Some media reports have suggested Charles may take the name George VII on his accession to the throne as king, because of the negative connotations of the name with regard to Charles I (authoritarian) and Charles II (womaniser). Should he be King Charles or King George?
2007-09-15 09:50:04 · 13 answers · asked by Paranormal I 3 in Society & Culture ➔ Royalty
NB I'm talking about the British Prince Charles of course.
2007-09-15 09:50:35 · update #1
Prince Charles has indicated in the past that he wants to be known as King George VII when he becomes king.
It is up to him & if he feels the name Charles is going to bring bad luck then he can call himself anything he wants to.
After all, it really is not going to matter to anyone else, is it?
2007-09-16 05:13:44 · answer #1 · answered by monkeyface 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I doubt that we'll see a Charles III - too much bad mojo from that name. Chuck's full name is Charles Philip Arthur George Windsor; there's never been a King Philip, and Arthur is out because of the inevitable comparisons to the mythological guy, so George would be the most obvious choice.
2007-09-15 13:42:11 · answer #2 · answered by JerH1 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Probably not. Both previous Charleses reigned at a controversial time in England during and after the Civil War. I understand the Charles wishes to be George VII in honour of his grandfather. His given names are Charles Philip Arthur George so he won't be taking a name he doesn't have.
2016-05-20 04:57:21 · answer #3 · answered by ? 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, its ultimately up to him. However, not all monarchs have used their common name. For example, Edward VII was born Albert Edward and known as Bertie to his family. The Georges don't have exact a sterling reputation either, although it would reference Charles' own grandfather, George VI and his great-grandfather George the V (both of whom were fairly well-behaved, as opposed to the earlier Georges.
2007-09-16 11:22:54 · answer #4 · answered by Nightwind 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hmmmm I hadn't heard that he's ruled out Charles....can anybody pass along a link? I'd like to read his reasoning.
I for one like Charles....it'd be a pleasant change from all the Edwards and Georges of the 20th century. One the other hand William V or Henry IX would be even better.
2007-09-16 03:39:31 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's his perogative to use any of his names (other than his "surname"). He's said it won't be Charles because people associate it with beheading (Charles I was the only King to actually formally be tried and executed). He's likely to choose George as it is the only other name that's been used before. Technically he could use Philip or Arthur but it's unlikely.
2007-09-16 01:21:36 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
If the name has negative connotations, which I must say it doesn't for me, having a great regard for Charles I in particular, then it's a good idea, surely, to lay the ghost. Charles III it should be.
2007-09-15 10:05:14 · answer #7 · answered by Doethineb 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I'm looking forward to King William V.
2007-09-15 16:24:32 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I've heard he will be King George, also. And I suppose it'll be his choice.
He does have a lot of names. So many that Diana got them in the wrong order in her wedding vows. He could probably use any one of them.
2007-09-16 01:36:33 · answer #9 · answered by kiwi 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think he has already decided on another name - it's part of the royal perogrative. I think he is going for George, after his grandfather.
2007-09-15 10:37:47 · answer #10 · answered by brian s 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋