A lighter, if geekier topic...

[orichalcum]

Forthcoming when I finish it - a review of the only Pulitzer-Prize winning novel to reference "Queen of the Demonweb Pits," as far as I know. It's kind of impressive when a mainstream novel (one assigned as mandatory reading for all the frosh at my college, at that, which is why I'm reading it) outgeeks me, and I have to keep asking CP questions like "Who's Uatu the Watcher, honey?"

On the request of meepodeekin, my random ponderings on the question of "Which English monarch's name has the highest average success rate?" where "success" is defined as "generally considered a good king by historians/the random public/tourist displays in the Tower of London."


So, Ill-Starred Monarch names are easy:
John (Despite the Disney refrain, he was in fact not too late to be known as John the First).
Ethelred (Ain't never gonna be an Ethelred II)
Charles (beheaded or a kinda useless rake)
Richard (Yes, I love R III too, but when none of the three died peacefully and all had highly checkered reigns, it's not such a good omen.)

Then there's the Boring But Popular Category:
George
William

And then we get to the really popular names, and the real showoff: (rated from ++ to --) (Please comment on the ratings!)
Edward Vs. Henry

We'll take the Edwards first, counting the pre-Norman Conquest ones:
Edward the Elder: Extended control of Wessex over Norse, Scots, and Welsh: +
Edward the Martyr: Religious/secular conflict, murdered and left land in chaos: --
E Confessor: Patron saint of difficult marriages! Sentenced his mom to trial by ordeal! Reign of peace and prosperity, but left land in chaos/civil war. 0
E I (Longshanks): Successful conqueror, but really, really nasty guy: -
EII: Abdicated on grounds of incompetence, murdered, played favorites: --
EIII: Reigned for 50 years, conducted successful war, instituted Justices of the Peace, good family man: ++
EIV: Restored peace and order after civil war to England, brilliant general., not good at dealing with conspiracies: +
EV: Prince in the Tower. Unsuccessful reign not his fault: -
EVI: Child monarch, apparently very smart, established Protestantism more fully in England.: +
EVII: Liberal, peacemakers, instituted military reforms, good constitutional monarch: ++
EVIII: Pro-Nazi, abdicated due to personal reasons: -
Total: 0

And now the Henrys:
H1: Restored peace and order, lots of administrative reforms, messy succession, 23 kids: +
HII: Ended civil war, lots of reforms, messy succession (largely own fault): +
HIII: Weak, erratic king, anti-Semitic: -
HIV: Usurper, but generally fairly strong king: +
HV: Great military leader, restored peace and order, invented passport: ++
HVI: Insane, led kingdom into civil war: --
HVII: Effective but nasty, miserly usurper: -
HVIII: Increased power of monarchy and wealth, messy personal life: 0
Total: +

I'm not really sure we get a definitive verdict here. Opinions?

Comments

[marginaleye.livejournal.com]

I think the British royal family ought to seriously go out on a limb, and name the males of the next generation (in no particular order): John, Richard, Stephen, and Arthur (just to totally freak everyone out -- although there is a historical precedent for this -- Henry VIII had a short-lived sickly older brother named Arthur). If, by some freakish chance, the House of Windsor experiences an unlikely population surge and needs yet more princely names, how about harkening back to the Anglo-Saxon era, and go for an Alfred and Edmund. All these damn Edwards and Henrys are a yawn-fest, and the brand seriously needs to be "freshened up."

[gee-tar.livejournal.com]

As opposed to the French's penchant for Louis?

[marginaleye.livejournal.com]

Oh, that was just as bad, but the British royal family is still a going concern (and thus has an opportunity to do something about it) while the House of Bourbon isn't.

[feir-fireb.livejournal.com]

Yeah, to be fair the French really had to get their Louis in while the getting was good.

[apintrix.livejournal.com]

And if you take the name back to the original Clovis, there are even more!

You can't really blame them for wanting to name their king "famous warrior" again and again, though.

[feir-fireb.livejournal.com]

Well, if that's the standard, clearly we need something really new and daring like "Madison" or "Logan".

[gee-tar.livejournal.com]

Dude, King Logan would be an awesome name for a monarch. Or a comic book villain. It's a win either way :)

[orichalcum.livejournal.com]

Apparently William's hoping to have a girl first, anyhow, so he can get male primogeniture abolished. :) So apintrix may yet get another Elizabeth.

[thistleingrey.livejournal.com]

Er, did you know that Edward I was named for (Saint) Edward the Confessor, who ruled England just before ill-fated Harold (killed at Hastings by William I)? "Edward" is a good "Anglo-Saxon" name, and Henry III gave his son that name for exactly that reason....

[orichalcum.livejournal.com]

Harold - there's another not-so-good English monarch name. :)

p.s.

[thistleingrey.livejournal.com]

I apologize for my tone in my prior comment--long day, going too fast. I found your comment oddly ironic, given the reasons for the long (re)use of the name "Edward"....