Posted on 12/25/2005 12:31:52 PM PST by Neville72
THE Prince of Wales has discussed rejecting the title Charles III when he becomes King to avoid unhappy associations with some of the bloodiest periods in the monarchy’s history. The Prince’s favourite alternative name is George VII, in honour of his grandfather — one of the best-loved monarchs of the past century.
The Times has spoken to two trusted friends of the Prince, who both said that the change to George has been considered seriously. One said: “There have been many conversations with the Prince about this. It is an assumption among us all that it will happen.
“The name Charles is tinged with so much sadness.”
The other source said: “They [the Royal Family] will decide at the time, but he has talked about George.”
The name Charles is regarded as jinxed in some royal circles. Charles I was the only monarch to be executed. His beheading in 1649, after the English Civil War, brought about the short-lived republic under Oliver Cromwell.
Charles II, the son of Charles I, returned to the throne at the Restoration in 1660, after spending 18 years in exile overseas, but was mocked as the Merry Monarch because he had a string of mistresses, including the orange-seller Nell Gwyn.
There is sensitivity in royal circles about Bonnie Prince Charlie, the Young Pretender, who was known as Charles III by his supporters. Despite his defeat at the Battle of Culloden in 1746, he is still seen as a Scottish romantic figure.
The Prince of Wales, who was christened Charles Philip Arthur George, is a passionate supporter of the Union and spends most of his holidays in Scotland.
A Clarence House spokesman said that there had been long-term thinking about the Coronation, but that nothing had been discussed officially about changing the Prince’s title. He added: “One of the questions that we have asked is what he will be known as. The decision will be taken at the time.”
When he ascends the throne the new King will convene an Accession Council — a meeting of the full Privy Council.
It is the only time that the full Privy Council, which includes ministers and senior bishops, meets. It will then be decreed by the council what title the new King will take.
Were the Prince to change his formal, or regnal, title he would be following a tradition begun by Queen Victoria in 1837, who was born Alexandrina. Four of the past six monarchs have changed their name, including George VI, the father of the Queen, who was christened Prince Albert.
Prince Charles was only 4 when his grandfather died but he was very close to his grandmother, the late Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother.
The issue of changing the regnal title has been raised at Clarence House but the name is not yet part of any formal planning for the sucession.
One senior Royal official said that there had been an assumption in informal talks about the accession that the Prince would keep the name Charles.
Patrick Cracroft-Brennan, a genealogist from Cracroft’s Peerage, said: “There has been a tradition over the last century for the regnal title to be different to the christian name. The change would make sense.
“Monarchs called Charles have not had much luck. One was beheaded, one was in exile, and one was a pretender to the throne.
“While the Prince of Wales is known throughout the world as Charles, there is enormous goodwill to the name George. George VI was an outstanding and popular King who took over in the immediate aftermath of the abdication crisis and rallied his people during the war. King George and Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother were wonderful. I think George VII and Queen Camilla sound wonderful, too.”
When the marriage was announced of the Prince of Wales and Camilla Parker Bowles, Clarence House said that she would be known as the Duchess of Cornwall after the marriage and that it was “intended” that she would be known as Princess Consort when the Prince of Wales succeeds his mother to the throne.
If, however, public opinion were amenable, she could yet become Queen Camilla. Significantly, there was no such announcement about the title by which her husband would be known
That'd be an insult to his Grandad.
And he'll still have big ears and look funny.
....Charles and Pope Benedict are no better nor worse than us "subjects." Just because you are born into office or appointed by a group of guys in dresses doesn't mean you deserve to be bowed to....>>>
No. In the latter case it has to do with the fact that you are the direct and legitimate Heir to Peter and the Vicar of Christ, our one connection with the Risen Lord.
Compared to that, the German kings of England are a joke.
Actually Charles should take up painting, then abandon it, so he can become the Prince Formerly Known as "Artist."
Sad? I think it's great. George has actually fully morphed into a male. Ugly, true, but undeniably male.
LOL... agree. I don't really think Charles will ever be king!
You seem to be upset with your cousins, here...
?
That reminds me of the following item that I saw earlier today:
Mordechai Vanunu, who was released from prison 20 months ago, after serving 18 years for giving away Israel's nuclear secrets, has changed his name to Johnny Carson.
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=95436
The Prince of Wales has to avoid unhappy associations with some of the bloodiest periods in the monarchy’s history. “The name Charles is tinged with so much sadness.”
This is the time of year for name changes, just before yearend.
LOL! You're bad!
You have NO idea. :0)
How about the Super Plus King? That would be a good 'fit'.
"How about changing your name to King Freeloader?
What makes these people so much better then the common folk who reward them with the taxpayers riches? The Brits should wise up and throw this freeloading family out on their asses!"
You might want to do some homework. When I last read on the matter, the Royal Family actually paid in to the government more than they took out. Also, much of the tax money spent for the upkeep of historic palaces and other costs related to the functions of a Head of State would still be spent even if the UK were a republic.
And The Prince of Wales does not get much, if any government money. His income comes from the Duchy of Cornwall, a collection of businesses and properties maintained to provide an independent income for the heir to the throne. He also pays a hefty tax on that money.
He has been in overall control of the Duchy since the seventies (government officials manage the Duchy when there is no Prince of Wales or if he is a minor) and has kept it profitable and has used it's income to fund many charitable organizations, most notably, the Prince's Trust.
http://www.princes-trust.org.uk/
The Prince of Wales has made a lot of public mistakes and like a lot of other baby boomers is probably too socially liberal, but he has the makings of a good King for his future realms, not probably a great King, but a good King.
He was a prince too long. The fruit's been on the tree too long; and there's a new crop.
He probably would, but the British rules of succession require that in order for William to become King, Charles would have to voluntarily abdicate the throne, IIRC.
Perhaps I missed it, but I don't get the tampon joke. Aside from it being funny and oddly fitting...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.