is true then that is an awful thing to even begin to comprehend. His parents had a duty to their country, coming before their children. I have a lot of empathy for Mary. There is one scene in the drama which moved me a lot. I know it is a drama and a lot of it is made to look more dramatic, and parts could have been made up, but the scene when Mary sees John having a seizure and a tear rolls down her eye breaks my heart.

Prince John appeared to be such a charming chap. It's such a shame his life was cut so short.

[XeniaCasaraghi]

I have to watch this movie entirely, I didn't see the part where Mary sees him have a seizure. Only one he has had is in the hall and Lalla rushes to get him to a private room.
I have never been a fan of Mary, but Miranda did give the most humane portrayal of her that I've seen.

[Molly2101]

Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi

I have to watch this movie entirely, I didn't see the part where Mary sees him have a seizure. Only one he has had is in the hall and Lalla rushes to get him to a private room.
I have never been a fan of Mary, but Miranda did give the most humane portrayal of her that I've seen.

The Lost Prince 1x01

It is about half way through that clip when Mary sees her son fit and she cries. It's so moving.

[Grandduchess24]

I loved watching "the lost prince" I watched the whole thing and loved it I nearly cried at the end and was saddened by all that happened to the poor boy especially the younger prince john and his seizures.

[IloveCP]

Rare photo of him:

The Royal Watcher

I think he looked so much like his brother George VI.

[scooter]

Originally Posted by jackie68

i recently read that Prince Bertie took the name George (VI) in honour of his father. It was meant to bring the people back to the Monarchy after the abdication.

I believe that was suggested by the PM as a way of harkening back to his fathers reign after the whole brouhaha of his brother's abdication. Continuity and stability were high on the list after the abdication.

[CyrilVladisla]

Did Prince John have any male teachers that read to him?
How much of an education was he given?

King Edward VIII described his brother John had only been a brother in flesh. Edward did not attend Prince John's funeral.

[Blog Real]

John was christened on 3 August in the Church of St Mary Magdalene at Sandringham, the Reverend Canon John Neale Dalton officiating. His godparents were King Carlos I of Portugal (his third cousin once removed, for whom the Prince of Wales stood proxy), the Duke of Sparta (his first cousin once removed), Prince Carl of Denmark (his uncle by marriage and first cousin once removed, for whom the Prince of Wales stood proxy), Prince John of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg (his great-great-uncle, for whom the Prince of Wales stood proxy), Alexander Duff, 1st Duke of Fife (his uncle by marriage, for whom the Prince of Wales stood proxy), the Duchess of Sparta (his first cousin once removed, for whom Princess Victoria of the United Kingdom stood proxy), and Princess Alexander of Teck (his first cousin once removed, for whom Princess Victoria stood proxy).

[Blog Real]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fh7Nesw6r0I

[Curryong]

Yes, his was a terribly callous and shallow reaction, quite selfish and unfeeling actually. He seemed to resent the fact that his brother interrupted his leisure activities. His mother, Queen Mary, was most upset at his behaviour.

[Tiggersk8]

Originally Posted by Blog Real

Thank you for posting that here Blog Real. It really is excellent & sheds quite a bit of light on Prince John's life at Wood Farm on the Sandringham Estate. Not to mention Queen Mary as well. For her to go to those Estate Workers w/children John's age to ask if they would like to be his friends & play w/him? That completely flies in the face of the "Rigid Ice Queen who was perfectly content for the Children to raised as their Father had laid down" and "Once John was moved to the Estate he was completely isolated and saw no one outside Lala Bill & the other Members of his Household" tales passed down through the years, doesn't it?

I've always felt sorry for Queen Mary & that increases as the years go by. She had to become more of a persona, and bury her true feelings deeply down, in order to cope w/the life of a Royal Wife & Mother of that era. To us, it doesn't seem like much for her doing that for John, but in that time & w/how she was expected to act? It's huge!!

Since watching that Documentary, & reading some Interviews w/John's friend*, I've gotten the impression that John's illness, disability & move to the Estate actually gave Queen Mary a bit more freedom as well. Unlike in London, on the Estate she could help her son & be the caring Mother she was underneath the Public Facade. Or at least to the best of her abilities she was able to. That well known & very true saying, "No Parent should have to bury their Child"? Queen Mary had to bury 3 out of her 6 children. I can't even begin to imagine what that had to be like to go through once, but 3 times...:(

I love what Queen Alexandra did for her Grandson w/the Garden she had set up for John at the Big House. W/her own Deafness she would know all too well how a disability can isolate someone. W/the Garden, John had a gift to send in his Letters to his Parents & never thought twice about how quickly his seeds grew into flowers w/in the space of a week. It's really sweet & a very "Granny thing" to do. :)

Originally Posted by Curryong

Yes, his was a terribly callous and shallow reaction, quite selfish and unfeeling actually. He seemed to resent the fact that his brother interrupted his leisure activities. His mother, Queen Mary, was most upset at his behaviour.

What Mother wouldn't be? I really believe by the time all those files about the Duke of Windsor & his actions before, during & after WWII are unsealed & made public, Wallis Simpson will finally be looked at as the best thing that ever happened. The thought of having *that* kind of a Man on the Throne during WWII gives me chills. Thanks to "the married American lady" that didn't happen thankfully.

*I found those Interviews by doing a simple Google search.


Sent from my iPad using The Royals Community mobile app

[CyrilVladisla]

At the age of four, Prince John suffered his first epileptic fit. There were claims John would attend school at St. Peter's Court in Kent. A report had to be put in The Times to refute these claims.