During my high school days, Mr. McNulty was a substitute teacher we saw often and enjoyed doing so. He had been a member of a Roman Catholic religious order (Oblates of St. Francis de Sales) and decided to leave and become an English teacher. In the meantime, he filled in for absent teachers.
Anyway, The First Churchills were airing on the local PBS station, and I asked Mr. McNulty if the United Kingdom would be comfortable with a Charles III, given the feelings against not only the two kings of that name but also Bonnie Prince Charlie, the Young Pretender, who considered himself "Charles III". Mr. McNulty said a long time had passed, and that Prince Charles (the Prince of Wales) was not likely to ascend to the throne soon. That was all back in 1969.
There was some buzz that the Prince would take the regnal name of George, after his grandfather, and reign as George VII. All that might have been clickbait, but Wikipedia reported it all the same, so I assume there was some serious discussion. I am glad that the King kept his given name, as did his mother in 1952. His full name is Charles Philip Arthur George. I would still feel the same had he chosen Arthur.
Granted, Charles I was hard-headed, but Cromwell was even more so. Charles II lived in exile until the Restoration and was easygoing. The Stuarts are my favorite dynasty since there were very interesting and if you include the Jacobites, the story gets even more interesting. For the record, the Hanoverians proved to be much better monarchs.
Long live the King!
Not this one...
No comments:
Post a Comment