Rather than Charles III could we possibly have a King Zah I instead?
Did you know that its only relatively recently that British monarchs have kept their personal name to be their ‘regnal’ name, writes Zah Azeem, Partner at Wimbledon based Chartered Surveyors Scrivener Tibbatts.
The last time a British monarch changed their name was in 1936, when Queen Elizabeth II’s father, who was born Albert Frederick Arthur George and called Bertie by friends and family, chose King George VI as his title to honour the memory of his father, King George V.
Before him, his elder brother Edward Albert Christian George Andrew Patrick David, called simply David by his family, was crowned King Edward VIII.
Meanwhile, King Edward VII, who was on the throne from 1901-1910, was born Albert Edward and he too was called Bertie by his family and close friends. His mother intended him to be crowned Albert I, in honour of her beloved husband, but he defied her and honoured his grandfather’s name instead.
His mother, Queen Victoria was originally named Alexandrina Victoria, after her godfather.
So why hasn’t Charles III chosen a more hip regnal name? It hasn’t gone too well for previous Charles either. Charles I was beheaded, and Charles II was known as the ‘merry monarch’ on account of his drinking and womanising. Charles Philip Arthur George Windsor, could have chosen another name to be used during his reign.
So what might better alternatives be? According to Google, most popular boys names today are: Oliver, Noah, James, Jack, Leo, Henry, Thomas, Benjamin, Charlie, George, Arthur, Ethan, Lucas, Michael, Liam, David, Logan, Mason, Sebastian and Dylan.
If only Charles had asked the population what his regnal name might be I reckon Ethan, Dylan or Logan might have been interesting choices.
But surely it’s time to branch out a bit further. Why not? Let’s have a King Zah 1st.
If you would like to discuss something related to a property valuation, please contact me direct via email at zah@scrivenertibbatts.co.uk or call 020 8947 7040.
