To my knowledge none are named Saul either, or Cephas.
Or Bubba.
There have been nine Pope Stephens, the last in the 11th century. I don’t know why the name fell out of favor.
…only 6 popes have named themselves after Paul!
I see there was nearly a thousand years between Paul 1 and Paul 2. Maybe it was seen as a bit presumptuous or ostentatious? A lot to live up to?
Interesting to me are the Papal names used only once: Linus, Anacletus, Eusebius, Agatho, Mark, Dionysius, Fabian, Silverius, Hormisdas, Symmachus, Hilarius, Vitalian, Severinus, Conon, Zachary, Valentine, Romanus, Formosus, Lando. And Francis of course.
Apparently there is unspoken tradition not to use Peter. I suppose that’s like the English royalty not naming a son Arthur. Tempting fate?
>> Apparently there is unspoken tradition not to use Peter.
Well, St. Malachy famously prophesied that the last pope would be named “Peter the Roman” so that may have made it seem like bad luck. But I suspect the taboo on popes taking “Peter” as the regnal name is rather older than that.
>>Interesting to me are the Papal names used only once: . . . Formosus
At least in that case, it is fairly easy to understand why no one wanted to take the name.
For myself, I’m at least as interested in the papal names that have been oft elected: Leo, Pius, John, Benedict, Gregory, Clement, Innocent, Alexander; even somewhat less frequent, but still recurring, names like Urban or Sixtus. Why did those names catch on? I suppose Leo and Gregory make sense because the first popes to take those names were later styled “great”. And I suppose Pius, Clement, and Innocent might make a certain sense in projecting virtues they wanted to be associated with, although it also strikes me as a bit presumptuous. John is an important apostle/evangelist, so perhaps that explains that one. I suppose Benedict was a pretty important saint for the west. Urban makes a certain sense for a Roman to take, but it seems pretty shallow as a name. Sixtus is just odd to me. I’m also confused why Alexander enjoyed any popularity–there was supposedly an early pope of that name, but as your list indicates a lot of early popes never got their names reused.
At least in that case, it is fairly easy to understand why no one wanted to take the name.
Yeah, who would aspire to being named Formosus II? Ha!
Sixtus is just odd to me.
My AI girlfriend informs me that Sixtus is a variant of the Greek name Xystos, meaning “polished,” “correct,” or “shaved,” subsequently Latinized as “Sixtus”. In fact the historical Sixtus I would have been known as Xystos I. Why a mother would name her child Xystos in the first place remains a mystery.
The Popes got off easy though. Imagine if we were still selecting Pharoahs! A Pharoah had multiple divine names.
- Horus Name: An early name linking the king to the falcon god Horus, often written in a palace-like enclosure called a serekh.
- Nebty Name: Signified rule over both Upper and Lower Egypt, associated with the goddesses ** you do not have permission to see this link ** (cobra).
- Golden Horus Name: Emphasized the triumph and divine nature of Horus, sometimes linked to the concept of gold as divine flesh.
- Throne Name (Prenomen): The king’s official, ceremonial name, often beginning with “Son of Re,” written in a cartouche (oval enclosure).
- Birth Name (Nomen): The personal name given at birth, also written in a cartouche and introduced by “Son of Re,” like Tutankhamun.
See, Steefen, I can cut and paste too.
BDEhrman
FreedomBen
evgendob
Robert
1 Guest(s)