Did anyone else read that Charles is expected to assume the name George when he ascends to the throne?
I've read so much about the royals over the last few days that I'm not sure I have it all straight...
That's what the speculation is, but Charles himself won't comment on what his regnal/king name might be.
Ditto pixiedust, I'm surprised they only gave him three names. They're all nice choices. I've always liked the name George and I'm sure it'll be quite fashionable now!
I was thinking to myself earlier today that George and Stephen are the only male monarch names that aren't currently in use by someone in the living royal family, and wondering if they'd go with one of those or use something that no king (but still princes) have used - Alfred, Leopold, etc.
I'm surprised that "Philip" isn't included at all. But people have pointed out that the name "Louis" is what's representing Prince Philip's family. I'm also surprised that they didn't throw in "Michael" to honor Kate's father, since William seems to be really fond of Kate's parents.
I bet they will use Michael if they have another boy. Maybe even something as a nod to Diana's family-- Spencer or even John after her father.
pixiedust I was surprised by only 3 names too. And also that they're calling him the prince of Cambridge. Wouldn't it make more sense to call him the prince of Windsor? I know they're the duke and duchess of Cambridge but when QE dies, won't he become the prince of wales? I thought Cambridge was just a courtesy title.
His title is His Royal Highness Prince George of Cambridge
Royal children take their titles from their fathers. This is why William was known as HRH Prince William of Wales before his wedding, and why Harry is still known as HRH Prince Henry of Wales ... they got those titles from their father, the Prince of Wales. The Duke of York's daughters are known as HRH Princess Beatrice of York and HRH Princess Eugenie of York.
The queen gifted William with the title Duke of Cambridge for his wedding. Therefore, he, Kate, and now George can use that title. Without that dukedom, the only proper way to refer to Kate would be HRH Princess William of Wales, because she'd get the feminine form of whatever titles William held. She's Duchess of Cambridge because that's the feminine form of Duke of Cambridge. (I actually don't know if George would be able to be called HRH Prince George of Wales in that case, or just HRH Prince George.)
He's not the Prince of Windsor because that's not his father's dukedom. "Duke of Windsor" was the title given to King Edward VIII after he abdicated the throne to marry Wallis Simpson. She was known as "Her Grace the Duchess of Windsor" after their marriage ... she was denied the HRH style basically as a big "fuck you" from Edward's brother King George VI and the rest of the royal family. I know that Edward signed away any rights his future children might've had to be in line for the throne, but IDK if they would've been denied a HRH title or a Prince(ss) title, so they might've been (HRH) Prince(ss) Whatever of Windsor ... but it's a moot point since he never had any children.
"Windsor" is the name of the royal house, and a last name that some of them use on occasion if there's a need for a last name. The royals don't have an official last name so basically they can use anything they want ... William and Harry use "Wales" in the military, Prince Edward (the queen's son and Earl of Wessex) has gone by both Edward Windsor and Edward Wessex in the past when he worked in film, and I believe that Prince Charles and Princess Anne both signed the marriage registry using the name Mountbatten-Windsor when they each got married ("Mountbatten" being the last name that the queen's husband, Prince Philip, adopted when he renounced his titles as a Greek prince and became a British citizen before he married Elizabeth).
The title of Prince of Wales generally goes to the monarch's oldest son but it's not automatic. I think there have been a few cases where the POW title was not awarded to the oldest son for whatever reason. Once Charles is king, he will actively have to award the POW title to William - which would make Kate HRH The Princess of Wales, and the baby will be HRH Prince George of Wales.
But there ARE some automatic titles: the monarch never dies, so the very second Elizabeth dies, Charles becomes king. And that very second, William will inherit the Duke of Cornwall title (among other titles) from Charles. And he and Harry will get "The" tacked on top their prince titles since they are now the sons of the monarch: HRH The Prince William, Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge; and HRH The Prince Henry (plus any dukedoms he might have at that point).
So up until William is actively created Prince of Wales by Charles, his title will be HRH The Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge ... and his family will be HRH The Duchess of Cornwall and Cambridge, and HRH Prince George of Cambridge.
ETA: And following past precedent, William will likely not be created The Prince of Wales until his father has been king for several months, or a year or more. The new monarch's coronation typically comes about a year after the old monarch's death (to allow for an appropriate mourning period as well as to prepare for such a huge ceremony) ... my bet is that when Elizabeth dies, we'll see Charles's coronation ceremony about year later, and then William will be invested as Prince of Wales in a ceremony in Wales about 6-12 months after Charles's coronation.
Charles was named Prince of Wales in 1958 at age 10 and his investiture ceremony was at age 21. I'm sure we'll see a much shorter wait for William since William will be in his 30s at least.
That's what the speculation is, but Charles himself won't comment on what his regnal/king name might be.
Ditto pixiedust, I'm surprised they only gave him three names. They're all nice choices. I've always liked the name George and I'm sure it'll be quite fashionable now!
I was thinking to myself earlier today that George and Stephen are the only male monarch names that aren't currently in use by someone in the living royal family, and wondering if they'd go with one of those or use something that no king (but still princes) have used - Alfred, Leopold, etc.
I'm surprised that "Philip" isn't included at all. But people have pointed out that the name "Louis" is what's representing Prince Philip's family. I'm also surprised that they didn't throw in "Michael" to honor Kate's father, since William seems to be really fond of Kate's parents.
I bet they will use Michael if they have another boy. Maybe even something as a nod to Diana's family-- Spencer or even John after her father.
I think Michael would be nice for a second son. And there's already a Prince Michael (the queen's cousin) so it's not like the name Michael is unprecedented).
IDK if they would use Spencer since it's not traditional. It's a cute name.
They almost definitely would not use John - John is considered to be very unlucky in the royal family. King John (Prince John from the Robin Hood story) was a disaster, and there were two children called Prince John who died very young. And I believe that Diana had a brother named John who also died young.
Rumor is that Diana wanted to use John for her first son and the royal family flat-out said no. I also heard that she wanted to call him Oliver and they refused because of Oliver Cromwell. Again, though, that's just a rumor so who knows how true it is.
mbcdefg thanks for that response, you are definitely the go to person on here for royal info Maybe you know the answer to this question then (or some sources to check out). I've been trying to google and haven't been getting anywhere. How much political power does the queen have? Does she have any real power? When did it get taken away from them?
Did the queen have to sign off on the name or was it just a coincidence that she visited then it was announced?
She doesn't have to officially sign off, but they informed her, "We're going to go with..." first out of courtesy. In the past, some monarchs have vetoed names, but not officially. More like, "I really dislike X." "Okay, how about Y?" "Sounds good." However, nowadays most people realize the name of the child is the complete decision of the parents. And the queen knew they wouldn't do anything crazy.
mbcdefg thanks for that response, you are definitely the go to person on here for royal info Maybe you know the answer to this question then (or some sources to check out). I've been trying to google and haven't been getting anywhere. How much political power does the queen have? Does she have any real power? When did it get taken away from them?
Parliament has the real power. The queen is supposed to be more of an adviser. There are a few areas where she makes appointments and approves things.
Very good question. I'm interested myself. I'm not too familiar with the U.K.'s political setup (and then Scotland deals with certain aspects on their own, and the Commonwealth countries have their own laws as well, so you'll see things vary across the board).
I know a lot of the monarch's power was lost with the signing of the Magna Carta (again, our buddy King John ), and the creation of Parliament. And more and more as the years went by.
I just keep singing George, George, George of the Jungle....
I keep hearing George Costanza's mom calling him, "Georgie! Georgie!" lol.
I think the royal baby's name is along the lines of what I expected. It's a solid name.
I keep thinking of the episode where she "caught" him into the bathroom ... and then George reenacting the scene at the diner for the rest of the group: "Gaoooowwwwwge, what are you doing, my God!!!!!"
I vaguely remember that the Queen has the ability to call Governors General in certain commonwealth nations (like Australia, New Zealand, maybe Bermuda) and that the Governor General can have quite a bit of power, like calling for a new election or ousting the Prime Minister. (But in fairness, the Prime Minister in a parliamentary system has less power, IIRC, than the executive branch of our government.)
I'm surprised that they went with George, since George was the top choice among the betters. I thought they'd intentionally avoid that name because that's what was expected from them.
Oh well. It's still nice. And maybe he'll be known as Alex or Louis at home.
I think it's interesting when people say that a certain name sounds like it's intended for an adult rather than a new baby ... because this new baby is going to be an adult for a majority of his/her life.
ETA: and OMG, I just saw this on my Twitter feed. NOPE NOPE NOPE NOPE NOPE.
I believe that Prince Charles and Princess Anne both signed the marriage registry using the name Mountbatten-Windsor when they each got married ("Mountbatten" being the last name that the queen's husband, Prince Philip, adopted when he renounced his titles as a Greek prince and became a British citizen before he married Elizabeth).
The title of Prince of Wales generally goes to the monarch's oldest son but it's not automatic. I think there have been a few cases where the POW title was not awarded to the oldest son for whatever reason. Once Charles is king, he will actively have to award the POW title to William - which would make Kate HRH The Princess of Wales, and the baby will be HRH Prince George of Wales.
But there ARE some automatic titles: the monarch never dies, so the very second Elizabeth dies, Charles becomes king. And that very second, William will inherit the Duke of Cornwall title (among other titles) from Charles. And he and Harry will get "The" tacked on top their prince titles since they are now the sons of the monarch: HRH The Prince William, Duke of Cornwall and Cambridge; and HRH The Prince Henry (plus any dukedoms he might have at that point).
William also used the surname Mountbatten-Windsor in the marriage registry when he and Kate got married, despite using "Wales" for the military.
The POW title is indeed not automatic, and must be conferred by the monarch. It reverts to the monarchy immediately upon the death of the current holder, so that it can then be re-granted to, for example, a younger son of the monarch.
My knowledge gets a lot dicier after 1603, but the prime example I can think of where the title was not given to the oldest son (keeping in mind that the title was first given to the oldest son around 1300 or so by Edward I) is during the Wars of the Roses. Henry VI agreed that he should be succeeded Richard of York, and so made him POW instead of his own infant son (also Henry). Because the title is granted by the monarch, this could be done (more easily).
Extra fun fact with respect to "The." It works a little different for the monarchy than for the nobility. William and Harry will indeed get the "The" once they are the sons of the monarch. For normal titles (duke, earl, etc.), "the" is used to designate the fact that they are the highest-titled individual in their line. Making things up for a sec, for example, "The Duke of Gloucester" indicates that he is Duke of Gloucester, and the highest-ranking male in his family. A son, or even a cousin who is potentially in line to inherit the dukedom might be just "Earl of Chester," which indicates that there's someone else higher up on the food chain.
Extra fun fact with respect to "The." It works a little different for the monarchy than for the nobility. William and Harry will indeed get the "The" once they are the sons of the monarch. For normal titles (duke, earl, etc.), "the" is used to designate the fact that they are the highest-titled individual in their line. Making things up for a sec, for example, "The Duke of Gloucester" indicates that he is Duke of Gloucester, and the highest-ranking male in his family. A son, or even a cousin who is potentially in line to inherit the dukedom might be just "Earl of Chester," which indicates that there's someone else higher up on the food chain.
Thanks, great info!
So re: the bolded, I guess (for example) this is why Princess Margaret's ex-husband is The Earl of Snowdon, and their son is Viscount Linley instead of The Viscount Linley? Because he has the subsidiary title?
pixiedust interesting factoid about the use of the word "the" in titles Do you know why some titles have an "of" and some don't? I noticed recently that they always refer to Diana's brother as Earl Spencer and not the Earl of Spencer. And yet they say his title is considered old and illustrious. Is this unusual?
Extra fun fact with respect to "The." It works a little different for the monarchy than for the nobility. William and Harry will indeed get the "The" once they are the sons of the monarch. For normal titles (duke, earl, etc.), "the" is used to designate the fact that they are the highest-titled individual in their line. Making things up for a sec, for example, "The Duke of Gloucester" indicates that he is Duke of Gloucester, and the highest-ranking male in his family. A son, or even a cousin who is potentially in line to inherit the dukedom might be just "Earl of Chester," which indicates that there's someone else higher up on the food chain.
Thanks, great info!
So re: the bolded, I guess (for example) this is why Princess Margaret's ex-husband is The Earl of Snowdon, and their son is Viscount Linley instead of The Viscount Linley? Because he has the subsidiary title?
Correct. Extra bonus fun fact, the use of "of": dukedoms use "of," generally, Earls and Marquesses use "of" if the title is a geographical designation (Earl of Essex), but not if it's a family name (Earl Warenne). Generally, viscounts (Viscount Linley) and barons (Baroness Thatcher) are not "of" anything. There are some exceptions to this, though, especially with older Scottish titles.
I'm so glad I can finally use my college degree in everyday life.
pixiedust interesting factoid about the use of the word "the" in titles Do you know why some titles have an "of" and some don't? I noticed recently that they always refer to Diana's brother as Earl Spencer and not the Earl of Spencer. And yet they say his title is considered old and illustrious. Is this unusual?
I feel awesome now because I totally just answered this in a post in answer to mbcdefg. Earl Spencer is a family name title ("Spencer"), not a territorial designation (Earl of Wessex), and so was created with the the "of," because it is not "of" any place. This is the case for most non-dukedoms that are family-named-derived. The title was created in the 1700s, so pretty old by current standards, but I don't think of it as that old. Mostly because my studies were and interests are older.
pixiedust interesting factoid about the use of the word "the" in titles Do you know why some titles have an "of" and some don't? I noticed recently that they always refer to Diana's brother as Earl Spencer and not the Earl of Spencer. And yet they say his title is considered old and illustrious. Is this unusual?
I feel awesome now because I totally just answered this in a post in answer to mbcdefg. Earl Spencer is a family name title ("Spencer"), not a territorial designation (Earl of Wessex), and so was created with the the "of," because it is not "of" any place. This is the case for most non-dukedoms that are family-named-derived. The title was created in the 1700s, so pretty old by current standards, but I don't think of it as that old. Mostly because my studies were and interests are older.
I was wondering the same thing as @lcap. Thank you very much for answering
I think its important to note that George is not an uncommon name in the UK at all. Its #12 on the popularity list. Much more common and much less "old man" than it is perceived here in the US.
All the George baby name hate on the internet today has made me sad. Its at the top of our list- it was my late father's name, but now after all the "its such an old man name" comments, I am reconsidering.
I think its important to note that George is not an uncommon name in the UK at all. Its #12 on the popularity list. Much more common and much less "old man" than it is perceived here in the US.
All the George baby name hate on the internet today has made me sad. Its at the top of our list- it was my late father's name, but now after all the "its such an old man name" comments, I am reconsidering.
FWIW I like George a lot. It's the name of my Dad's friend, whom I like but he's not close enough to us for it to be an obvious tribute or else I'd push more for us to maybe use it someday.
Also, a baby named George is (hopefully) going to spend most of his life as an old man. That's why cutesy names are NMS ... I'd rather stick with names that sound mature, even if it sounds "old" for a child.