"Upset" & other nomenological phenomena

[Beverly Flanigan]

At 01:20 PM 11/19/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>In a message dated 11/19/02 10:52:47 AM Eastern Standard Time,
>JMB at STRADLEY.COM writes:
>
> >         The line of succession given at http://www.begent.freeserve.co.uk/
> > history/succession.htm does not list any Johns in the next 150 people in
>line
> > for the throne, but the equally unlikely Arthur may be found at number 15,
> > Arthur David Nathaniel Chatto.
>
>You seem to have missed number 1 in the line of succession, one Charles
>Philip Arthur George, Prince of Wales.
>
>I don't know if there is a rule that a King of England must use his first
>given name, although as far as I know it is customary to do so, e.g. Edward
>Albert Christian George Andrew Patrick David became (temporarily) King Edward
>VIII, although he was generally known in private life as "David".  On the
>other hand, Alexandrina Victoria of Hanover became Queen Victoria.
You forgot George VI, who had, somewhere in his name, Albert and was called
Bertie.  But 4-7 names each--is this ridiculous or what?