# UK monarch naming/numbering Q **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [November 21, 2010, 11:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425 "2010-11-21T11:44:09Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Horatio\_Hellpop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Horatio\_Hellpop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Horatio_Hellpop)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2010, 11:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425/1 "2010-11-21T11:44:09Z")
When a monarch of England/Great Britain/the UK selects a name, it’s followed by a number to distinguish him/her from previous Georges, Edwards and Elizabeths. The numbering convention seems to go back to William I. Is this by design, or have there just not been any new Canutes or Ethelberts or Boadiceas? If a new monarch picked a pre-William name, would the numbering start over? Or would it continue from the Dark Ages numbering? Also, since Arthur and Uther are in that misty area between history and myth, how would those names be received and numbered? Some names are apparently unacceptable for a royal; Diana had wanted to name her firstborn “Oliver” until Her Majesty reminded her that England once had a Cromwell by that name. Any other names on the “Do Not Use” list? ---
**Author:** ![njtt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/ecd19e/32.png) [@njtt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/njtt)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2010, 1:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425/2 "2010-11-21T13:19:42Z")
Few of the people pre-William people would actually have been kings of England (let alone Britain). Even if Arthur or Uther really existed, they certainly never ruled anything like the whole of England. Henry VII’s oldest son was called Arthur, but he predeceased his father. I imagine that if he had lived he would have been King Arthur (and Arthur I if there had even been another one). (I seem to remember that there was another Arthur Prince of Wales more recently than that, who also never made it to king, but I can’t remember whose son he was.) I think they are trying to avoid there ever being another King John, as the first one is not considered to have worked out well. A Richard IV probably is not very likely either. On the other hand, despite the unfortunate precedent set by the first, we did, due to exigent circumstances, get a second regnant [Queen Mary](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_II_of_England). For some reason, however, neither Mary is commonly referred to by her number. ---
**Author:** ![kevlaw](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/kevlaw/32/2281_2.png) [@kevlaw](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kevlaw)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2010, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425/3 "2010-11-21T15:24:20Z")
> [@njtt](#): > > Few of the people pre-William people would actually have been kings of England (let alone Britain). There were a couple of numbered Harolds before They reset the King Counter. There was also an Edward. Weren’t they kings of England? ---
**Author:** ![Baron\_Greenback](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/baron_greenback/32/48_2.png) [@Baron\_Greenback](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Baron_Greenback)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2010, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425/4 "2010-11-21T15:42:11Z")
> [@kevlaw](#): > > There were a couple of numbered Harolds before They reset the King Counter. > There was also an Edward. > > Weren’t they kings of England? Kings of parts of what is now England/Wales. Wessex, Mercia, Northumberland etc. ---
**Author:** ![RealityChuck](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/realitychuck/32/195_2.png) [@RealityChuck](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RealityChuck)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2010, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425/5 "2010-11-21T15:42:51Z")
> [@Krokodil](#): > > Some names are apparently unacceptable for a royal; Diana had wanted to name her firstborn “Oliver” until Her Majesty reminded her that England once had a Cromwell by that name. Any other names on the “Do Not Use” list? Richard. Richard III ruined it for everyone. ---
**Author:** ![yabob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yabob/32/2821_2.png) [@yabob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yabob)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2010, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425/6 "2010-11-21T15:43:57Z")
There were three Edwards before the numbering scheme - Edward the Elder, Edward the Martyr and Edward the Confessor. ---
**Author:** ![yabob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yabob/32/2821_2.png) [@yabob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yabob)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2010, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425/7 "2010-11-21T15:47:59Z")
> [@](#): > > Some names are apparently unacceptable for a royal; Diana had wanted to name her firstborn “Oliver” until Her Majesty reminded her that England once had a Cromwell by that name. Any other names on the “Do Not Use” list? “King Oliver” would sound kind of jazzy, though … ---
**Author:** ![Markxxx](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/5daacb/32.png) [@Markxxx](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Markxxx)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2010, 5:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425/8 "2010-11-21T17:36:26Z")
You can’t have a guy name Oliver as king. Look what happend to _the Brady Brunch_ when they brought in a kid named Oliver. The whole show “Jumped the Shark” and was never able to recover. Do you want the same thing to happen in the UK? 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2010, 6:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425/9 "2010-11-21T18:28:32Z")
I thought Di wanted to name her son “John”, after her father? ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2010, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425/10 "2010-11-21T18:48:40Z")
> [@Baron\_Greenback](#): > > Kings of parts of what is now England/Wales. Wessex, Mercia, Northumberland etc. By 1066 England had been a [unified monarchy](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_monarchs_of_England) under monarchs of the Houses of Wessex and Denmark for 139 years. Edward Langshanks was actually the fourth king of England named Edward; he owes his ordinal “I” to the Conqueror’s official retconning of history. ---
**Author:** ![Jim\_s\_Son](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19adc/32.png) [@Jim\_s\_Son](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jim_s_Son)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2010, 8:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425/11 "2010-11-21T20:08:17Z")
Before World war I. First Sea Lord Winston Churchill wanted to name a new battleship after William Pitt. King George V shot that down, saying he had served in the navy and he knew what unflattering nickname sailors would give to a ship named “Pitt”. Churchill also asked for a ship named after Oliver Cromwell, arguing he was the founder of the modern Navy. KGV shot that one down too, don’t name anything after a regicide. Of course when yo notice how inept the Hanover George’s were (III loses America and goes nuts, IV was a lecherous slime), you wonder how the royal family could keep assigning that name. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2010, 9:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425/12 "2010-11-21T21:45:36Z")
[QUOTE=njtt] (I seem to remember that there was another Arthur Prince of Wales more recently than that, who also never made it to king, but I can’t remember whose son he was.) [/QUOTE] Are you thinking of [Arthur of Brittany](http://www.englishmonarchs.co.uk/arthur_brittany.htm), perhaps? He was the son of Geoffry of Brittany, older brother to King John, and by strict primogeniture rules, should have inherited ahead of John. He disappeared, believed to have been killed on John’s orders. ---
**Author:** ![Zsofia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/7bcc69/32.png) [@Zsofia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zsofia)\ **Post date:** [November 21, 2010, 9:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425/13 "2010-11-21T21:51:45Z")
I’m sure we won’t see a Stephen or John any time soon. ---
**Author:** ![alphaboi867](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alphaboi867/32/3898_2.png) [@alphaboi867](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alphaboi867)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2010, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425/14 "2010-11-22T02:05:16Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > I thought Di wanted to name her son “John”, after her father? More recently than King John the last Prince John (George V’s youngest son) was an epileptic who died in childhood. ---
**Author:** ![Horatio\_Hellpop](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e5b9ba/32.png) [@Horatio\_Hellpop](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Horatio_Hellpop)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2010, 10:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425/15 "2010-11-22T10:00:42Z")
> [@yabob](#): > > “King Oliver” would sound kind of jazzy, though … And his contemporary, Satchmo. The name “Louis” might not have helped him much in British royal houses, but it might have worked for him in France… ---
**Author:** ![robby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robby/32/11048_2.png) [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2010, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425/16 "2010-11-22T15:32:46Z")
> [@njtt](#): > > (I seem to remember that there was another Arthur Prince of Wales more recently than that, who also never made it to king, but I can’t remember whose son he was.) > [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > Are you thinking of [Arthur of Brittany](http://www.englishmonarchs.co.uk/arthur_brittany.htm), perhaps? He was the son of Geoffry of Brittany, older brother to King John, and by strict primogeniture rules, should have inherited ahead of John. He disappeared, believed to have been killed on John’s orders. Arthur, Duke of Brittany may have been heir-designate to the throne, but was never Prince of Wales. The earliest dating of the heir to the English throne being designated Prince of Wales is a century after Arthur of Brittany’s death. Henry VII’s eldest son (and Henry VIII’s older brother) [Arthur, Prince of Wales](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur,_Prince_of_Wales) is likely who **njtt** was thinking of. > [@njtt](#): > > On the other hand, despite the unfortunate precedent set by the first, we did, due to exigent circumstances, get a second regnant [Queen Mary](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_II_of_England). For some reason, however, neither Mary is commonly referred to by her number. Because Mary reigned jointly with her husband, they are indeed commonly referred to as “William and Mary.” Nevertheless, Mary is formally referred to as “Queen Mary II of England,” and I don’t doubt that a subsequent (future) Queen regnant who took the regnal name of Mary would be designated as “Mary III.” ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2010, 7:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425/17 "2010-11-22T19:15:15Z")
> [@robby](#): > > Arthur, Duke of Brittany may have been heir-designate to the throne, but was never Prince of Wales. The earliest dating of the heir to the English throne being designated Prince of Wales is a century after Arthur of Brittany’s death. I agree that he was never Prince of Wales, but he’s the only other heir named Arthur that I can remember. [QUOTE=robby] Henry VII’s eldest son (and Henry VIII’s older brother) [Arthur, Prince of Wales](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur,_Prince_of_Wales) is likely who **njtt** was thinking of. [/QUOTE] No - **njtt** in his post referred to Arthur, Prince of Wales and was suggesting there was another heir named Arthur: [QUOTE=njtt] Henry VII’s oldest son was called Arthur, but he predeceased his father. I imagine that if he had lived he would have been King Arthur (and Arthur I if there had even been another one). (I seem to remember that there was another Arthur Prince of Wales more recently than that, who also never made it to king, but I can’t remember whose son he was.) [/QUOTE] ---
**Author:** ![robby](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robby/32/11048_2.png) [@robby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/robby)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2010, 7:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425/18 "2010-11-22T19:23:17Z")
> [@Northern\_Piper](#): > > …No - **njtt** in his post referred to Arthur, Prince of Wales and was suggesting there was another heir named Arthur: Oh–whoops. :smack: I’ll try reading for comprehension next time. ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2010, 8:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425/19 "2010-11-22T20:35:44Z")
> [@Jim\_s\_Son](#): > > Before World war I. First Sea Lord Winston Churchill wanted to name a new battleship after William Pitt. King George V shot that down, saying he had served in the navy and he knew what unflattering nickname sailors would give to a ship named “Pitt”. Churchill also asked for a ship named after Oliver Cromwell, arguing he was the founder of the modern Navy. KGV shot that one down too, don’t name anything after a regicide. > > Of course when yo notice how inept the Hanover George’s were (III loses America and goes nuts, IV was a lecherous slime), you wonder how the royal family could keep assigning that name. George the First was always reckoned Vile, but viler George the Second, And what mortal ever heard Any good of George the Third? When from Earth the Fourth descended, God be praised, the Georges ended. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [November 22, 2010, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425/20 "2010-11-22T21:28:44Z")
And, also many of the Pre-William-the-Bastard kings have names which were very Anglo-Saxon, and would be rather out of date later. _Egbert, Aethelwulf, Aethelbald, Aethelberht, Aethelred_, Alfred, _Athelstan,_ Edmund, _Eadred, Eadwig_, Edgar, Edward, \*Aethelred, Sweyn \*(?) ,Edmund, _Canute_, Harold, _Harthacanute,_ , Edward, Harold. Most of those would have seem rather odd for a Norman/Plantagnent King. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/uk-monarch-naming-numbering-q/561425.md?page=2)