question about Europe Monarchy

Tags: History, Royalty, European History
Email this Topic • Print this Page

Read Discussion
Reply to All

very very dont understand.

why Edward 1 chose Edward 1, why henry 1 chose henry 1.
i just cant understand why is Edward 1 , not Mike 1 or something like that
i just wonder how those European monarches chose their names

Topic Stats
Top Replies
Link/Embed

Type: Discussion • Score: 2 • Views: 2,164 • Replies: 42

[+1] - Thok - 08/19/2004The first son of a king, gets the name of his father and this goes on.
[+1] - Grand Duke - 08/19/2004As Thok says, it's common for names to be passed down through the generations, from father to son, but also grandfathers and uncles etc. Alot of the names are Biblical names as well (and there's...
[+1] - J-B - 08/19/2004you mean name? first name?
[+1] - Thok - 08/19/2004Yes, the first name.
[+1] - J-B - 08/19/2004thx thok and Grand Duke
[+1] - Asherman - 08/19/2004Properly, I'm Norville Wesley Cargile-Sherman III. Think I'd willingly choose that ancient and honorable name if there was much choice? Asherman works much better. I suppose one of my grand-sons...
[+1] - Grand Duke - 08/19/2004That is a good question John-Bush. I don't think that (in Britain) the royal families have 'proper' surnames, and so they only use their first names.
[+1] - Walter Hinteler - 08/19/2004[quote="Thok"]The first son of a king, gets the name of his father and this goes on.[/quote] Sometimes, but this has never been the rule. And when you look at the kings/emperors of...
[+1] - Thok - 08/19/2004Why I could forgot that? thanks, anyway :wink:
[+1] - Grand Duke - 08/19/2004Cheers for the clarifications Walter. I knew about House of Windsor, Saxe-Cobourg (sp?), Plantagenet (sp?) etc. but I've only ever seen my own monarch's name used as "Her Royal Brittanic...

The first son of a king, gets the name of his father and this goes on.

0 Replies

As Thok says, it's common for names to be passed down through the generations, from father to son, but also grandfathers and uncles etc. Alot of the names are Biblical names as well (and there's not many to choose from).

0 Replies

you mean name?
first name?

0 Replies

Yes, the first name.

0 Replies

thx thok and Grand Duke

0 Replies

Properly, I'm Norville Wesley Cargile-Sherman III. Think I'd willingly choose that ancient and honorable name if there was much choice? Asherman works much better. I suppose one of my grand-sons might be saddled with IV. My father who was II was generally known as Joe.

0 Replies

That is a good question John-Bush. I don't think that (in Britain) the royal families have 'proper' surnames, and so they only use their first names.

0 Replies

Thok wrote:

The first son of a king, gets the name of his father and this goes on.

Sometimes, but this has never been the rule.

And when you look at the kings/emperors of the 'Holy Roman Empire of German Nation' - there hasn't been a hereditary monarchy at all, so the father (if being king) never knew for sure, if his (first) would be elected.

Another example (proving, btw, that royal families in Britain have 'proper' surnames): James Stuart was King James I of England, and King James VI of Scotland. His father was Henry Stuart, Duke of Albany (Lord Darnley), his mother Mary, Queen of Scots.

0 Replies

Why I could forgot that?

thanks, anyway :wink:

0 Replies

Cheers for the clarifications Walter. I knew about House of Windsor, Saxe-Cobourg (sp?), Plantagenet (sp?) etc. but I've only ever seen my own monarch's name used as "Her Royal Brittanic Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, without the Windsor part. Confusing, huh?

0 Replies

Grand Duke wrote:

Cheers for the clarifications Walter. I knew about House of Windsor, Saxe-Cobourg (sp?), Plantagenet (sp?) etc. but I've only ever seen my own monarch's name used as "Her Royal Brittanic Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, without the Windsor part. Confusing, huh?

Her full name is:
Elizabeth Alexandra Mary,
officially: Elizabeth II, by the Grace of God, of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of her other realms and territories Queen, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.

Her husband, Philip, Duke of Edinburgh
in full: Prince Philip, duke of Edinburgh, Earl of Merioneth and Baron Greenwich, also called Philip Mountbatten, original name Philip, Prince of Greece and Denmark.

0 Replies

Also medieval monarchs--coming from good Catholic families--were limited to Saints' Names rather than old fashioned, pagan names.

0 Replies

A very noteworthy point, Noddy! (And of course, even centuries ago some names were up-to-date than others :wink: )

An aside to the British royalty:

Prince Abert of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha's family name was Wettin.

And Mountbatten (Prince Philipp's family name) is the Anglicization of the German 'Battenberg'.
The 'house of Battenberg', however, never really existed but was created by Prince Alexander of Hessia and Rhine .... because his illegitime wife Julia of Hauck had to get a proper title (at first Countess of Battenberg, later Princess of Battenberg).

0 Replies

The ruling house of Reuss (a tiny German principality) had a tradition, dating back to the twelfth century, of naming every male "Friedrich." As the family grew, it became necessary to differentiate all the Friedrichs by number: at a couple of points, they had to re-start the sequence because the numbering became too complicated (Walter, the Reuss family tree is set out in Grote, pp. 248-251).

EDIT: I can't understand how I made this mistake if I had the "Grote" in front of me, but the Reuss family name was "Heinrich," not "Friedrich." More information about this family can be found here

0 Replies

Re: question about Europe Monarchy

^JB^ wrote:

very very dont understand.
why Edward 1 chose Edward 1, why henry 1 chose henry 1.
i just cant understand why is Edward 1 , not Mike 1 or something like that
i just wonder how those European monarches chose their names

Actually NO Monarch has ever chosen a name and added "I" to it. The number is a designator as to WHICH monarch of that name. King John will become King John I ONLY when another King John comes along as King John II.

Along this topic also is that by tradition they can use ANY of their given names. Prince Charles does not necessarily HAVE to become King Charles III. He can be either King Charles III, King Philip II, King Arthur OR King George VII

0 Replies

With regard to Mr Asherman's entry, is it only US commoners who use the numbering in their names? I have a US friend who is also no. III, but I have never ever encountered that habit in Europe (except for nobility, but even they rarely use it).

Is it due to the US lacking nobility and commoners seeking to adopt some of the glamour of nobility in this cheap way (a lot cheaper than buying or building a mansion or chateau)? I guess then there is also a lively trade in fake coats of arms and titles?

0 Replies

joefromchicago wrote:

(Walter, the Reuss family tree is set out in Grote, pp. 248-251).

Thanks - so there was no need to search it :wink:

(As mentioned on page 250, bottom notes: until 1632 they numbered their princes with Latin, then changed and started with German numerals.)

0 Replies

Paaskymen,

Some families just have a tradition of using the same name generation after generation. It hasn't anything to do with aspirations to nobility. Few of us would exchange our "title", U.S. Citizen, for "Arch-Duke". Mister is much preferable to "Sire".

0 Replies

Mister Asherman,

Well, that tradition exists in Europe as well (in my family it is initials, not names that are repeated over many generations), but I have never heard of families numbering those generations. I am me, not an updated version of my grandfather Very Happy

Incidentally, I can trace back my family tree (only) to the Napoleonic era and am proud to say that everyone of my forefathers was an honest hardworking labourer, not a single blue blood among them.

0 Replies

Read Discussion
Reply to All

question about Europe Monarchy

Related Topics