June 13: Birth of Charles the Bald in 823. Birth of Charles the Fat in 839. Both Carolingian Emperors

Tags

Carolingian Emperor, Charlemagne, Charles the Bald, Charles The Fat, Charles the Great. Charles the Simple, King of the Franks, Kingdom of West Francia, Royal numbering

Charles the Bald (June 13, 823 – October 6, 877), also known as Charles II, was a 9th-century king of West Francia (843–877), king of Italy (875–877) and emperor of the Carolingian Empire (875–877).

Charles the Bald was a grandson of Charlemagne and the youngest son of Louis I the Pious, King of the Franks, King of Aquitaine and Emperor of the Carolingian Empire and his second wife Judith of Bavaria, the daughter of Count Welf of Bavaria and Saxon noblewoman Hedwig.

Emperor Charles the Bald

No surviving sources provide a record of Judith’s exact date and year of birth. Judith was probably born around 797. Most girls in the Carolingian world were married in adolescence, with twelve years as the minimum age, though her marriage to the 41-year-old King Louis occurred in 819, when she was probably around 22 years old.

After a series of civil wars during the reign of his father, Louis the Pious, Charles succeeded, by the Treaty of Verdun (843), in acquiring the western third of the empire.

Charles the Fat (June 13, 839 – January 13, 888), also known as Charles III was the emperor of the Carolingian Empire from 881 to 888. A member of the Carolingian dynasty, Charles was the youngest son of Louis the German and Hemma, and a great-grandson of Charlemagne. He was the last Carolingian emperor of legitimate birth and the last to rule over all the realms of the Franks.

Emperor Charles the Fat

Over his lifetime, Charles became ruler of the various kingdoms of Charlemagne’s former empire. Granted lordship over Alamannia in 876, following the division of East Francia, he succeeded to the Italian throne upon the abdication of his older brother Carloman of Bavaria who had been incapacitated by a stroke.

Crowned emperor in 881 by Pope John VIII, his succession to the territories of his brother Louis the Younger (Saxony and Bavaria) the following year reunited the kingdom of East Francia. Upon the death of his cousin Carloman II in 884, he inherited all of West Francia, thus reuniting the entire Carolingian Empire.

Nickname and number

The nickname “Charles the Fat” (Latin Carolus Crassus) is not contemporary. It was first used by the Annalista Saxo (the anonymous “Saxon Annalist”) in the twelfth century. There is no contemporary reference to Charles’s physical size, but the nickname has stuck and is the common name in most modern European languages (French Charles le Gros, German Karl der Dicke, Italian Carlo il Grosso).

His numeral is roughly contemporary. Regino of Prüm, a contemporary of Charles’s recording his death, calls him “Emperor Charles, third of that name and dignity” (Latin Carolus imperator, tertius huius nominis et dignitatis).

Further on Royal Numbering

All of the numbering of the French kings follow the numbering that began with the Carolingian Dynasty. There is not any real discrepancy in the numbers except with the name Charles.

In 768 Charlemagne became co-king of the Franks along with his brother Carloman. However, Charlemagne was technically not his real name. It is an Anglicized version of his given name plus his sobriquet. His name was simply Charles.

To history, and even his contemporaries, he was known as Charles the Great (Latin: Carolus Magnus or Karolus Magnus) It is the Latin form of his name and sobriquet that have been Anglicized and combined and passed down to posterity as Charlemagne.

There were a few successor to Charlemagne that also held the name Charles and similarly were known by their name along with their sobriquet. Adding to the confusion was the fact that titles and territories were in a constant state of flux. Here is a list of the Carolingian kings/emperors with their titles and sobriquet’s.

Charles the Bald, King of West Francia, 840-877, Carolingian Emperor, 875-877

Charles the Fat, King of East Francia, 882-887. King of West Francia 884-887, Carolingian Emperor, 881-887.

Charles the Simple, King of West Francia, 898-922.

I have seen some lists where Charles the Bald is listed as Charles I of France and where Charlemagne is listed as simply Charlemagne instead of Charles I of France.

Although they were both technically Kings of the Franks, which would eventually evolve into the modern Kingdom of France, they are generally counted as French monarchs which causes confusion with the numbering of the French monarchs named Charles.

If Charlemagne is counted as Charles I of France (which I think he should be) then Charles the Bald should be counted as Charles II of France.

Instead, if the Kingdom of West Francia is considered the start of the Kingdom of France then the number of Kings named and Charles is accurate. Charles the Bald would be counted as Charles I of France, Charles the Fat would be counted as Charles II of France and Charles the Simple would be counted as Charles III of France.

The problem with that is then the number of Kings named Louis would be inaccurate as Louis the Pious is counted as Louis I of France who reigned prior to the creation of the Kingdom of West Francia.

In some lists of the Kings of France both Charles the Fat and Charles the Simple are listed as Charles III of France.

The lists where Charles the Bald is listed as Charles I of France they list Charles the Fat as Charles II of France. There are some lists that omit Charles the Fat entirely. After Charles III the Simple there would not be another King of France by that name until 1322 a full 400 years! Even then Charles IV was known by his sobriquet as Charles the Fair.

In the end all of these mistakes are difficult to reconcile and I have just come to accept that the numbering for the name of Charles is simply off by one.

January 17, 1991: Death of King Olav V of Norway

Tags

Alexander of Denmark, Alexandra of Denmark, Carl of Denmark, Edward VII of the United Kingdom, Frederik VIII of Denmark, Kingdom of Norway, Maud of Wales, Märtha of Sweden, Olav Magnusson, Olav V of Norway, Royal numbering

Olav V (July 2, 1903 – January 17, 1991) was the King of Norway from 1957 until his death in 1991.

Olav V was born Prince Alexander Edward Christian Frederik of Denmark in Appleton House on the Royal Sandringham Estate, Flitcham, United Kingdom. His parents were Prince Carl of Denmark, second son of Crown Prince Frederik of Denmark (later King Frederik VIII), and Princess Maud of Wales, youngest daughter of King Edward VII of the United Kingdom and Alexandra of Denmark. Edward VII was the eldest son of Britain’s Queen Victoria.

Crown Prince Frederik of Denmark and Alexandra of Denmark were siblings making Olav’s parents first cousins.

When Olav’s father was elected King of Norway, he took the name Haakon VII, and on the day he was inaugurated, he gave his son the Norwegian name Olav after King Olaf II Haakonsson of Norway who reigned from 1015 to 1028. Olaf II died July 30, 1030.

Olav was the first heir to the Norwegian throne to be brought up in Norway since Olav IV in the fourteenth century, and his parents made sure he was given as much of a Norwegian upbringing as possible.

In preparation for his future role, he attended both civilian and military schools.

In 1929, he married his first cousin Princess Märtha of Sweden. During World War II his leadership was much appreciated and he was appointed Norwegian Chief of Defence in 1944. At his death in 1991, he was the last surviving grandchild of Edward VII of the United Kingdom and Alexandra of Denmark.

On March 21, 1929 in Oslo, he married his first cousin Princess Märtha of Sweden, the second child of Prince Carl of Sweden, Duke of Västergötland, and his wife Princess Ingeborg of Denmark. Her father was the younger brother of King Gustav V of Sweden, making her a first cousin twice removed of the present King of Sweden, and her mother was the younger sister of King Christian X of Denmark and of King Haakon VII of Norway. with whom he had two daughters, Ragnhild and Astrid and one son, Harald (future King Harald V of Norway)

As exiles during World War II, Crown Princess Märtha and the royal children lived in Washington, D.C., where she struck up a close friendship with Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Following a lengthy period of ill-health, Märtha died of cancer at The National Hospital in Oslo in 5 April 1954.[citation needed] At the time of her death, her elder daughter Ragnhild was expecting her first child. Her death came little more than three years before her husband ascended the throne as king. Her death was a tremendous loss for the future king Olav and the children as well as for Norway.

King Haakon VII was injured in an accident in 1955; his son Olav served as regent until his death. Haakon died at the Royal Palace in Oslo on September 21, 1957. He was 85 years old. After his death, Olav succeeded him as Olav V.

Olav reigned as a “People’s King,” and became extremely popular. He liked to drive his own cars, and would drive in the public lanes, even though as a monarch he was allowed to drive in bus lanes. When driving was restricted during the 1973 energy crisis, King Olav – who could have driven legally – wanted to lead by example; while preparing for a skiing trip, he dressed up in his skiing outfit and boarded the Holmenkollbanen suburban railway carrying his skis on his shoulder. When later asked how he dared to go out in public without bodyguards, he replied that “he had 4 million bodyguards” – the population of Norway was at the time 4 million.

Although the constitution nominally vested Olav with executive power, he was not responsible for exercising it. One source states that his “duties were largely ceremonial”. His acts were not valid without the countersignature of a minister–usually the Prime Minister–who then became politically responsible for the act in question.

As King, Olav V, he had the right to appoint the government, but in practice it was not possible for him to keep a government in office against the will of the Storting. Thus, in practice, his role was mostly representative in nature. Nonetheless, like his father before him, he commanded great moral authority as a symbol of the nation’s unity.

Owing to his considerate, down-to-earth style, King Olav was immensely popular, resulting in the nickname Folkekongen (“The People’s King”). In a 2005 poll by the Norwegian Broadcasting Corporation, Olav was voted “Norwegian of the Century”.

During the summer of 1990, the King suffered from health problems, but recovered somewhat during Christmas the same year. At the age of 87, on 17 January 1991, while residing in the Royal Lodge Kongsseteren in Oslo, he became ill and died in the evening of a myocardial infarction.

An interview given by King Harald V and hints in a biography by Jo Benkow, who was the President of the Storting at that time, mention the possibility that King Olav suffered great trauma upon learning of the outbreak of the first Gulf War, which began the day of his death. Olav’s son Harald V succeeded him as King.

The Ordinal Number of King Olav V

Most early kings of Norway are known more by their sobriquet than their ordinals. During the history of Norway the problem with numbering the kings is that there were times when brothers ruled jointly or there were rival kings. All in all the numbering has been consistent with all the names except for the name Olav.

The one in question is Olav Magnusson who was King of Norway from 1103 to 1115 and was the son of King Magnus III Barefoot and Sigrid, daughter of Sakse of Vik.

Olav Magnusson was a co-king together with his half-brothers Sigurd Jorsalfar and Øystein Magnusson after his father Magnus III died in 1103. He was king of Norway for twelve years, but did not, like his brothers, leave a lasting impression.

Olav Magnusson died at the age of 17 and and never ruled his share of the kingdom on his own while his brothers acted as his regent on his behalf. Historians at first judged him as to be insignificant and when numbering the kings of Norway they left Olav Magnusson out from the official numbering.

Olav Magnusson should have been counted as Olav IV of Norway but that ordinal was assigned to King Olaf Haakonsson (1380-1387).

In the middle ages Norway and Denmark, along with Sweden formed the Union of Kalmar in 1397 uniting all three Scandinavian states under one Monarch. Sweden broke away from this union in 1523 and the union between Norway and Denmark lasted until 1814.

However in 1814 Norway was not able to gain its independence and fell under the control of Sweden. It wasn’t until 1905 when Norway became an independent state.

Norway chose a monarchical form of government and elected the second son of King Christian IX of Denmark, Prince Carl of Denmark as their king. Prince Carl chose the Norwegian name of Haakon and became King Haakon VII and he ruled until 1957.

His son, Olav V of Norway 1957-1991, reigned using the ordinal “V” but would have been Olav VI, had the co-king Olaf Magnusson been numbered and not ignored by historians.

Royal Numbering ~ The Kingdom of Hanover.

Tags

Duke of Brunswick-Lüneburg, Elector Ernst-August of Hanover, Elector of Hanover, Georg V of Hanover, George I of Great Britain, Kingdom of Hanover, Royal numbering

From the Emperor’s Desk: After yesterday’s brief history Of the Kingdom of Hanover, I wanted to address how the monarchs of Hanover are numbered. This is an expansion of a portion of a larger article on numbering German monarchs in general I posted back in May of 2012.

Coat of Arms of Prince Ernst-August of Hanover (b.1954)

One of the places where there is a discrepancy in numbering of monarchs is the Electorate and Kingdom of Hanover. Prior to its elevation as a kingdom, Hanover was an Imperial Electorate within the Holy Roman Empire ruled by a cadet line of the House of Guelph that ruled the various Brunswick duchies.

Prince Ernst-August, Duke of Brunswick-Lüneburg, Prince-Elector of Hanover

In 1692 Emperor Leopold I installed Prince Ernst-August, Duke of Brunswick-Lüneburg as Prince-Elector of Hanover as a reward for his service to the Emperor during the Great Turkish War, also known as the War of the Holy League. In 1698 Elector Ernst-August was succeeded by his eldest son who became Elector Georg-Ludwig of Hanover.

In 1701 The Act of Settlement was passed in the Parliament of England that settle the succession to the English and Irish crowns on Protestants only. The next Protestant in line to the throne after William III and his heir, Anne, was the Electress Sophia of Hanover, a granddaughter of James VI-I of England, Scotland and Ireland and the wife of Elector Ernst-August.

Elector Georg-Ludwig’s mother, the Electress Sophia, died on May 28, 1714 at the age of 83. She had collapsed in the gardens at Herrenhausen after rushing to shelter from a shower of rain. Georg-Ludwig, Elector of Hanover and was now Queen Anne’s heir presumptive.

On August 1, 1714 came the death of Queen Anne of Great Britain, and in accordance with the provisions of the Act of Settelment of 1701 in England and Scotland and by virtue of Article II of the Treaty of Union, which defined the succession to the throne of Great Britain, Elector Georg-Ludwig became King George of Great Britain.

George I, King of Great Britain, Prince-Elector of Hanover, Duke of Brunswick-Lüneburg

During his reign King George was not known as King George I. Under the British tradition of numbering their monarchs, a monarch will not get a ordinal number until there is another monarch with the same name. That is why you do not see Queen Victoria being called Queen Victoria I. When and if there is a Queen Victoria II, only then will the first Queen Victoria become known as Queen Victoria I. The same goes with king’s Stephen, John and Queen Anne.

In Hanover and Great Britain the numbering for these King-Electors was the same. In 1727 King-Elector George was succeeded by his son as George II (and George obtained the ordinal “I”) and in 1760 George II’s grandson succeeded him as George III.

In 1806 the Holy Roman Empire came to an end and Hanover became part of the Kingdom of Westphalia, a puppet state founded by Napoleon. After the defeat of Napoleon the Congress of Vienna restored George III to his Hanoverian territories and elevated Hanover to a Kingdom, since the title Imperial Elector was now obsolete given the fact there was no longer a Holy Roman Emperor to elect.

With Hanover now a kingdom, instead of starting a new numbering sequence for the Kings of Hanover, George III still retained his ordinal number in Hanover as well as Great Britain. In 1820 George III was succeeded by his son who became George IV of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Hanover. In 1830 George IV was succeeded by his brother William IV who was known as King Wilhelm of Hanover.

George III, King of the United Kingdom of Great Britain, King of Hanover, Duke of Brunswick-Lüneburg

Since succession to the crown of Hanover was governed by the Salic Law which barred women from inheriting the throne, the personal union between the United Kingdom and Hanover ended in 1837 with the death of William IV. William IV was succeeded in the United by his niece, Victoria, who reigned in Britain until 1901 and gave her name to the entire era.

In Hanover the crown of Hanover went to another brother of William IV, Prince Ernest-Augustus, Duke of Cumberland…..and became King Ernst-August (1837-1851) without an ordinal.

This is where it gets tricky. In my view the new Hanoverian King should have been been called Ernst-August II because the dynasty of Hanover began with Elector Ernst-August, Duke of Brunswick-Lüneburg in 1692. There are two ways to view this situation. Since the first Ernst-August was only an Elector in 1692 and never a King he doesn’t revive an ordinal.

Ernst-August, King of Hanover

His son and successor, King George I, was the first Hanoverian Elector to hold the royal title of King, although he was a King of Great Britain and not a King of Hanover. So it appears that the royal numbering of Hanover follows those with the title of King regardless if the person was not a King of Hanover. Technically George’s I, II and III (until 1814) were Electors of Hanover and not Kings.

Grave of King Georg V of Hanover

That is the inconsistency. It ignores the Elector Ernst-August, Duke of Brunswick-Lüneburg. It seems only the name George gets an ordinal number in Hanover. This is exemplified with the accession of Crown Prince Georg of Hanover, son and heir of King Ernst-August, who became King of Hanover as King Georg V (1851-1866). Again, this means the royal numbering of Hanover follows those with the title of King regardless if the person was not a King of Hanover.

It is a minor quibble but an interesting one!

The Naming of a King: Willem-Alexander of the Netherlands.

Tags

Frederick II, King Willem IIII of the Nethlands, King Willem-Alexander of the Netherlands., Kings and Queens of Sweden, Kings and Queens of the Netherlands., Princess of Orange, Prussia, Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands, Regal Number, Royal numbering, Wilhelm II of Germany, Willem IV of the Netherlands

Last week in my post about the titles and styles of the Dutch Sovereign I asked a question concerning the name and future numbering of a King Willem of the Netherlands. This is a follow up to that blog entry.

Willem-Alexander, King of the Nertherlands

Here was my question: What will another King Willem of the Netherlands call himself, assuming he just uses his first name only? Will he be Willem IV or possibly Willem V? I also wondered why King Willem-Alexander didn’t call himself Willem IV of the Netherlands? After doing some research and discussing the topic with some Dutch monarchists I found some answers.

King Willem-Alexander was born on April 27, 1967 the eldest son of future Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands and her diplomat husband, Claus van Amsberg. He was christened with the names Willem-Alexander Claus George Ferdinand; and became Prince of Orange as heir apparent upon his mother’s accession as queen on April 30, 1980.

Although he publicly went by the double name Willem-Alexander, he is called Alexander within the family. The King himself stated that his name has always been Willem-Alexander and that it would feel wrong for him to be called just Willem prior to being king, or Willem IV after coming to the throne. In earlier interviews he did acknowledge that there were options to what he could be called once he mounted the throne but he never publicly stated what his name would be as king.

His Majesty the King of the Nertherlands

Simply his options were:

Willem-Alexander
Willem IV Alexander
Willem IV
Alexander
Claus
George
Ferdinand

These were different combinations of his given names. Theoretically he could have chosen a completely different name altogether. I don’t think he had to stick with options stemming from his list of given names. However, he opted for Willem -Alexander since that has been his legal first name since birth.

Double names, such as Willem-Alexander, do have a rich tradition among European Royalty, reaching its peak of popular usage in the 18th and 19th centuries. Prussia is a prime example of how double names were handled when numbering single and double names that were closely related.

For example, the first Prussian king, Friedrich I, was succeeded by Friedrich Wilhelm I, then came Friedrich II, Friedrich Wilhelm II, III and IV, and then (after Wilhelm I) there was Friedrich III. In other words, the names Friedrich and Friedrich Wilhelm were regarded as different and separate regnal names and thus were treated differently.

What is also interesting to note is that both Friedrich III and his son Wilhelm II were publicly known by the double names Friedrich-Wilhelm prior to them succeeding the throne. However, within the family the future Friedrich III was known as “Fritz” while his son, the future Wilhelm II, was known as “Willy.” When they came to the Prussian and Imperial thrones they chose as their regal names that which reflected how they were known within the family.

Friedrich III, German Emperor & King of Prussia

Wilhelm II, German Emperor & King of Prussia

Sweden is another excellent example of how similar names were treated, specifically with the names Carl and Gustaf. We’ve seen kings named Carl, the notable Carl XII for example. We’ve seen kings named Gustaf, Gustaf V is an example. We’ve also seen double names used uniquely. Unlike the Prussians who have regarded the names Friedrich and Friedrich Wilhelm as different and separate regal names, in Sweden the first name was treated as the primary name and the regal number was placed in the middle of the name not at the end.

This resulted in names such as Gustaf II Adolph, Carl X Gustaf, Carl XIV Johan, Gustaf VI Adolph and the current king, Carl XVI Gustaf. If the succession to the Swedish Crown had not been altered to absolute primogeniture then the next King of Sweden would be Carl XVII Philip.

King Willem-Alexander and Queen Maxima of the Netherlands.

It could be theoretically possible for the sovereign of the Netherlands treating Willem and Willem-Alexander as different regnal names as was done in Prussia. This would mean that there could be a Willem IV, or a Willem-Alexander II, at some point in the future, and that the current king is not counted as Willem IV, even though he has not taken that regal name and number.

However, Willem-Alexander wanting to be known by his given names are not the only reasons he chose this option. From this article I found online by The Guardian, published on April 30, 2013 when Willem-Alexander came to the throne, I learned that being called Willem IV could open himself up for ridicule.

King Willem-Alexander does not wish to be called Willem IV, he says, because he doesn’t want to be labelled with a number. It has been suggested that his real motive is to avoid being called “vier” (four) because it rhymes with “bier” (beer), which would make the temptation to call him “Willem Bier”, following his previous nickname “Prince Pils”, almost irrestible. His father, Prince Claus, was so committed to informality that he became famous for his condemnation of tie-wearing. He first made his feelings known at an awards ceremony for African fashion designers, when he announced his contempt for this “snake around my neck” – a statement that has since become known as “The Declaration of the Tie”. LB

There is also another reason Willem-Alexander didn’t want a regal number attached to his name….he seems to detest them.

In an interview Willem-Alexander made a rather degrading comment that the regal numbers remind him of farm animals. He stated that “Willem IV stands next to Bertha XII (a cow) in the pasture.” It seems that the king feels that numbering a Dutch Monarch is the same as numbering cattle.

HRH The Princess of Orange

This does create a problem in the future. How could a sovereign of the Netherlands now be known by a regal number with that image in their minds? The heiress to the throne is the Princess of Orange, Princess Catherina-Amalia, and her father’s remarks makes it very difficult for her to choose an already existing name for her eldest child from the list of the Dutch sovereigns, should she ever have one.

These names include Willem, Wilhelmina, Juliana, Beatrix, Willem-Alexander or her own, Catherina-Amalia. Since any of those names would require a regnal number if used again, it would open them up for criticism or ridicule with every television channel or news organization in the Netherlands repeating her father’s comment on how Willem IV (or any name requiring a regular number) “stands in a pasture next to Bertha XXII.”

There hasn’t been a Monarch of the Netherlands with a regal number since the death of King Willem III on November 23, 1890, 128 years, 10 months, 15 days ago.

Since the reign of Queen Wilhelmina the tradition within the Dutch Royal family has been to pick a name with a familial connection but one that does not require a regal number. Now one cannot rule out the possibility of there being a Willem IV or Willem-Alexander II (or even a Wilhelmina II or Beatrix II) but that is unlikely to occur in the near or foreseeable future.






Royal Numbering ~ France

Tags

Charlemagne, France, French Kings, History, Kingdom of the Franks, Louis XIV, Royal numbering

The next country I will examine in the usage of ordinal numbers for is monarchs is France. As my previous blog post demonstrated all monarchies, France included, developed over time. This includes the usage of ordinal numbers to differentiate monarchs of the same name within a given territory.

The modern Kingdom of France evolved out of the old Kingdom of the Franks. Similar to England where Anglo-Saxon names fell into disuse in France the old Frankish names such as Childeric, Dagobert and Thierry also gave way to more modern Christian based names. All of the numbering of the French kings follow the numbering that began with the Carolingian Dynasty. There is not any real discrepancy in the numbers except with the name Charles.

In 768 Charlemagne became co-king of the Franks along with his brother Carloman. However, Charlemagne was technically not his real name. It is an Anglicized version of his given name plus his sobriquet. His name was simply Charles. To history and even his contemporaries he was known as Charles the Great (Latin: Carolus Magnus or Karolus Magnus) It is the Latin form of his name and sobriquet that have been Anglicized and passed down to posterity.

There were a few successor to Charlemagne, reckoned Charles I of France, that also held the name Charles and similarly were known by their name along with their sobriquet. Adding to the confusion was the fact that titles and territories were in a constant state of flux. Here is a list of the Carolingian kings/emperors with their titles and sobriquet’s.

Charles the Bald, King of West Francia, 840-877, Holy Roman Emperor, 875-877

Charles the Fat, King of East Francia, 882-887. King of West Francia 884-887, Holy Roman Emperor, 881-887.

Charles the Simple, King of West Francia, 898-922.

In some lists of the kings of France both Charles the Fat and Charles the Simple are listed as Charles III. I have also seen some lists where Charles the Bald is listed as Charles I of France and Charlemagne is listed as Charlemagne instead of Charles the Great without an ordinal. The lists where Charles the Bald is listed as Charles I, Charles the Fat is listed as Charles II. There are some lists that omit Charles the Fat entirely. After Charles III the Simple there would not be another king of France by that name until 1322 a full 400 years! Even then Charles IV was known by his sobriquet as Charles the Fair.

In the end all of these mistakes are difficult to reconcile and I have just come to accept that the numbering for the name of Charles is simply off by one.

Part II will be posted tomorrow.

 

Royal Numbering: Part II

Tags

Kings and Queens of England, kings and queens of Scotland, kings and queens of the United Kingdom, Queen Elizabeth II, Queen Victoria, Royal numbering

Yesterday for this topic I covered the Kingdom of England, today my focus will be on the union of England and Scotland. With numbering the kings and queens of Scotland there does not seem to be any similar problems as there was with England. It isn’t until England and Scotland are united does a problem begin to appear. In 1603 Queen Elizabeth I of England died without issue and was succeeded by James VI, King of Scots. Since he was the first king of England by that name he became known as King James I of England.

Although England and Scotland shared a monarch they remained separate countries and retained their separate governments as well as ordinals for their monarchs accordingly. During this time period there were monarchs that had dual ordinals and some that did not. For example, Charles I and Charles II were the first two of that name in either England or Scotland so that did not present a problem. Charles II’s successor was his brother James who was known as King  James II of England and James VII, King of Scots. King William III of England was also William II, King of Scots and these are two examples of monarchs that technically had dual ordinals, although you may not often see them regarded in that fashion.

In 1707 during the reign of Queen Anne (1702-1714) the Parliaments of England and Scotland were finally united creating the kingdom of Great Britain. When Ireland joined in 1801 the nation became the United Kingdom of Great Britain. This meant the separate titles of King or Queen of England and Scotland ceased to exist. There was also no need for two separate ordinals for the monarchs. This did not matter for the first four successors to Queen Anne, all named George, because there had never been a King George in either England or Scotland until that time.

After the reign of King George IV, who died in 1830,  it seemed that the ordinal numbers used in Scotland were to be ignored and those that had been used in England would take precedence. This is demonstrated by the fact that in 1830 with the accession of the Duke of Clarence as King William IV he was not called William III in Scotland and no one seemed to mind. He could have been called King William of the United Kingdom to reflect the new nation-state but I find no evidence if that option was ever considered.

A little trouble was stirred up in 1901 with the accession of King Edward VII (1901-1910). Some theorized that since the United Kingdom was a new nation Edward VII and Edward VIII should or could  have been called Edward I and Edward II.

The problem really reared its head in Scotland with the accession of Elizabeth II. Elizabeth I was queen of England only and the Scots never had a queen named Elizabeth reigning over them. An example of one of the objections made at the time of her accession was the use of the Royal Cypher “EIIR” anywhere in Scotland. The use of that particular cypher even instated violence. Today the cypher that is used in Scotland on all government and Crown property has no lettering and displays an artistic rendering of the Crown of Scotland from the Honors of Scotland.

In order to prevent any further problems with the numbering of the monarchs in the United Kingdom Prime Minister Winston Churchill suggested that in the future the monarch should use the higher of the two numerals from the English and Scottish sequences. Therefore if there is another King James he will not be James III but James VIII. If there is a King Robert he will be Robert IV since there were three kings of Scotland by that name.

The last issue in numbering the British monarch is the use of the numeral “I.” In some monarchies a monarch with a new name previously not used will be called the first. Britain does not follow this tradition. That is why you do not see Queen Victoria being called Queen Victoria I. In Britain a monarch will not get a ordinal number until there is another monarch with the same name. Until there is another Queen by the name of Victoria the first Queen Victoria will simply remain Victoria. The same goes with king’s Stephen, John and Queen Anne.

 One aspect Britain shares with other countries is that consorts are not numbered. The only acceptation are those that ruled jointly, where sovereignty was vested in both individuals. With King William III and Queen Mary II this is clearly evident as Parliament vested sovereignty in both people. Mary was the rightful successor to her father King James II-VII of England and Scotland but Mary refused to rule without her husband, Prince Willem III of Orange. He was also her cousin and he did have succession right but only after Mary’s sister Anne. The question about a consort receiving an ordinal number arises with Queen Mary I of England and her husband King Felipe II of Spain. He was the only male consort of a queen regnant in England to be given the title of King. Will there ever be a King Philip II of the United Kingdom of Great Britain? It remains to be seen. I will discuss that part of the issue in Part III tomorrow.