Why new monarch has chosen Charles III

Charles will reign as Charles III, Clarence House confirmed last night.

There had been a possibility that the new king could use one of his other names, as some monarchs have done previously. His full name is Charles Philip Arthur George, so he could have opted to use any of these names as his regnal name.

But shortly after the Queen’s death, the new King’s spokesman confirmed that His Majesty will be called King Charles III.

He will be proclaimed as the new sovereign, with that name, from the balcony at St James’s Palace at 11am tomorrow.

The choice had been preceded by unofficial guidance from Charles’s team over the past few years that he would reign as Charles III. However, he was not obliged to do so.

Indeed, it had been speculated that because Charles I was executed — and his son, Charles II, had not been a particularly admirable figure — the new King would prefer another name.

Some reports claimed that he would reign as George VII, although this was never given any credence by Clarence House.

When the Queen’s father came to the throne after the Abdication, he chose to be known as George VI, even though he was christened Albert (and was known as Bertie).

This was a deliberate gesture to hark back to his father, George V, and thus to emphasise the message of continuity in the royal family in the midst of the crisis of his elder brother relinquishing the throne.

He was not alone: three of the past six monarchs have reigned under one of their middle names. Queen Victoria’s successor chose as his regnal name Edward VII, even though he was really an Albert (also known as Bertie). His choice, which went against the wishes of his late mother, was so that the name Albert should for ever be associated with his father, Prince Albert.

Even Victoria herself was christened Alexandrina Victoria, but chose to reign as Victoria, the name by which she was known.

Edward VIII was indeed an Edward, but throughout his life was known to his family and close friends as David.

However, the new King has been known to the public throughout his life as Charles — indeed a play speculating on his future was called Charles III — so any associations with previous Charleses are surely diminished.

For him to call himself George at this late stage would have only been a recipe for confusion.

Unlike George VI, he always knew he would be King, as indeed did his parents when they gave him the name.

Also, there is another George in the wings, in the form of Prince George, who is now second in line to the throne: the continuity of the name is assured.

Above all, there is the example set by Charles’s mother, who like her father before her, spent the first years of her life happily unaware of the destiny that awaited her.

In the hours after the death of George VI, Elizabeth was asked by Martin Charteris, her private secretary, what she planned to call herself. “My own name, of course,” she replied. “What else?”