What names would British monarchs likely have if no Hanoverians?

[Mikestone8]

Actually there are quite a few royal names that we could have had and didn't.

Ethelwold had Alfred the Great not left a son.
Theobald if he chose to supplant his younger brother Stephen.
Eustace if Stephen's family had retained the throne.
Matilda had the war with Stephen gone differently.
Geoffrey had he outlived his brother Richard 1.
Arthur ditto (or had John died before Richard 1).
Louis had John died childless
Alfonso (!!) had he not died at 11yo in 1284.
Lionel had he outlived his father, elder brother and Nephew, and seized power in 1399.
Roger (Mortimer) had he not been killed in Ireland, and one on to succeed Richard II.
Thomas had Henry V died a couple of years earlier.
Humphrey had Henry VI died before 1447.
Margaret had Henry VIII died before 1516.
Catherine had Elizabeth 1 died in 1562.
Philip had the Spanish Armada succeeded.
Isabella possibly ditto
Arabella (Stuart) had James VI of Scotland died before Henry's birth in 1594.
Ferdinando (Stanley) a possible had James and Elizabeth I both died earlier.
Frederick had he outlived his father George II.
Charlotte had she survived the childbirth in 1817
Leopold had Charlotte lived and gone on to have a son named for his father.
Ernest had Victoria died before the birth of her daughter
Augustus had this happened and Ernest been rejected in favour of the next brother.
Adolphus had this happened and Augustus died w/o legitimate heirs.
Alexandrina had Victoria. used her first name.
Albert had either Edward VII or George VI used their first names.
David had Edward VIII reigned under the name by which the family usually called him.
Andrew (Oh dear!) had the future Charles III died before fathering Prince William.

Please feel free to suggest any that I have missed.

 

[FalconHonour]

Charlotte had she survived the childbirth in 1817

Or if, God forbid, anything happens to Prince George before he has kids.

 

[Mikestone8]

Or if, God forbid, anything happens to Prince George before he has kids.

Which one? If you mean Prinny, I don't think the Grand old Duke of York would be too bad.

If you mean the current one, we still have Charlotte and Louis between Unohoo and the throne.

 

[Comte de Geneve]

France did have a Louis Stanislas: Louis XVIII (Louis Stanislas Xavier)

 

[material_boy]

Albert had either Edward VII or George VI used their first names.
David had Edward VIII reigned under the name by which the family usually called him.

Albert I and II and David III would have been so much better tbh.

 

[Kellan Sullivan]

Please feel free to suggest any that I have missed.

Francis and Theophilus both crop up in the Hastings' succession line, even if supremely unlikely, had Elizabeth I died in 1562, the Hastings' line was apparently her "preferred" candidate for the throne. Francis also pops up in the Jacobite succession line. And, aside from its Catholic connotations, I don't think King Frank sounds too terrible. Least, no better or no worse than a train of Georges, Fredericks and Williams

 

[FalconHonour]

Which one? If you mean Prinny, I don't think the Grand old Duke of York would be too bad.

If you mean the current one, ee still have Charlotte and Louis between Unohoo and the throne.

Charlotte comes before Louis, though, so if George of Wales dies before he has kids, we'll likely have a Queen Charlotte.

 

[kasumigenx]

David had Edward VIII reigned under the name by which the family usually called him.

David, Donald, and Malcolm are royal Scots names,

 

[Mikestone8]

David, Donald, and Malcolm are royal Scots names,

True, but those are names that actually *have* been used. I was listing the "near misses".

I accept, though, that there could be some names from Scottish history to add to this list.

 

[Charles III Stuart]

I could see regnal names alternating between James and Henry, similar to the Danish practice with Christian and Frederick.

Another name option is Arthur, used for the second sons of both James IV and James V of Scotland and the eldest son of Henry VII of England.

Why James and Henry? James and Charles are more likely, seeing as all the Stuart kings of England were either James or Charles.

For males: James and Charles would are most popular. Henry would be in third place. Perhaps Robert too.

For females: Mary and Anna would are most used. Perhaps Margaret and Catherine if king has several daughters. I am not so sure about Charlotte. It wasn't much used before Hannoverians.

Probably Anne instead of Anna, based on Queen Anne. I think Anna was historically seen as kind of an Italian name and not really an English one. Then again, non-English names have had their day in the sun in the Anglophone world, Marie (which is the French version of Mary) is one of the most common middle names for Anglophone women. Pretty sure that Charlotte is also a French name originally. (interesting how French names only ever caught on for Anglophone girls, and never Anglophone boys, I don't know any Anglophone named Henri, Jacques, Pierre, Jean (although this would create confusion with the English woman's name), etc...

It wouldn't necessarilly be a name commonly used by the Stuarts sure but the Stuarts don't necessarilly stay on the throne forever, even without the Orange and Hannoverians coming into the picture.

The Stuarts were by far the best dynasty to rule the Isles, the Tudors second, the Wettins third. The Oldenburgs haven't ruled long enough for me to judge them.

Also he married a granddaughter of John Sobieski... The latter whom had named his sons James, Alexander and Konstanty which is basically Constantine in Polish. Granted King Constantine of Britain would be a new one (and make me laugh because since we mentionned King Arthur I remember the Historia Regnum Britanniae) but it's not specifically polish-inspired.

James Sobieski is just what Anglophones call him, his given name was Jakub.

perhaps not officially, but the Old Pretenders's nicknames for them were "Carluccio" and "Enzo", not "Chuck" and "Harry". Philippe, duc d'Anjou, continued to speak French and be "Philippe", he didn't rule as "King Philippe of Spain". The house of Savoie spoke French at home when they became kings of Italy- unlike both the Habsburgs and the Bourbons who spoke Italian as first language- yet in 1848, the Italians used to scrawl Viva Verdi! (Vittore Emanuele Re d'Italia, not the composer of Aïda and La Traviata) on the walls of the city .

I was under the impression that the Old Pretender's family spoke English at home. Certainly Bonnie Prince Charlie spoke far better English than George I, George II, and Prince Frederick. I think he even had an English accent. Not sure if he would have answered to "Carlo".
Celeste Aïda, forma divina!

Even in contemporary Scotland they referred to him as "King Billy", "Dutchman Bill" or

They should have referred to him as "King Usurper Butcher". He did a lot of very evil things, from stripping the native Irish population of our civil and economic rights, to massacring lots and lots of innocent people (Glencoe, etc...) to having an incestuous marriage, to usurpation and treason, etc...Honestly, given the way a lot of problematic historical figures have had their legacies re-assessed over the past few years, I'm surprised that William, or Annoying Orange, as I like to call him (reference to an old YouTube channel) has had his legacy mostly unscathed. He belongs with the other warlords and tyrants. I see good things about Queen Anne (and her life was tragic), and Mary seems like she was mostly just a pushover (she was the first adult in the line of succession, but pushed for William to be made the sole monarch instead of her, Parliament forced them to be co-monarchs), but William, he's by far the most responsible of any of them for the Protestant Ascendancy and all of that. There is a reason that I, being Irish, would never name my son William, nor Oliver. I would not give my son the name of someone who murdered and mistreated his ancestors.

"Geordie Welks/Welp".

That song was really funny.

The irony that you wish for two kings with attested English names (William I and II say "hi", so do George, Duke of Clarence, George Fitzroy, Duke of Northumberland and Saint George) to go by a "foreign" name simply because they are foreign? When their succession was decided by Englishmen? They can call themselves by whatever name they like in private (Edward VIII didn't reign as David III, despite that being the name he answered to), the regnal documents* and acts of parliament are still gonna be signed as "Will. 3" and "Geo. 1",

To drive home the point that they were both foreign usurpers who had no right to the throne unless 3 (in William's case) or literally dozens (in George's case) of other people predeceased them. James VII & II's reign was a huge hope spot for Ireland, and then when he lost his throne, things became awful for us for two centuries. The Battle of the Boyne, to us, is what the Fall of Constantinople is to Greeks...a tragic loss that led our peoples to centuries of suffering.

*and Victoria did reign as "Queen Alexandrina"- the original oath that that the privy council had to swear was worded "Queen Alexandrina". Then she announced she would reign as "Victoria", and the documents had to reissued, the oath resworn.

I still don't understand why her parents give her the made up name "Alexandrina" instead of the common name "Alexandra". I know they were naming her for Tsar Alexander.

 

[Kellan Sullivan]

"Alexandrina" instead of the common name "Alexandra".

"Alexandrine/Alexandrina" is the French/German form of Alexandra.

I was under the impression that the Old Pretender's family spoke English at home. Certainly Bonnie Prince Charlie spoke far better English than George I, George II, and Prince Frederick.

by that standard both Voltaire and Louis XVI spoke better English than every monarch all the way to George IV (George III, despite his claims of being "entirely English", spoke German with Charlotte in private,) and then with Victoria, German became the lingua franca of the household again, with Vicky's kids/grandkids speaking English with a German accent. In fact, several witnesses attested that the longer Vicky's kids were in one another's company, the thicker the German accent would become.

I think he even had an English accent. Not sure if he would have answered to "Carlo".

Not sure where he'd have acquired this "English accent". And he signed his letters to his father as "Carlo", indicating he did answer.

the Tudors second,

the Tudors? That trashcan fire that's to blame for far more pain and suffering in Ireland under Henry VIII and Glorious Queen Elizabeth? it's very hard to take your dismissal of William III and blame for everything bad since 1688 on the British seriously when you're willing to rank a dynasty that started shit in the 1490s already as your "second best".

 

[Nuraghe]

"Alexandrine/Alexandrina" is the French/German form of Alexandra.

by that standard both Voltaire and Louis XVI spoke better English than every monarch all the way to George IV (George III, despite his claims of being "entirely English", spoke German with Charlotte in private,) and then with Victoria, German became the lingua franca of the household again, with Vicky's kids/grandkids speaking English with a German accent. In fact, several witnesses attested that the longer Vicky's kids were in one another's company, the thicker the German accent would become.

Not sure where he'd have acquired this "English accent". And he signed his letters to his father as "Carlo", indicating he did answer.


the Tudors? That trashcan fire that's to blame for far more pain and suffering in Ireland under Henry VIII and Glorious Queen Elizabeth? it's very hard to take your dismissal of William III and blame for everything bad since 1688 on the British seriously when you're willing to rank a dynasty that started shit in the 1490s already as your "second best".

I totally agree with this comment by Kellan, the Tudors were a real tragedy for Ireland, especially from Henry VIII onwards ( culminating with Elizabeth I ) it is emblematic that in the Emerald Isle there were continuous and very violent armed insurrections against his rule from the 1560s until the accession of James I, something that no other post-Reformation English monarch had to deal with on this level ( perhaps only the Jacobite movement comes close as a continuation in time but I'm not so sure about the numbers of adherents in the long run, considering that James II's army in 1689 was on par with a SINGLE revolt of the Elizabethan period ) furthermore it is good to remember that in those decades more than 1/10 of the entire Irish population died ( and I am using the lowest estimate calculated by historians, because others suggest figures equal to a million ) while an equally equal number emigrated to the continent

therefore if anything it can be stated that Oliver Cromwell, William III and co, were only following a methodology already widely used to once again submit Ireland to the government of London ( I believe that the real misfortune for the island was the death of Charles I, who although faithful Anglican was calmly willing to come to terms with the local Catholics, but the civil war nullified any negotiations ) in any case my very personal opinion, I believe the Plantagenets were the most important dynasty for the British Isles with the Stuarts and Hanovers immediately following

 

[UrbanNight]

Why James and Henry? James and Charles are more likely, seeing as all the Stuart kings of England were either James or Charles.

You're right that James and Charles are more likely. My thought was simply to alternate between the Scottish-originating James and English-originating Henry and also to push the numbers up (following the scheme of using the larger regnal number), so that modern-day we'd have some nice large numbers like James XIV of the British Isles.

 

[Alamannicus]

I'm surprised that William, or Annoying Orange, as I like to call him

Oh my Irish uncles are gonna love this one.

 

[Yorel]

I think Anna was historically seen as kind of an Italian name and not really an English one.

Anne has biblical origins technically, since it's the name of Virgin Mary's mother.

Don't know if it was italian. According to Behind the Name, Anne started being used in England around the XIIIth century but it wasn't until the XVIth century that it became quite popular.

Then again, non-English names have had their day in the sun in the Anglophone world, Marie (which is the French version of Mary) is one of the most common middle names for Anglophone women. Pretty sure that Charlotte is also a French name originally

The common use of the French-spelling of Marie probably has to do with the Norman conquest more than anything. Also, French was for a long while the language of the aristocracy, so it probably played a part in that.

As for Charlotte, if we're technical it technically comes from Charles so the roots are germanic. That said, Charlotte itself is apparently a name that was used first in France.

(interesting how French names only ever caught on for Anglophone girls, and never Anglophone boys, I don't know any Anglophone named Henri, Jacques, Pierre, Jean (although this would create confusion with the English woman's name), etc...

The thing is that all of these names have their English equivalent. Henri is Henry, Jacques is James, Pierre is Peter and Jean is John.

The Stuarts were by far the best dynasty to rule the Isles, the Tudors second, the Wettins third. The Oldenburgs haven't ruled long enough for me to judge them.

It's always going to be quite a huge debate on which dynasty was the best to rule the Isles.

Though I'm not sure the Stuarts rank that high honestly... James I isn't fondly remembered, Charles I got beheaded, Charles II was a womanizer and James II was way too stubborn religiously for his own good. Hell, even queen Anne is remembered as being quite characterial... And Mary II is overshadowed by her husband.

Then again, British history is a mess and royal families have a long history of being fucked up in every sense of the word.

James Sobieski is just what Anglophones call him, his given name was Jakub.

John Sobieski is also remember as King John III of Poland outside of England: the French refer to him as Jean III or Jean Sobieski.

And even if his given name was Jakub (I've seen this as the name of his father), it's basically the Polish version of James.

 

[Analytical Engine]

Why James and Henry? James and Charles are more likely, seeing as all the Stuart kings of England were either James or Charles.

There were several Stuarts named Henry:

Henry Frederick, Prince of Wales - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Henry Stuart, Duke of Gloucester - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Henry Benedict Stuart - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org