Almost every royal name has at least one, if not more, links to previous Kings and Queens. And, when it comes to choosing a royal baby name, it is important that the parents consider if there are any overriding historical associations which could draw negative comparisons in the future. It's also a reason that perhaps has prompted former reigning monarchs to change their regnal name when crowned.

Some names associated with the Royal Family have been tainted and are likely not to be used for a future ruler. The best example of this is the name Richard. King Richard I (better known as Richard the Lionheart) was killed in battle, the second was deposed and died of starvation, and Richard III is famously linked to the disappearance of his two young nephews.

There are examples of several famous monarchs who have chosen to take a different regnal name to their birth name.Queen Victoria was born as Princess Alexandrina but took the name Victoria as it was thought Alexandrina sounded too foreign to be the name of a British Queen.

Queen Elizabeth II's father also took a different regnal name. He was born as Prince Albert Frederick Arthur George on December 14, 1895.

Upon the abdication of his elder brother, King Edward VIII, Prince Albert took the name George and became King George VI. But it was also seen as a display of stability and a continuation from his father, King George V.

However, in the modern age, it is very likely that Prince William will be styled as King William V when he succeeds his father, and Prince George will one day be known as King George VII.

Nonetheless, George could decide to opt for Alexander or Louis, given that they are his middle names - although it is unlikely that he will choose the latter due to the fact that his little brother also shares that moniker.

In recent years, monarchs have decided against it - when the late Queen Elizabeth II was crowned, she chose to retain her name, and King Charles followed suit when he was made King, despite the name Charles being historically tainted by bad luck.

Charles I had a bad personal reputation because he was a staunch believer in the Divine Right of Kings. This meant he thought his right to rule came from God and wasn’t answerable to Parliament. He was imprisoned by Oliver Cromwell and was beheaded outside the Palace of Whitehall in 1649.

Charles I’s son, Charles II, was brought back from exile when the monarchy was restored in 1660 and was very popular. But his reign was considered as equally as unlucky as his father’s because he was unable to have a legitimate heir and both the Great Plague in 1665 and the Great Fire of London in 1666 took place during his time on the throne.