Posted on 09/08/2022 4:38:46 PM PDT by nickcarraway
The new king of England will reign as King Charles III – a moniker he once reportedly considered rejecting to avoid links to the bloody and turbulent history of his two royal namesakes.
His majesty considered being called George VII to honor his grandfather — a beloved royal figure — and to avoid Charles, a name considered “jinxed” in some royal circles, The London Times reported in 2005.
His “Charles” predecessors ruled over some of the bloodiest periods in UK history. King Charles I led the country into a civil war — and remains the only English monarch to be executed.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
In case you want to watch. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ER6xGlAZjVs
I like that better. King Chuckles I
Could go my his fathers name, Philip, or Arthur. Both part of his full name.
Charles II was skillful, humane, and intelligent. While he had slightly more than his share of personal faults, his reign was highly successful. The new king would do quite well to do as well as the Merry Monarch.
I thought they had already decided he will be Charles III. Maybe not?
Trump hasn’t exactly been a choirboy either, but that didn’t stop him from being an excellent president. America needs to grow out of its roundhead antipathy for the Stuart kings.
The “Merry Monarch” also created a lot of bastards
“Sir Walter Scott is credited with inventing the phrase bar sinister, which has become a metonymic term for bastardy.[13] Heraldry scholar Arthur Charles Fox-Davies and others state that the phrase derives from a misspelling of barre, the French term for bend.[14] The term is irregular, since in English heraldry, a bar is horizontal, neither dexter nor sinister; nevertheless, bar sinister has become a standard euphemism for illegitimate birth”
“Charles’ royal name is George VII, not Charles III”
Then why will he be coronated Charles III?
It was reported today he would be coronated George VII At least that is what the said on the radio.
Charles II was skillful, humane, and intelligent.
Charles I tried to make himself closer to an absolute monarch, but that didn’t end well. Charles II restored royalty following he Puritans. They were both heroes for royal power, which might be why that name was chosen 70 years ago.
That being said, Charles III is such a jerk, and should abdicate. William V would make a much better king.
They must have reported it before it was confirmed. All day it has been reported as Charles III.
Doesn’t everyone know that King Charles was beheaded?
Why do you think he would be a good king? He’s still an inbred with two idiots for parents. Charles and William are both secret Muslims, right? Which one dressed as a Nazi?
He will suffer the same jinx...
I was kind of hoping for King Arthur Too.
UK sources says George III as his name is official.
Err…
Make that Charles III
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.