Skip to content

I’d not thought of this

Lizzie was QE-II

Possibly more formally QE II or England, QE I of Scotland.

Charlie is KC III of England. And what of Scotland? CI was of Scotland, but was he CI of Scotland, if you see what I mean? Did they have other Cs before that?

23 thoughts on “I’d not thought of this”

  1. Bloke in Aberdeen

    I thought there was legislation rushed through prior to QE2 to deal with this. If I recall correctly it said that for the UK we would use the highest regnal number from either Scotland, England or the UK. Hence Elizabeth II

    But Charles 1 & 2 were both kings of Scotland also, so it’s not relevant to that. It would only be confusing if a James were to come along.

  2. King of the Scots, not, historically anyway, King of Scotland. Don’t know if that title changed with the Union, whether James I/VI was called King of Scotland officially or not.

  3. I vaguely remember reading many years ago that Macbeth was titled King of the Scots, Picts, English north of the Tweed and the Norse of Moray, or something like that. It was in an article on the origins of the kingdom of Scotland.

  4. Bloke in Aberdeen is right. James VI and I wanted to be king of a unified Great Britain (and is referred to thus in the front matter of the King James Bible), but neither of his parliaments was having it.

  5. If the current Prince of Wales takes his first given name as his regnal name, then the resolution mentioned by Bloke in Aberdeen comes into play again (once more favouring the English numeral): Scotland had only William the Lion prior to William of Orange, England had the Conqueror and Rufus.

  6. Bloke in Aberdeen

    Alan Peakall:
    The next king William will be William V because there was a British William IV. Scotland has already missed out on having a William II.

    A Duncan, Robert, Alexander etc would cause England to miss out similarly.

    I always thought it was a shame that Henry VIII’s older brother died, and there wasn’t a King Arthur. I’d like to think they’d have gone for Arthur II.

  7. Bloke in Aberdeen

    And while I’m at it, William the Lyon is a brilliant name (to do with his banner I think, rather than his bravery). Can we go back to giving monarchs nicknames? The rest of Europe seemed better at it than us:

    X the Bald
    X the Fat
    X the Affable
    X the Impaler
    X the Dragon
    X the Amorous
    X the Mad

  8. You have now, haven’t you
    The Cunt*

    *Well he’s the one fantasised about being a Tampax. Hardly Charles Magne is it?

  9. “Charles is King of Great Britain, rather than England or Scotland.” No, he’s king of the UK of GB and NI. Unless you mean that Charles I was King of Great Britain which is true if you use GB as a geographical expression, and is true as a statement of his affecting the title, but not true legally since there was no Kingdom of Great Britain to be king of. Reason: see Chris above.

  10. I always think William the Bastard is better than William the Conqueror – former is how he is known here in Guernsey

  11. Well yes, the UK of GB and NI rather than GB, the point being he is neither the King of Scotland nor England as those titles no longer exist

  12. Richard the French Poof would be better than Richard the Lionheart.

    And Bloody Mary isn’t too accurate because she preferred judicial murder by unbloody burning rather than by bloody head-chopping. (At least I assume so; did she do lots of chopping too?)

    And Alfred should really be spelt Alfred the Grate in allusion to his burning the cakes.

  13. Pedants point out that Ethelred the Unready’s soubriquet meant badly advised, but I always suspected that, even if that were the formal meaning, it was bestowed with the sarcastic subtext that so much went wrong for him that not all of it could have been the fault of his advisers.

  14. …and Queen Victoria provided spares named Alfred and Arthur – as opposed to 1066 and All That‘s Alfred/Arthur.

  15. In yer olden times Oxford claimed to have been founded by Alfred the Great. Cambridge responded by claiming to have been founded by King Arthur.

    Dons playing silly buggers, eh?

  16. @ dearieme
    During the reign of Alfred the Great: he was remarkably intellectual compared to other monarchs of his era but he wasn’t a professor. He may have given permission for it …
    Cambridge was founded by some refugees from Oxford

  17. does it really matter? The only thing wirth knowing is that for monarch’s called Charles it never ends well!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *