Harry and William's names would have been different if King …
If King Charles had got his way Prince William and Prince Harry's names would have been different, it has emerged. William would have been named after the fictional monarch who pulled Excalibur from the lake, it has been revealed. When the heir to the throne was born in June 1982 it took a week for his parents to announce his name.
According to royal experts and historians the then Prince Charles had his heart set on naming his son Arthur. However Princess Diana finally suggested "the more robust name" William. Robert Lacey, the writer behind the biography Battle of Brothers, previously said: "Diana, Princess of Wales proposed a more robust name -- William, as in 'William the Conqueror,' victor of the famed Battle of Hastings in 1066."
King Charles at loggerheads with church leaders over his desire for diverse Coronation
Prince Charles, pictured with Diana, had wanted to call his son Arthur (Getty Images)
The name Arthur was not dismissed entirely, as it is one of William's middle names.
His other middle names are Philip - in honour of his grandfather Prince Philip - and Louis thought to be inspired by Lord Louis Mountbatten. Diana and Charles had also disagreed on the name of their younger son. The King is said to have wanted to call him Albert - the real name of King George VI.
Instead Harry was finally announced. There are several theories suggesting who King Arthur really was.
Arthur is one of the future king's middle names (Getty Images)
He is said to have lived during the sixth century, in the early Dark Ages, from when there are almost no contemporary records to help ascertain the truth behind the legend. Some scholars believe Arthur was a mythical figure who was transformed into a 'historical' king in later records.
Others however say there was a real individual behind the legends. Some evidence of this includes the intriguing fact the name gained sudden popularity in the time period after King Arthur was supposed to have lived. There is a record of a king of south west Wales named Arthur in the late-sixth or early-seventh century.
It comes as King Charles has been hailed for the way he has conducted himself during his 'stand-off' with the Duke and Duchess of Sussex amid their doubted attendance of his and the Queen Consort's Coronation.
The young parents had disagreed what to call their son (AFP via Getty Images)
There is less than a month to go before the historic event at Westminster Abbey on Saturday, May 6 and it is still not clear whether the Sussexes will be attending or not.Advertisement : 33 sec
Charles has made it clear he wanted his youngest son and his wife to be part of proceedings, but their silence has exacerbated doubts on whether they will travel across the Atlantic at all.
The monarch has been praised for "playing a blinder" for putting the ball in the Sussexes court, which could backfire if they do attend the service.