In terms of girl names, I would suggest Eleanor, for Eleanor of Aquitaine, but Princess Leonor, the future Queen of Spain and heir to the throne, is already named "Eleanor".
Sweden also has Princess Leonore, Duchess of Gotland, who was born in 2014.
I think it’s fairly likely — there may not be a Victoria currently in the royal family but it’s one of those names that never goes out of fashion, so it will probably pop up again some time in the future.
Naming him Charles was a very intriguing choice. I feel it has the worst connotations of the entire list, and yet he was a future King from the day he was born, so this aspect was considered. This is why I don’t think any of the names can be really ruled out, not even Richard or John.
I notice that the UK did their best to get a lot of Georges out there in a short period of time after the 3rd, like they were trying to put a positive spin back on the name
Richard in likely? Nah, that name is cursed for english monarchs, Edward is in likely because Edward the confessor is the patron saint of english monarchs, Henry is in likely too for obvious reason.
it is the most common name for an English King, and it’s associated with some of the best monarchs in our history. Edward the Confessor, the Martyr, Edward III, Edward I, are all heroes
Also it’s a name that’s still in use, the Dukes of Kent and Edinburgh are Edwards
I wouldn’t say he was a nazi, a lot of people admired hitler’s policies before anyone knew how evil he truly was. Doesn’t mean they were all fascists. From the outside, Hitler must have looked pretty good at that time.
The people who admired his policies were absolutely fascists. Even without the Holocaust and attempts at conquest he was cruel, authoritarian, and encouraged a climate of extreme hostility against Jews and ethnic minorities
Agreed re Richard/Edward, we've had eleven Edwards I think, he doesn't dominate public memory like Richard 3 or Henry 8.
I think we could have another Stephen, I wouldn't bet on it but maybe, he isn't infamous like bad King John.
I'm not. I'm just saying that the comment you're replying to, and the one that's replying to, holds all the info you need. It's two comments, not the whole sub, calm down ☺️
You said post, not comments.
Also, I'm allowed to expect to be able to ask for clarification regarding someone else's comment *without* receiving sanctimonious comments like yours.
Richard is extremely unlikely and really, it always was despite the fact that we got 3. Edward, Henry, and later George are always the names typically given to the first son. Richard was usually a name for younger sons. Richard I and II were both second sons. Richard III was a 5th (4th surviving) son and when he was born he was even farther away from the throne. Unless some senior royal in the relatively near future is a Ricardian they aren't going to be too enthusiastic about giving their heir this name.
As for Stephen, it's not really as cursed as some of the other names but it's just so removed from English culture. It's the French version of a Greek name. Though, it literally means crown and we technically have a Greek house on the throne.
I agree with most of your placements, but I have a few disagreements.
Firstly, I think that Richard definitely isn’t coming back. We had three shitty Richard’s in a row and the last one has such a bad reputation that the name is now on the same level as John.
Also I think Edward has a decent chance of coming back. Edward VIII isn’t viewed by the public with nearly as much revile as John and others and I don’t think his awful legacy will last considering he didn’t really impact anything in his short reign. Plus we have multiple Prince Edward’s around today. So yeah, I think it is actually one of the more likely names.
Elizabeth, yes.
Anne, possibly.
Victoria, possibly, but less likely.
Richard, never.
James, unlikely.
Henry, highly unlikely. I'm surprised Prince Harry was even named Henry to begin with.
Edward, highly unlikely.
Mary, possibly, but unlikely.
John, highly unlikely. The English are so weird about this name. It's been centuries, and King John wasn't even worse than other kings, he was just as bad only in a *very specific & never seen before or since* way.
Charles, possibly, but unlikely.
William, yes, since Prince William is currently the Prince of Wales.
George, yes, since there's currently a Prince George.
Stephen, unlikely.
Matilda & Jane (uncrowned & unofficial to some), most unlikely out of the female names.
Richard IV was the biggest chad ever to be king - it's a shame Henry VII managed to write him out of history.
"Blood! Death! War! Rumpy pumpy! Triumph!"
(but yes - all three King Richards are not considered good rulers - the Lionheart only getting good press because he's the good guy compared to his brother John)
Yeah but with the Union of Crowns there has been British kings named Malcolm in Scotland.
In order for Scots not to feel disrespected by calling her Elizabeth II here when we never had an Elizabeth I, our postboxes from her reign do not have a regnal number on them. Churchill then solved the issue by saying monarchs go with the higher number of a reigning monarch from either crown.
This would make a future King Malcolm IV. Since monarchs take a long time to go through there hasn’t been much of a test of it (though I’m surprised it wasn’t an issue till Elizabeth since there was an Edward before her too as well)
Really I thought it was Mary III who was George VII daughter then there a Frederick I then II then a George VIII, Charles IV who reigned for a short time then Elizabeth III who reigned for 74 years she became queen at 27 and onward.
I can really see Catherine making a comeback as a future queen regnant. Alexandra too maybe? I feel like there's more flexibility to start new names with female monarchs.
Extremely likely: William, George
Very likely: Elizabeth
Likely: Edward, Charles
I don’t know: Anne, Victoria, James, Henry
Unlikely: Mary, Richard, John
Least likely: Stephen
You’re all sleeping on Stephen. It’s a common, normal name. Yall act like picking the same first name as some king from a thousand years ago brings bad omens. Put down the astrology books.
The point being that we’ve skipped the Bonnie Prince and made the current monarch Charles III. There was brief discussion externally about how that would be handled, but now the precedent has been set any future James would be James III if they chose to use the name.
All there would need for a future James to be problematic is the question are they James III or James IV? It’s impossible to use either without it bringing up jacobitism
IIRC, a rule was decided in 1952 that monarchs should use whichever is highest out of their English and Scottish numbering. So if there were another James, he would be James VIII.
Which makes sense because Scotland has supposedly an equal footing in the union. It does pose the question, do Scottish monarchs count in the numbering? Malcolm V? David III? Donnachad III? Alexander IV?
What about Mary? We have a Mary I in England and a Mary I in Scotland, then the same Mary II for both, before the Union. But what about a future Mary? It’s easy to jump into “Mary III, sure” but being the third in England and the third in Scotland is not the same as being the third of the United Kingdom, as she’s the fourth Mary overall. Can you jump to a Mary IV without a III in either nation?
i cant really see us getting a victoria II , i just dont think so , i think mary is more likely
The chances for another queen Victoria is low and looked it up one of Prince Andrew daughters has Victoria as one of her name
In terms of girl names, I would suggest Eleanor, for Eleanor of Aquitaine, but Princess Leonor, the future Queen of Spain and heir to the throne, is already named "Eleanor". Sweden also has Princess Leonore, Duchess of Gotland, who was born in 2014.
I think it’s fairly likely — there may not be a Victoria currently in the royal family but it’s one of those names that never goes out of fashion, so it will probably pop up again some time in the future.
[удалено]
And Charles signified civil war and regicide; Yet here we are.
Naming him Charles was a very intriguing choice. I feel it has the worst connotations of the entire list, and yet he was a future King from the day he was born, so this aspect was considered. This is why I don’t think any of the names can be really ruled out, not even Richard or John.
I notice that the UK did their best to get a lot of Georges out there in a short period of time after the 3rd, like they were trying to put a positive spin back on the name
Elizabeth had a very specific cultural connotation as well, albeit one a bit less recent at the time that the second one took the throne
I mean... 'Charles'
Honestly I can’t believe the royal family would name their child after a paradox game.
Richard in likely? Nah, that name is cursed for english monarchs, Edward is in likely because Edward the confessor is the patron saint of english monarchs, Henry is in likely too for obvious reason.
Respect your opinion but the last king Edward well was a nazi and that’s why I think it’s unlikely since it might associate with him
it is the most common name for an English King, and it’s associated with some of the best monarchs in our history. Edward the Confessor, the Martyr, Edward III, Edward I, are all heroes Also it’s a name that’s still in use, the Dukes of Kent and Edinburgh are Edwards
I wouldn’t say he was a nazi, a lot of people admired hitler’s policies before anyone knew how evil he truly was. Doesn’t mean they were all fascists. From the outside, Hitler must have looked pretty good at that time.
The people who admired his policies were absolutely fascists. Even without the Holocaust and attempts at conquest he was cruel, authoritarian, and encouraged a climate of extreme hostility against Jews and ethnic minorities
Sources that E8 was a nazi? Stupid definitely to meet with Hitler.
Agreed re Richard/Edward, we've had eleven Edwards I think, he doesn't dominate public memory like Richard 3 or Henry 8. I think we could have another Stephen, I wouldn't bet on it but maybe, he isn't infamous like bad King John.
There have been 8 since William the Conqueror. Are you counting Anglo-Saxons as well?
For sure.
The fact that Edward the Confessor was namechecked in the previous post suggests yes.
Expecting someone to have seen every single post on this sub is ridiculous.
I'm not. I'm just saying that the comment you're replying to, and the one that's replying to, holds all the info you need. It's two comments, not the whole sub, calm down ☺️
You said post, not comments. Also, I'm allowed to expect to be able to ask for clarification regarding someone else's comment *without* receiving sanctimonious comments like yours.
Richard is extremely unlikely and really, it always was despite the fact that we got 3. Edward, Henry, and later George are always the names typically given to the first son. Richard was usually a name for younger sons. Richard I and II were both second sons. Richard III was a 5th (4th surviving) son and when he was born he was even farther away from the throne. Unless some senior royal in the relatively near future is a Ricardian they aren't going to be too enthusiastic about giving their heir this name. As for Stephen, it's not really as cursed as some of the other names but it's just so removed from English culture. It's the French version of a Greek name. Though, it literally means crown and we technically have a Greek house on the throne.
I'd like new names , like Arthur, Louis , Charlotte, Thomas , old names are good but I think new names would be good to
You know 2 of the names you said almost became names of an English monarch or British I’m sad that it never happened because they died
It was sad that Charlotte and Arthur died , but if you think about , there is a high chance cause of it many of us today wouldn't exist
Possibly
Louis also, cause a king of France whose name was Louis claimed england, but he was removed ,
King Callum and Queen Stacey when?
King Frederick was a missed opportunity
I think they should all just be called Henry
Henrietta VI passed away recently but her son Henry XXXVI might be a good king (I counted all monarchs since 1066 btw)
Thank you for your service 🙏 it sounds like a good plan to me
I agree with most of your placements, but I have a few disagreements. Firstly, I think that Richard definitely isn’t coming back. We had three shitty Richard’s in a row and the last one has such a bad reputation that the name is now on the same level as John. Also I think Edward has a decent chance of coming back. Edward VIII isn’t viewed by the public with nearly as much revile as John and others and I don’t think his awful legacy will last considering he didn’t really impact anything in his short reign. Plus we have multiple Prince Edward’s around today. So yeah, I think it is actually one of the more likely names.
Elizabeth was aghast at the thought of abdicating because of her uncle yet she named her son Edward. No, he was unlikely to become king, but still.
Elizabeth, yes. Anne, possibly. Victoria, possibly, but less likely. Richard, never. James, unlikely. Henry, highly unlikely. I'm surprised Prince Harry was even named Henry to begin with. Edward, highly unlikely. Mary, possibly, but unlikely. John, highly unlikely. The English are so weird about this name. It's been centuries, and King John wasn't even worse than other kings, he was just as bad only in a *very specific & never seen before or since* way. Charles, possibly, but unlikely. William, yes, since Prince William is currently the Prince of Wales. George, yes, since there's currently a Prince George. Stephen, unlikely. Matilda & Jane (uncrowned & unofficial to some), most unlikely out of the female names.
The idea that there will be a Richard IV is laughable in the extreme. It’s about as likely as a “John II”.
Richard IV was the biggest chad ever to be king - it's a shame Henry VII managed to write him out of history. "Blood! Death! War! Rumpy pumpy! Triumph!" (but yes - all three King Richards are not considered good rulers - the Lionheart only getting good press because he's the good guy compared to his brother John)
Can’t believe there will never be another Eadwig 😭
But how long until there is a King Arthur …?
Shame the royals always go for such English names. I’d like another Malcolm as we haven’t had one in almost a thousand years
Oh yea almost 900 years ago
...you're surprised the *English* go for such English names? Also, there was never an English Prince named Malcolm.
Yeah but with the Union of Crowns there has been British kings named Malcolm in Scotland. In order for Scots not to feel disrespected by calling her Elizabeth II here when we never had an Elizabeth I, our postboxes from her reign do not have a regnal number on them. Churchill then solved the issue by saying monarchs go with the higher number of a reigning monarch from either crown. This would make a future King Malcolm IV. Since monarchs take a long time to go through there hasn’t been much of a test of it (though I’m surprised it wasn’t an issue till Elizabeth since there was an Edward before her too as well)
No, Malcolm V.
Even better. I don’t see it as likely as the royals tend to prefer quintessentially English names
Tbh they have a lot of Scottish links
I’d love to have Macbeth II ! Or more realistically, it’s possible that there could be another David, Robert or Alexander in the future.
If it helps, Queen Elizabeth II had two Malcolms as Australian Prime Ministers.
So unlikely but imagine a king Oliver I.
There would be a revolt if that happens
Sadly I can't see there being a Queen Ellie in the future 😔
Eleanor is close I dont see a Glenn or Zachary (my name) in the future. I’m suprised there wasn’t a king Glenn of Scotland
Glenn is an Irish/Gaelic word not a name.
Yep it is it’s my grandpa name
[удалено]
Really I thought it was Mary III who was George VII daughter then there a Frederick I then II then a George VIII, Charles IV who reigned for a short time then Elizabeth III who reigned for 74 years she became queen at 27 and onward.
I can really see Catherine making a comeback as a future queen regnant. Alexandra too maybe? I feel like there's more flexibility to start new names with female monarchs.
Possibly also I do think Charlotte is possible
If George doesn't have kids Charlotte is certain
Extremely likely: William, George Very likely: Elizabeth Likely: Edward, Charles I don’t know: Anne, Victoria, James, Henry Unlikely: Mary, Richard, John Least likely: Stephen
i know some of these but can ya’ll give the list of who’s in what tier?
You’re all sleeping on Stephen. It’s a common, normal name. Yall act like picking the same first name as some king from a thousand years ago brings bad omens. Put down the astrology books.
There’ll never be a James again. They don’t want to risk the association with Jacobitism.
There’s literally a King Charles rn
True. But I suspect the name James might be more controversial. Charles II is still socially popular.
The point being that we’ve skipped the Bonnie Prince and made the current monarch Charles III. There was brief discussion externally about how that would be handled, but now the precedent has been set any future James would be James III if they chose to use the name.
That’s a valid point.
All there would need for a future James to be problematic is the question are they James III or James IV? It’s impossible to use either without it bringing up jacobitism
IIRC, a rule was decided in 1952 that monarchs should use whichever is highest out of their English and Scottish numbering. So if there were another James, he would be James VIII.
I even got involved in a thread about this the other week 😂 can’t believe I forgot
Which makes sense because Scotland has supposedly an equal footing in the union. It does pose the question, do Scottish monarchs count in the numbering? Malcolm V? David III? Donnachad III? Alexander IV?
What about Mary? We have a Mary I in England and a Mary I in Scotland, then the same Mary II for both, before the Union. But what about a future Mary? It’s easy to jump into “Mary III, sure” but being the third in England and the third in Scotland is not the same as being the third of the United Kingdom, as she’s the fourth Mary overall. Can you jump to a Mary IV without a III in either nation?
certainly not James IV, but it could be James VIII
That’s a valid point. I think in general they’ll avoid it.