The Monarchy under Charles

[Rudolph]

I don't know why people get so worked up over this. We all know Charles will be the next king if he outlives his mother. We all know it's not a popularity contest. But it's not William's fault they take these surveys. He can't help it if people seem to like him and think he'd be a good king.

 

[Osipi]

What I find so interesting is that its always "Charles will be king." "William would make a good king." and "Harry might not be suitable material to be a king" and whatever other opinion on being king that can be thought of.

The more I learn about the monarchy and how the monarchy works and just how well oiled of a business the "Firm" is, I sincerely have to believe that a lot of how Charles' monarchy runs depends not only on Charles, himself, but also the people around him. His family, his trusted advisors and his staff. A well oiled and successfully running machine has parts that all work together as a whole.

When the time does come, William will be a very big important gear in the workings of the Firm and so will his wife and his brother and the rest of the extended family as satellites that reflect on HM, The King. There's no better king training for William (and eventually George) than having the hands on experience. Charles has had a lifetime of "king training" and he's more than ready to step into that role.

 

[Curryong]

I don't know whether Charles as a young man, in his 'action man' days, was considered so much less popular than his siblings. I don't think too many surveys were taken on the subject but people seemed to quite like him.

In my opinion it was the 'war of the Wales's' that first put the British public offside with Charles. This was followed by his marriage to Camilla, who is also not very popular.

Then there have been the various negative media campaigns about his public espousal of various issues, and his lobbying of Government ministers, which could be a problem as a future king.

Add to this the titbits in the tabloids about Chrles 'talking to plants', having three valets, having his toothpaste put on his toothbrush for him every morning etc etc.

The British and Commonwealth public, as a result of these revelations, seem to have been left with the impression that here we have a waffler who likes to lecture others on the environment etc while leaving a huge environmental footprint of his own.

Many members of the public, I think, view Charles as a man who was an adulterer, and someone, who although a hard worker, is an indulgent eccentric who can't stop meddling in business that doesn't concern him. It would be very difficult, I think, for Charles to remove those impressions now, false though many of them are.

 

[Osipi]

Many members of the public, I think, view Charles as a man who was an adulterer, and someone, who although a hard worker, is an indulgent eccentric who can't stop meddling in business that doesn't concern him. It would be very difficult, I think, for Charles to remove those impressions now, false though many of them are.

I have to admit that before I became a member here at TRF, what I knew about Charles is what was gleaned from American tabloids at the grocery checkout (I worked as a cashier at one and read them in my slow times). Needless to say that since actively "getting to know" the man that Charles is by discussions here and by reading biographies and learning of how intelligent this man is and how much of a successful and hard working entrepreneur and businessman he is with a gift of looking beyond today into the future, my opinion has changed drastically and my admiration of him grew.

I was lucky and interested enough to learn. The majority of the people will never see him as anything but how the tabloids and the media have presented him over the years. What will change people's minds and endear Charles to them more will be his actual actions as the King of the UK. That part of history hasn't been written yet. I believe it was the same situation with George VI. He was never expected to be king but yet history is very favorable to him because of his dedication and the actions he took.

 

[Skippyboo]

Edward VII is probably more closer analogy for Charles. Long serving Prince of Wales, becomes King at a late age, had low expectations when he becomes King. Charles unlike his maternal grandfather knew he was going to be King one day.

 

[Osipi]

Very good point. Edward VII is a better analogy than George VI. With both of them though, how they were perceived as king was written after their time on the throne by their actions. Charles' hasn't been written yet. Wish my crystal ball wasn't so cloudy (or is it dusty) and I could peer into the future history books.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

It is not so hard to see why and old man, near retirement age and a grandfather, looses it from the younger generation. Usually an abdication results in a younger generation taking over, giving new youth to the monarchy. See Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Belgium and Spain. But when Charles takes over, he will do that on more or less the age on which Jean, Beatrix, Albert and Juan Carlos abdicated their kingship...

In this day and era, so dominated by image and imago, it is not so strange that a fresh young family with cute babies wins it from grandpa and grandma C&C. By the way, in this years open sewers, pardon: comments' sections, I could deduct more favorability towards popular, easygoing, achieving Harry than for the often "lazy"-dubbed William.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

Half of British public wants Prince William to succeed the Queen | Royal | News | Daily Express

The 34-year-old is even more popular than heir to the throne Prince Charles, it has been claimed.

''Even more popular than heir to the throne Prince Charles'', as if this is a surprise.

Current Monarch: Immensely popular, beloved, admired, iconic.

Charles as monarch: I believe and hope that he will be respected, but he will never be popular/loved.

William as monarch: Probably very popular, but behind his son/daughter in the polls.

A survey published today by Opinium Research’s ‘Monarchy Tracker’ also shows that just one in five British people want the country to become a republic giving a boost to the house of Windsor.

A boost to the house of Windsor? This poll allwais has the support for the monarchy lover than other polls, so the 'boost' is actually even higher.

Since this also involves William, maybe this should be moved to this thread:
http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f23/the-monarchy-after-elizabeth-ii-11874-16.html

 

[Countessmeout]

Unless he abdicates of course.

Even in that case Charles would still be the next king. You have to be king to abdicate. He may be a very short reigned king, but fro, the time his mother dies until he officially abdicated, Charles would be king. A coronation is not required, as seen with Edward.

 

[Countessmeout]

It is not so hard to see why and old man, near retirement age and a grandfather, looses it from the younger generation. Usually an abdication results in a younger generation taking over, giving new youth to the monarchy. See Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Belgium and Spain. But when Charles takes over, he will do that on more or less the age on which Jean, Beatrix, Albert and Juan Carlos abdicated their kingship...

In this day and era, so dominated by image and imago, it is not so strange that a fresh young family with cute babies wins it from grandpa and grandma C&C. By the way, in this years open sewers, pardon: comments' sections, I could deduct more favorability towards popular, easygoing, achieving Harry than for the often "lazy"-dubbed William.

Luxembourg and the Netherlands have a tradition for abdication. And even then, Beatrix wa spurned on by her son dying. Albert and just Carlos didn't simply abdicate because they wanted to retire and let a younger generation be king. JC retired due to scandal and Albert due to failing health.


British royaks more than any believe in reigning until death. Charles is not going to simply abdicate for his son and retire. Charles has spent decades preparing fir this role and his chance, he won't simply hand that over.

William is in no way ready to be king. And if they continue to let him play family man, he never will. As Prince of Wales he will have to take on more responsibility. His good looking kids will only help his popularity so long. He can use his fathers reign to build up his own working image. It will help his father's reign and strengthen his own eventual.

 

[Rudolph]

William could step in as king tomorrow. It's a constitutional role. You have next to no authority. You do what your ministers tell you to do and that's it.

Princess Eugenie could step in as Queen for that matter. Charles' 60 years as heir doesn't matter because his role as king will be completely different to that as Prince of Wales.

According to polls, William's future subjects seem to think he's ready.

 

[Skippyboo]

William could step in as king tomorrow. It's a constitutional role. You have next to no authority. You do what your ministers tell you to do and that's it.



Princess Eugenie could step in as Queen for that matter. Charles' 60 years as heir doesn't matter because his role as king will be completely different to that as Prince of Wales.



According to polls, William's future subjects seem to think he's ready.

Exactly. Sign the paperwork in front of you, read the speech the government prepares for you, pass out the gongs, wear a variety of different uniforms. Keep your mouth shut.

 

[muriel]

And even then, Beatrix wa spurned on by her son dying.

Is that an educated guess, a personal view or a statement of fact?

 

[Denville]

Unless he abdicates of course.

He's not going to do that.

 

[Denville]

I don't know whether Charles as a young man, in his 'action man' days, was considered so much less popular than his siblings. I don't think too many surveys were taken on the subject but people seemed to quite like him.

In , false though many of them are.

Charles was extreemley popular as a young POW. His bad marriage and first few years after Diana's death were a bad time and he lost a lot of popularity then but he is now IMO as popular as a man of his age is likely to be when there are young pretty people around like Will and Kate. I'm sure he was never "less popular" than other royals such as his siblings or anyone but his Mother.. It was Diana who outshone him.

 

[Lady October]

The *past* is just that, The *past* and is not how Charles is today. He has been preparing for his role as king all his life and has had a great example of being head of the common wealth, HM, his mother.

Charles has IMO always been highly underestimated because it seems IMO that people are always judging him because of his marriage to Diana. Life is not fairytales and yet that is what I see some are relying on. He is one that I believe learns from his mistakes and moves on......he has turned the duchy into a very profitable business that has helped tens of thousands of people, he loves his country with a passion and has lived his life to be the very best king he can be and I believe that he will outshine more then anyone knows.

And above all he has found a woman who will support him in all things. We all change as time goes by and any marriage changes with time be it one where they are happy or not so happy, life moves on and I see that he has done the very best with whom he is and what he has, as we all should do.

William to me has a long way to go, it is not about just putting a crown on the head, it is about knowing all the responsibilities that go with the job and Charles knows that. He will when the time comes take William and teach him as he has been taught.

I just pray that HM is around at least another decade before any of this happens. To me, there will never be another Queen Elizabeth like the one we have now. She is priceless in every way.

 

[Osipi]

Very well written post and right on the money.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

The *past* is just that, The *past* and is not how Charles is today. He has been preparing for his role as king all his life and has had a great example of being head of the common wealth, HM, his mother.

Charles has IMO always been highly underestimated because it seems IMO that people are always judging him because of his marriage to Diana. Life is not fairytales and yet that is what I see some are relying on. He is one that I believe learns from his mistakes and moves on......he has turned the duchy into a very profitable business that has helped tens of thousands of people, he loves his country with a passion and has lived his life to be the very best king he can be and I believe that he will outshine more then anyone knows.

And above all he has found a woman who will support him in all things. We all change as time goes by and any marriage changes with time be it one where they are happy or not so happy, life moves on and I see that he has done the very best with whom he is and what he has, as we all should do.

William to me has a long way to go, it is not about just putting a crown on the head, it is about knowing all the responsibilities that go with the job and Charles knows that. He will when the time comes take William and teach him as he has been taught.

I just pray that HM is around at least another decade before any of this happens. To me, there will never be another Queen Elizabeth like the one we have now. She is priceless in every way.

Agree with everything, and welcome to TRF!

 

[Iluvbertie]

Abdication can't happen until after a person becomes King.

He can ask to be withdrawn from the line of succession or convert to Roman Catholicism making it automatic but only kings/queens can actually abdicate.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

{I just pray that HM is around at least another decade before any of this happens. To me, there will never be another Queen Elizabeth like the one we have now. She is priceless in every way.}

Every word of your wonderful post rings true Lady October, and the last paragraph sums up my feelings precisely!

I have always had tremendous admiration for HM, and the longer she lives the more this is true.

 

[Mbruno]

Even in that case Charles would still be the next king. You have to be king to abdicate. He may be a very short reigned king, but fro, the time his mother dies until he officially abdicated, Charles would be king. A coronation is not required, as seen with Edward.

He could renounce his succession rights before ascending the throne. Technically it would be a renunciation, not an abdication, but the effect is the same. Either way, it would require special legislation in the UK and in other Commonwealth realms.

 

[Mbruno]

William is in no way ready to be king. And if they continue to let him play family man, he never will.

Was Queen Elizabeth II "ready" when she ascended the throne at the age of 25 with two young children ? I am pretty sure William would step up to the job if he were required to take it.

 

[Osipi]

When I think about it, neither the Queen or her father, George VI were ready to be the monarch. One was thrust into the role of king from an unexpected abdication and his daughter by her father's early death.

Charles, I think has the same respect towards the duty of a monarch as his mother does. His motto as The Prince of Wales is "Ich Dien" (German for "I Serve") and he's lived up to that motto. Charles also has a deep regard for tradition as well as a keen eye for looking into the future. With this in mind, I do believe that Charles' reign will be a fitting "transitional" monarchy between the traditional ways of the reign of his mother with a willingness to adapt the monarchy even more into the 21st century in preparation for William's reign.

 

[Dman]

Was Queen Elizabeth II "ready" when she ascended the throne at the age of 25 with two young children ? I am pretty sure William would step up to the job if he were required to take it.

Yes, William is prepared to take on the job if he's called to do so. Of course, he's not going to skip over his father, but if something happened to Charles before his succession, William will do his duty. They've been raised to take the top job on.

Also, they are surrounded by advisors to help them through the process.

 

[nascarlucy]

Unless Prince Charles is very very old or is in very poor health, he will be the King of England when the Queen passes.

 

[EllieCat]

Unless Prince Charles is very very old or is in very poor health, he will be the King of England when the Queen passes.

And King of a few other countries too!

I think he will be a good king. I saw the documentary Ant and Dec did on the Prince's Trust; Prince Charles may have made a bit of a mess of his private life, but in public he's a thoughtful caring type of bloke. And the public is all we should care about, Royals' private lives should be just that – private.*

* Apart from weddings of course!

 

[Iluvbertie]

Unless Prince Charles is very very old or is in very poor health, he will be the King of England when the Queen passes.

His health or age will have no bearing on his right to inherit.

Even if he is mentally incapable of doing the job he will still be King with William as Regent.

He has to ask parliament to pass the necessary legislation to remove him from the line of succession or make a decision to convert to Roman Catholicism - otherwise if he outlives his mother, regardless of his health, he will be King.

 

[TLLK]

William could step in as king tomorrow. It's a constitutional role. You have next to no authority. You do what your ministers tell you to do and that's it.

Princess Eugenie could step in as Queen for that matter. Charles' 60 years as heir doesn't matter because his role as king will be completely different to that as Prince of Wales.

According to polls, William's future subjects seem to think he's ready.

I agree as William has had to be ready since he reached adulthood. It is important to remember there is a well-oiled machine that will smooth the transition from one monarch to another. So yes if an incredible accident occurs and Princess Eugenie is the next highest remaining person in the line of succession then she would have all the assistance and support to become the next monarch.

 

[Countessmeout]

Was Queen Elizabeth II "ready" when she ascended the throne at the age of 25 with two young children ? I am pretty sure William would step up to the job if he were required to take it.

How are these two things comparable?

Elizabeth wasnt ready, even she I am sure would tell you that. She had no choice. Her father didn't choose to die.

Charles has a choice. He has chosen to support his adult son to continue to be a part time Royal well beyond when other royals stepped up to duties. Charles knows better than anyone the work, training, understanding that goes into becoming a king. Unlike his grandfather, he has the Choice not to put his son on the throne before he is ready.

We all hope the queen lives another decade, but the fact is she is almost 91. We can hope she lives as long as her mother, but she may not. William needs some years of actually stepping up and being a royal, and Kate.


A monarch is only as good as their support. Will is not the only one not ready. Kate certainly is not ready to be queen consort. Love her or hate her, Camilla is much more ready for a roll supporting the king, then Kate. And the longer Kate remains away with the kids instead of doing more duties, the longer that learning time will be.

The reality his being prince and Princess of Wales is an important step. It is a transition period. You take on new duties, you take more responsibility.

His health or age will have no bearing on his right to inherit.

Even if he is mentally incapable of doing the job he will still be King with William as Regent.

He has to ask parliament to pass the necessary legislation to remove him from the line of succession or make a decision to convert to Roman Catholicism - otherwise if he outlives his mother, regardless of his health, he will be King.

And he had to be mentally capacitance to ask to be removed. So if he was in bad enough health, it likely would never get passed. They would simply have a regent. But considering the age of his parents, and he is likely to be king in his seventies, not very likely to be the case. He could reign for a good fifteen to twenty years.

 

[ROYAL NORWAY]

If Ephraim is a journalist, then I am the King of Norway.