What’s in a name? Naming Baby Cambridge
Matthew Glencross |
The world's media have hit fever pitch since the birth of the royal baby on Monday. Before the birth, the big question was whether the baby would be a girl, destined to become the first Queen to rule in her own right following urgent, progressive changes to the royal succession. Now we know that Baby Cambridge is a boy, media and public interest is focused instead on what the Duke and Duchess will name their tiny future King. This was the question on all reporters' lips when they introduced their child to the expectant crowds outside St Mary's Hospital on Tuesday evening.
No matter what we are led to believe officially, the choice of name will not be solely in the hands of William and Kate, it will be the result of considerable discussion with royal spin doctors and advisers. A future King's name will help shape his public image, and has caused considerable debate amongst royal and governmental circles in the past. The most recent example being Prince Albert taking the name George on his private secretary's advice to recreate the stable image of his father after his brother Edward VIII had brought the monarchy's future into doubt by abdicating.
If the baby Prince is to have a traditional royal name, as expected, there are only nine choices, all coloured by the reputation of the previous monarchs so named. George is the odds-on favourite with bookmakers, and represents a very logical choice, conjuring up the image of the Queen's father and grandfather who saw the country through two world wars. George VI earned his reputation through extensive visits to the bombed East End of London, and George V to the frontline in France. Prince Charles has obviously seen the appeal, publically stating that he would like to adopt the name George when he takes the throne. But Georges have not always enjoyed such a steadfast reputation. When her son, the future Edward VII, raised with Queen Victoria the idea of naming his newborn son George, she was horrified; the name at that time bringing to mind the questionable private lives of her uncles and the alien nature of the first two Hanoverian Georges.
Another name in the running is Arthur at 12-1, which in many ways seems ideal. With its Celtic origins, Arthur could appeal to the entire United Kingdom, not just England. Its appeal to the Welsh in particular would suit William Wales and continue the initiative established by George V in 1911 to make the monarchy less English and more British. George V believed that all Princes of Wales should embrace Welsh culture, be crowned at a ceremony in Wales, conducted in Welsh, and be fluent in Welsh, which William is apparently learning in readiness for his own coronation as Prince of Wales.
However, within royal circles the name Arthur has a reputation of being cursed, due to the premature and mysterious death in 1502 of the eldest son of Henry VII. Queen Victoria had a lengthy argument with Prince Albert over the name, which he was keen to deploy for one of their nine children, only relenting at his absolute insistence that their seventh child bear the name. Victoria was very superstitious and was always aware of ill omens which she felt the British royals were particularly susceptible to, especially after she learned of an oak tree in Windsor Great Park felled on royal orders in 1796, which she believed had invoked a curse on the royal family. Thus, Victoria was reluctant to risk invoking another curse by naming her seventh child Arthur. Reassuringly, this Arthur lived to be 91.
Richard is among the royal names that have black marks against them, which may seem surprising given its lion-hearted connections. Richard I represents the perfect, romantic warrior King, and a century ago the name might have seemed a very appealing choice. However, in the 20th century historical reinterpretation has given Richard's personality a darker shade, particularly due to his xenophobic domestic policies, while his status as a warrior King has seen him recast as a warmonger. Furthermore, Richard I was absent from England for almost his entire reign - not an image that present royals want to project. Richard III also played his part in reducing the popularity of the name due to his notorious exploits, the most famous of which being the murder of the princes in the tower, not to mention his highly ambitious self-serving personality and tyrannical rule over England, though how much of this negative reputation is the work of later Tudor propagandists is still up for debate.
When Baby Cambridge's name is finally announced, the media will be brimming with stories of its previous holders, and predictions for the Prince's future based on his name alone. There will be speculation about how far the name represents William and Kate's own choice. But for now we must wait. It seems highly unlikely though that we shall welcome Prince John, the most notorious of all royal names due to Medieval King John's villainous role in the Robin Hood narrative.
Please note: Views expressed are those of the author.- Tags:
- Glencross, Matthew
- Monarchy
About the author
