Naming Customs of British Royalty, Favourite Name, Regnal Name and Numeration

[XeniaCasaraghi]

I meant steer to stir; my bad. John might be avoided for a Prince early but I read that John is avoided because of Prince John (Richard I's brother who usurped him) and Prince John the youngest son of George V and Mary who was born with epilepsy and died young.

 

[Mandarin_Empress]

Full Names:

Females
Elizabeth Alexandra Mary
Margaret Rose
Zara Anne Elizabeth
Gabriella Marina Alexandra Ophelia
Alexandra Helen Elizabeth Olga Christabel

Males
Charles Philip Arthur George
William Arthur Philip Louis
Henry Charles Albert David

Individual Names:

Female: Elizabeth, Alexandra, Rose, Catherine, Sophie/a, Gabriella/e, Ophelia, Diana, Charlotte, Adelaide, Zara, Caroline
Male: Philip, Arthur, Henry, William, David, Edward, James, Andrew, Christian, Alexander

I'd love to see Alexandra/Alexander used as first names more often, and Charlotte/Caroline/Adelaide used more often, period. It'd be sweet if one or more of Prince Charles' future granddaughters has Charlotte or Caroline as a middle or first name, as the former is a feminine diminutive of Charles and the latter is the feminine version.

 

[Molly2101]

Full Names:

Females
Elizabeth Alexandra Mary
Margaret Rose
Zara Anne Elizabeth
Gabriella Marina Alexandra Ophelia
Alexandra Helen Elizabeth Olga Christabel

Males
Charles Philip Arthur George
William Arthur Philip Louis
Henry Charles Albert David

Individual Names:

Female: Elizabeth, Alexandra, Rose, Catherine, Sophie/a, Gabriella/e, Ophelia, Diana, Charlotte, Adelaide, Zara, Caroline
Male: Philip, Arthur, Henry, William, David, Edward, James, Andrew, Christian, Alexander

I'd love to see Alexandra/Alexander used as first names more often, and Charlotte/Caroline/Adelaide used more often, period. It'd be sweet if one or more of Prince Charles' future granddaughters has Charlotte or Caroline as a middle or first name, as the former is a feminine diminutive of Charles and the latter is the feminine version.

I'd LOVE to see Alexander and Charlotte used as Christian names in the family. They haven't been used for such a long time. Alexander is one of Viscount Severn's middle names, but i'd love to see it as a Christian name and the same with Adelaide. Adelaide is now quite "modern" yet we know in the Royal family it has a lot of history. It would work in today's society, and I also think Addy is a cute shortened version.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Adelaide is modern now? Good for....it
Knowing William and Catherine, I doubt they are going to bring new blood into the baby naming game. Though props to Kate's parents for going outside the box and naming their second daughter after Phillipa.

 

[Daria_S]

Even though I adore the name 'Elizabeth', I would wish that William and Catherine would use a different form of it, like perhaps 'Isabella'. It's different, but still traditional and regal-sounding. For a boy, I would love to see 'Nicholas' make an appearance. There are different variations of that name too, but I do not see them naming their son 'Nikolai'. It would be a little too out of the box.

 

[Burzg]

Girls

Florence
lucie
violet
elizabeth
kate

Boys

Jenson
darcy
jackob
zachary
william

 

[IloveCP]

As for minor royals,I love Rose Windsor's name.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Adelaide is modern now? Good for....it
Knowing William and Catherine, I doubt they are going to bring new blood into the baby naming game. Though props to Kate's parents for going outside the box and naming their second daughter after Phillipa.

May I ask how you know William and Catherine?

Which Phillipa did the Middleton's name Pippa after? I hadn't heard that they had named her after a specific royal Phillipa so I am interested in hearing which one and your evidence to support that statement.

 

[Mayhouse]

Boys

Jenson
darcy

But Jenson and Darcy are not royal names! Royals use timeless and dignified names, not trendy ones.

My favourites:

Female: Rose, Victoria, Mary, Eugenie, Beatrice (I love the names of both York girls, they are very royal and romantic)

Male: William, Arthur, James

 

[Grandduchess24]

Victoria, Mary, Elizabeth

 

[Rocketmom]

I have read several threads and haven't seen an explanation for why some kings take a different name upon coronation. Queen Victoria's son Bertie became Edward. David became Edward and Albert became George. I don't think that any of the queens changed their names, and not all of the males did either. Is it likely that Charles will change his name. Any explanation out there?

 

[An Ard Ri]

Most British Monarchs have used their first name as their Regnal name,though some have not always followed this trend.

Charles, Prince of Wales full name is Charles Philip Arthur George and its his prerogative to choose whatever name he wishes when or if he becomes King.

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » What will be the Regnal name of the next King?

 

[cepe]

King Edward VII was christened Albert Edward. When he became king he said that he did not wish to diminish his father's name and that his father should "stand alone" in history - so he chose to use his 2nd name.

Edward VIII was christened Edward - I think David was his last name of many (he had about 6!).

George VI was chistened Albert Fredrick Arthur George - he said he chose George for "continuity" and given the problems over Edward VIII, that makes sense. In effect it would seem that the monarchy rolled seamlessly between Geroge V and George VI.

The royal family used to do lots of repeat names - particularly George and Edward. Being known in the family as something else would make it less confusing.

I think Charles will become Charles I

 

[Sunnystar]

Actually, he'd be Charles III if he sticks with his first name as his regnal name.

 

[cepe]

oops signed off quicker than I should - thnx sunnystar

 

[NGalitzine]

Even Queen Victoria's first name was not Victoria.

 

[Iluvbertie]

The reason why they take different names to their birth names is down to personal preference.

The first monarch I can think of off hand who didn't use her birth name was Victoria - christened Alexandrina Victoria but reigned as Victoria - she was called Drina for the first half-dozen or so years of her life.

Albert Edward - as he was christened - was expected to reign using both names but decided that his father's name of Albert should stand alone and so used his second name.

George V and Edward VIII both reigned using their first Christian names - Edward VIII was called David privately but officially he was The Prince Edward and so reigned using his first name.

The Prince Albert - who became George VI - did so after the abdication to link his reign back to the security of his father's reign after the upheaval of the abdication.

The present Queen was asked, when told she was Queen, what name she would use and she said 'my own of course'.

With Charles there have been stories for years that he would reign as George VII as a tribute to his grandfather but he has not made any official comment on that - and we will simply have to wait and see what name he decides to use.

It is like the Popes who are also free to use a papal name rather than their Christian name.

 

[NGalitzine]

"The Prince Albert - who became George VI - did so after the coronation to link his reign back to the security of his father's reign after the upheaval of the abdication."

I think you meant he chose his regnal name after the abdication. He was already GVI before he went to Westminster to be crowned.

 

[Artemisia]

There is no reason, no rule.
A Monarch can reign under any of his given names - or choose another name altogether.

For instance, Edward VIII's full name was Edward Albert Christian George Andrew Patrick David so he actually reigned under his first given name, although he could choose any of the others. Now, according to a legend, Queen Victoria asked her descendants to refrain from ever reigning under the name Albert, lest a King with the name outshines her beloved husband, Prince Albert. There has never been a king Christian, Andrew, Patrick or David in Britain, so really, there was a choice between Edward and George.

George VI reigned chose George so symbolise continuity; in essence, the brief reigned of his brother, Edward VIII, was swept under the carpet, and there was a nice continuation from George V to George VI. In addition, Albert was unacceptable for the reason mentioned above, and there had never been a King Frederick or Arthur (not counting the legendary King Arthur) either, so George was the only alternative.


Basically, it's a matter of personal choice and judgement of a given Monarch.

 

[Iluvbertie]

"The Prince Albert - who became George VI - did so after the coronation to link his reign back to the security of his father's reign after the upheaval of the abdication."

I think you meant he chose his regnal name after the abdication. He was already GVI before he went to Westminster to be crowned.

Thanks for that pick up - I know I said abdication in my mind but still typed coronation.

He of cause chose George VI after his abdication and announced it at his Accession Council the day after the abdication.

I will amend by previous post accordingly.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Now, according to a legend, Queen Victoria asked her descendants to refrain from ever reigning under the name Albert, lest a King with the name outshines her beloved husband, Prince Albert.

Interesting as I have always read and heard that she wanted her son to reign as King Albert Edward and he himself said as much at his accession council - that the expectation was that he would reign as King Albert Edward but that it was his decision to not use Albert as he believed that the name Albert should stand alone.

There has never been a king Christian, Andrew, Patrick or David in Britain, so really, there was a choice between Edward and George.

Not really - he could have chosen any name. He wasn't restricted to his given names.

 

[Lumutqueen]

don't think that any of the queens changed their names, and not all of the males did either.

Queen Victoria's first name was Alexandrina. Victoria was her second name.

 

[Artemisia]

Interesting as I have always read and heard that she wanted her son to reign as King Albert Edward and he himself said as much at his accession council - that the expectation was that he would reign as King Albert Edward but that it was his decision to not use Albert as he believed that the name Albert should stand alone.

I've never heard that version; where have you read it, Iluvbertie?
Funny how many stories, some contradicting, are there about the name and its use.

Not really - he could have chosen any name. He wasn't restricted to his given names.

Of course he could; I did mention a Monarch can select one of his given names - or a random one altogether. However, the practice so far has shown all Monarchs who didn't reign under their first given name choose from one of their other names, hence the comment.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Every biography I have ever read of either Victoria and Edward (I have only read about 30 in total as their reigns have been the focus of a lot of my studies at uni). In addition to that my great-uncle's diary and he talking to people about Edward's speech within hours of it being given, as he moved in those circles.

I have never heard the version that Victoria never wanted someone to use Albert - the opposite in fact as she insisted that every male line descendent had Albert in their name so she expected an Albert to reign at some time - particularly her eldest son and heir.

 

[Artemisia]

I haven't read nearly as many biographies of either. My sources were from Internet (such as wiki.answers) so are probably much less reliable than yours.
Henceforth, I'll adhere to that, more accepted, version.

 

[GrammaSueSue]

I have read or been told that Queen Victoria did not want another QV to reign? Is that what you have heard?

 

[Excalibur]

I have read or been told that Queen Victoria did not want another QV to reign? Is that what you have heard?

Queen Victoria made a similar insistence in regards to naming of her female descendants -- that they all include the name Victoria. In fact I think the current queen is one of the first -- if not the first -- female descendant of QV not to have Victoria as one of her names.

Given the number of sons she produced, I would imagine Queen Victoria thought it unlikely that a Queen Regnant with the name Victoria would reign any time soon, if ever.

 

[Mirabel]

I htink it would be really weird if Charles were to use George when he succeeds.
He is in his mid-sixties and has been known as Charles for so long that I can't imagine him suddenly switching.

 

[Artemisia]

I completely agree; it would be weird calling him anything but Charles. However, don't forget Edward VII who was known as Albert (or Bertie) for the first 60 years of his life, before ascending to the Throne. Similarly, Edward VIII was David for 42 years and and George VI - Bertie for 41 years, before their own accessions. I suppose if people at the time could get used to the new names of the new Monarchs, so could we.

 

[Iluvbertie]

The difference is that those names were known more privately and not officially.

Edward VII when referred to in the papers was as HRH The Prince of Wales or The Prince Albert Edward, while Edward VIII was The Prince Edward or The Prince of Wales or simply Prince Edward and the same with George VI - the press called him Prince Albert. Their family names simply weren't the names the everyday people used.

So they had a name they used in private which was different to their public name but Charles seems to have the same name in both private and public (I am sure that we would have heard if the family called him by a different name by now - just as we know that Elizabeth was called Lilibet but that family name was never going to be her regnal name - so Edward VII and George VI were never going to be King Bertie.