Britain's new monarch to be known as King Charles III

[NYC Liberal]

Source: Reuters

LONDON, Sept 8 (Reuters) - Clarence House confirmed on Thursday that Britain's new monarch will be known as King Charles III, following the death of Queen Elizabeth, PA Media reported on Thursday.

Read more: https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/britains-new-monarch-be-known-king-charles-iii-2022-09-08/

[durablend]

1. Assuming Trump doesn't beat him to it....

[generalbetrayus]

3. King Donald the Turd.

[GreenWave]

25. Two numbers for Donald the Turd traitor.

1776
1812

[jimfields33]

9. Yes all about trump even on threads dedicated to the new king.

What a gracious way to introduce the new king.

[Aristus]

2. I was wrong.

I thought they would avoid the regnal name Charles, as Charles I & Charles II were not the most beloved monarchs in England's history.

I guess the former PoW is too old to change his spots, let alone his name.

[NYC Liberal]

4. He's been Charles for 73 years so I'm not too surprised.

But I wouldn’t have been surprised if he’d gone by George or another name either.

[erronis]

13. How about King Chuck?

It's got that folksy tone to it. Or King Diana X

[melm00se]

18. With tongue firmly placed in cheek

"Charles in Charge"?

[twodogsbarking]

19. Chuckles?

[melm00se]

27. chuckie?

[pandr32]

5. He has been known as Charles for a long time

Keeping his name will help the transition from Prince to King go smoothly.

[FalloutShelter]

6. I thought so too...

I read there was discussion of choosing George.
I guess Charles wants his name in the books.

[calimary]

10. Well, now he can rehabilitate that tradition.

Third time's a charm, 'eh?

[muriel_volestrangler]

11. Charles II wasn't that unpopular

Many illegitimate children before and after he got married, though none with his wife, but that was accepted (the eldest, the Duke of Monmouth, tried to overthrow James II after the latter succeeded Charles II, his elder brother).

[FakeNoose]

32. They were Stuarts though

... so I guess they don't count. Charles III is the first Charles of the Windsor line.

[Retrograde]

36. By that logic, one can also eliminate

Richard, Edward, and Henry, as Richard II, Edward II and Henry VI were all deposed and murdered (or "died under mysterious circumstances after being removed from the throne&quot . William's out too, as William II was killed in a hunting accident (was he with a Dick Cheney ancestor?) So is James, since James II was deposed and thrown out of the country. That leaves George*, and the Georges were mostly dull, aside from George III who went mad. Doesn't leave much left to choose from.

Charles II, BTW, once he was asked back to England, wasn't that unpopular: he at least learned enough in exile to avoid his father's mistakes.

*there was a King Stephen in the 1100s, but the since his reign was known as The Anarchy his name's best avoided as well.

[hlthe2b]

7. Well, here's hoping he's a more fortuitous monarch than Charles I (and II)

No Oliver Cromwells anywhere nor religious controversies this time around...

[Warpy]

24. Not an especially auspicious name in British history

but it could be worse, it could be John.

[SheltieLover]

8. Hoping he is not subject to pootin's kompromat

[Martin68]

12. Well, I hope he enjoys it. He's waited long enough.

Queen Camilla?

[Aristus]

14. Queen Consort, I think.

Kind of their way of saying "You managed to marry in, but you'll never be royalty."

[Martin68]

15. Right-o.

How about, Royal concubine?

[paleotn]

29. That's closer to reality.

[hatrack]

37. "Morganatic Marriage" - it's actually a thing (or was . . . )

Like Sophie, wife of Franz Ferdinand. She was considered of 'lowly' birth, so could never have become empress even if the two of them hadn't gone to Sarajevo.

[OnlinePoker]

16. No, they created a new title for her.

Originally, it was going to be Princess Consort when Charles acceded to the throne, but in June, Queen Elizabeth said she would prefer Queen Consort, so I expect that will be it.

https://ca.sports.yahoo.com/news/why-camilla-won-t-called-213356112.html

On edit: I don't know why this was in Yahoo Sports.

[cstanleytech]

17. I don't care what they call her as imo the title should have belonged to Diana.

[Scottie Mom]

20. Exactly.

I detest Camilla.

[GoneOffShore]

22. She scrubbed up well, as my English neighbor said this evening.

[PlutosHeart]

21. At the end of the day

they are just people with flaws like everyone. Diana had hers as well. Charles. All of them.

I wish him well though. Imagine it is a difficult day for their family.

[Martin68]

43. I'm afraid I don't really believe they are "people like everyone." There doesn't seem to be a great

deal of love lost among them. Too busy following the rules, fulfilling the duties, and sucking it up. As with the Japanese Imperial Family, theirs is an inhuman institution dedicated to the continuity of power and status. An incredibly artificial human invention, designed to instill awe in the commoners, much like the edifices of the Egyptian Pharaohs.

[Collimator]

33. Any wife of a reigning (Monarch) king. . .

. . . would be a Queen Consort. Queens can be regnal, i.e, the actual monarch, the consort/spouse of the monarch or the mother of the monarch.

Kings reign or they're dead.

What was unusual about Camilla was that she never became the Princess of Wales, because Diana's fans would not have had that. Those were the people that the RF had in mind when they proposed Camilla being called the "Princess Consort" when Charles became king, because people had their hearts set on Diana as the eventual Queen. The word "consort" added to a Queen married to the British king would be sort of redundant for either Diana or Camilla.

So, either people will accept Camilla as Queen, or not. The real stickiness might come when Charles dies and William succeeds. Will people tolerate Camilla being known as "The Queen Mother" when Diana was William's actual mother?

[Coventina]

40. Just call her "The Dowager" and leave it at that.

[Collimator]

42. Yep.

"Dowager". Makes sense. Also makes me think of Maggie Smith, but hey, what can you do?

[Martin68]

44. The Post reports that Charles can make her Queen if he wants to. His mother bestowed the title

Queen Consort, but Charles can change that later. I imagine they'll need to conduct some surveys and gather a few focus groups to test the reaction to be expected among the populace before doing that

[markpkessinger]

23. I thought he might go for George VII . . .

. . . building upon his grandfather's legacy, but Charles III it is!

[cab67]

41. I've always thought George VI should have been Albert I.

The notion that Albert was too "Germanic," when the first King George couldn't even speak English and was part of a line known as the House of Hanover, then the House of Saxe-Coburg, until the UK went to war with Germany, always struck me as silly.

[The Mouth]

26. At least a person with environmental awareness

and a keen understanding of the peril the planet is in.

[Lulu KC]

35. Amen to this n/t

[hatrack]

38. Unlike pretty much every single Tory in the new government, starting with Liz Truss . . .

[paleotn]

28. Chuck cubed.

[Harker]

30. Had he thrown a dart at his full name, he might have become King Arthur.

II.

[Chainfire]

31. This would be a great time for the Brits to put the monarchy to bed.

[Martin68]

45. Maybe Charles will be the last. It probably depends on the popular reaction to his reign.

[Lulu KC]

34. For some reason

I want to just call him Chuck! I've never thought of him that way until now, but it's almost like he's a brother who should have a nickname.

[hatrack]

39. Weird royal trivia - among Charles' many ancestors - one Vlad Tepes, Voivode of Wallachia

Charles actually owns a traditional Romanian country house in a village not too far north of Brasov.