2
   

question about Europe Monarchy

 
 
J-B
 
Reply Thu 19 Aug, 2004 09:07 am
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 to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 2 • Views: 4,615 • Replies: 43
No top replies

 
Thok
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Aug, 2004 09:33 am
The first son of a king, gets the name of his father and this goes on.
0 Replies
 
Grand Duke
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Aug, 2004 09:35 am
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
 
J-B
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Aug, 2004 09:38 am
you mean name?
first name?
0 Replies
 
Thok
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Aug, 2004 09:42 am
Yes, the first name.
0 Replies
 
J-B
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Aug, 2004 09:47 am
thx thok and Grand Duke
0 Replies
 
Asherman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Aug, 2004 09:48 am
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
 
Grand Duke
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Aug, 2004 09:49 am
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
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Aug, 2004 10:03 am
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
 
Thok
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Aug, 2004 10:11 am
Why I could forgot that?

thanks, anyway :wink:
0 Replies
 
Grand Duke
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Aug, 2004 10:19 am
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
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Aug, 2004 10:33 am
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
 
Noddy24
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Aug, 2004 11:10 am
Also medieval monarchs--coming from good Catholic families--were limited to Saints' Names rather than old fashioned, pagan names.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Aug, 2004 11:30 am
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
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Aug, 2004 11:37 pm
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
 
WannaBeRoyal
 
  1  
Reply Sat 11 Jun, 2005 03:58 pm
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
 
Paaskynen
 
  1  
Reply Sun 12 Jun, 2005 03:55 am
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
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 12 Jun, 2005 12:53 pm
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
 
Asherman
 
  1  
Reply Sun 12 Jun, 2005 02:13 pm
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
 
Paaskynen
 
  1  
Reply Sun 12 Jun, 2005 10:27 pm
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
 
 

Related Topics

HAPPY ANNIVERSARY, EVERYONE! - Discussion by OmSigDAVID
WIND AND WATER - Discussion by Setanta
Who ordered the construction of the Berlin Wall? - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
True version of Vlad Dracula, 15'th century - Discussion by gungasnake
ONE SMALL STEP . . . - Discussion by Setanta
History of Gun Control - Discussion by gungasnake
Where did our notion of a 'scholar' come from? - Discussion by TuringEquivalent
 
  1. Forums
  2. » question about Europe Monarchy
Copyright © 2018 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 04/26/2018 at 08:43:54