Charles III: Accession to the Throne: 8 September, 2022


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
The Queen had her coronation in 1953 though not 1952 and we celebrated it in 2022, 70 years of her becoming queen
 
travelguy said:
The Queen had her coronation in 1953 though not 1952 and we celebrated it in 2022, 70 years of her becoming queen
Click to expand...

True, they always celebrate on the date but in the (jubilee) year of her ascension to the throne - not in the (jubilee) year of her coronation.

But I don't expect Charles to wait until 2024 to have his coronation - more likely within a year/before the summer (imho) - so in that case the celebration would be on the jubilee of the coronation as well.

If he would wait until next September it would be different (or better: comparable to queen Elizabeth).
 
OwlBranch said:
There are many challenges ahead for King Charles. Belize and Antigua already announced plans to remove him as their head of state. And the Queen hasn't even been buried!!

People love to focus on these family squabbles. But the truth is Harry and Meghan are a side show to distract from real issues. Would Belize and Antigua like to remain in the commonwealth if Harry and Meghan have stayed as working royals? I doubt it.

In the coming days and weeks, there will be major PR push to try to shore up King Charles image. He has never been as popular as his Mother. There will be effort made to improve his image (for example, there were reports that Charles order William to invite Harry and Meghan to the walkabout, but later that was disputed by William's camp.) It is hilarious that they are fighting over who gets the credit to appear more magnanimous.

It is important for King Charles to try to stay above the fray, like his Mother. And while he can't stop the declining influence of the Monarchy, he will try to slow it down.
Click to expand...
The work that goes on to influence the public's perception would make many of us think twice. However, this is a time of mourning and hopefully these squabbles can be kept to a minimum
 
The DM (and various other tabloids and magazines) have been interested in Mr Durante-Day for the last year or so, especially at slow news times. He’s never shown any documentation of any kind, just several photos of himself and his children at various points in their lives, showing supposed resemblances between them and members of the RF.

The royals have been troubled by individuals like him in the past. I believe there was a man who believed he was Princess Margaret’s son at one time.
 
OwlBranch said:
There are many challenges ahead for King Charles. Belize and Antigua already announced plans to remove him as their head of state. And the Queen hasn't even been buried!!

People love to focus on these family squabbles. But the truth is Harry and Meghan are a side show to distract from real issues. Would Belize and Antigua like to remain in the commonwealth if Harry and Meghan have stayed as working royals? I doubt it.

In the coming days and weeks, there will be major PR push to try to shore up King Charles image. He has never been as popular as his Mother. There will be effort made to improve his image (for example, there were reports that Charles order William to invite Harry and Meghan to the walkabout, but later that was disputed by William's camp.) It is hilarious that they are fighting over who gets the credit to appear more magnanimous.

It is important for King Charles to try to stay above the fray, like his Mother. And while he can't stop the declining influence of the Monarchy, he will try to slow it down.
Click to expand...

I have seen no suggestion that either of these countries are intending on leaving the Commonwealth.

I have seen the suggestion that they will become a republic, according to the workings of their constitutions but not that they will leave the Commonwealth.

Most of the countries of the Commonwealth are already republics.

The Queen lost about half of her realms during her reign. Some of the remaining realms had already made it clear they were waiting until she died before following their constitutions in order to move in that direction - some will be able to do what Barbados did which was do it without consulting the people while others will have to hold a referendum.
 
Duc_et_Pair said:
We saw irritation with the King, when he had to sign a Golden Book with a leaking pen. It struck me how calm, self-controlled and poised Queen Camilla remained. As if her unperturbability calmed the King (or was a reminder to him to follow her example).
Click to expand...

Yes I picked up on that too!
 
Some smiles between the King and the Queen in front of the Golden book (and HM brought his very own pen this time) : bet the last "outburst" in Northern Ireland was taken with good humor afterwards.
 
Last edited:
MARG said:
Yes it is serious. Charles has always held himself to a high standard and nearly everything he is signing is on parchment and will end up with a seal or, in books with heavy and expensive "paper", all of which are historic, legal, constitutional or parts of all three They will all be part of history so when my ink pen squirted I was narked but able to take out another piece of paper and start again.
Click to expand...

I agree but I think it is more than his high standards. He is shaking hands with many people, not just dignitaries but people who have waited for hours to see him. He wasn't in a position to run to the restroom and wash his hands. He didn't yell or insult anyone - hardly a meltdown.

Perhaps there are examples of when this happened to Elizabeth and she shrugged it off but I would not be surprised if it wouldn't have irritated her too. It's also been reported that Elizabeth was not seen in public very much during the mourning period after her father's death.
 
US Royal Watcher said:
I agree but I think it is more than his high standards. He is shaking hands with many people, not just dignitaries but people who have waited for hours to see him. He wasn't in a position to run to the restroom and wash his hands. He didn't yell or insult anyone - hardly a meltdown.

Perhaps there are examples of when this happened to Elizabeth and she shrugged it off but I would not be surprised if it wouldn't have irritated her too. It's also been reported that Elizabeth was not seen in public very much during the mourning period after her father's death.
Click to expand...

I think Charles is more easily flustered than his mother was, and less capable of hiding his irritation in public. I definitely don’t think the Queen would have shrugged off the incident(s) with the ink, but I think she realized that, when you’re the Queen (or King), any situation that arises at these things can be fixed. Hands can be washed, clothes can be changed, new documents can be made. Her standards were likely at least as high as those of her son, but she seemed more accepting of the fact that things go wrong anyway.

Charles must be mentally and physically drained. He’s not a young man, who knows what kinds of family issues are playing out behind the scenes, everyone is looking to him to make decisions on any number of things, and he knows he’ll be knee deep in planning for the coronation almost as soon as the funeral is over. I think he’ll be calmer once things have settled down and he’s hopefully given himself a chance to rest, even for just a few days.
 
King Charles received military chiefs of staff at Buckingham Palace today, September 17:


** rex gallery **
 
He’s receiving the Governors General later. William and Catherine will also be there.
 
HM The King and HRH The Prince of Wales went to out to meet with people standing in line to pay their respects to the late Queen Elizabeth.A moving and wonderfull gesture!
 
Posts about Charles III in Scotland and about a possible French state visit have been moved to the General News thread, which you can find here.
 
The proclamation of the new monarch occurs at St. James Palace.
Who was the first sovereign to be proclaimed at St. James Palace?
 
CyrilVladisla said:
The proclamation of the new monarch occurs at St. James Palace.
Who was the first sovereign to be proclaimed at St. James Palace?
Click to expand...

Good question! The palace was built by his father so maybe Edward vi?
 
I'm not sure if there is a more specific thread for this, but:

I wonder if HM The King will issue any proclamation regarding the name of the Royal House.

I'm thinking he may change the name to "the House of Mountbatten-Windsor", and that way the (sometimes hidden) family surname will be the same as that of the House.

Of course he might issue a proclamation or statement, confirming that it will remain the House of Windsor or he may do nothing at all in which case it remains the House of Windsor.

Thoughts, comments?
 
Duke of Leaside said:
I'm not sure if there is a more specific thread for this, but:

I wonder if HM The King will issue any proclamation regarding the name of the Royal House.

I'm thinking he may change the name to "the House of Mountbatten-Windsor", and that way the (sometimes hidden) family surname will be the same as that of the House.

Of course he might issue a proclamation or statement, confirming that it will remain the House of Windsor or he may do nothing at all in which case it remains the House of Windsor.

Thoughts, comments?
Click to expand...

I can't see him change the name. The matter was discussed in the 1950s, and the Queen had been advised by Churchill to retain the House of Windsor name. I see no reason for Charles to want to change it at this stage.
 
Duke of Leaside said:
I'm not sure if there is a more specific thread for this, but:

I wonder if HM The King will issue any proclamation regarding the name of the Royal House.

I'm thinking he may change the name to "the House of Mountbatten-Windsor", and that way the (sometimes hidden) family surname will be the same as that of the House.

Of course he might issue a proclamation or statement, confirming that it will remain the House of Windsor or he may do nothing at all in which case it remains the House of Windsor.

Thoughts, comments?
Click to expand...

I think that will be left as it is… Agnatically the BRF belongs to the House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg since 8:th September, just like the Danish and Norwegian royal families.

But i don’t expect Charles to change The Queen’s letters patent from the 50:s that the BRF should belong to the House of Windsor, and that her descendants without titles can take the name of Mountbatten-Windsor for themselves.
 
Last edited:
Duke of Leaside said:
I'm not sure if there is a more specific thread for this
Click to expand...

Yes, there is. :flowers: You can find it here:

Windsor/Mountbatten-Windsor: Name of Royal House and Surname


Hans-Rickard said:
I think that will be left as it is… Agnatically the BRF belongs to the House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glücksburg since 8:th September, just like the Danish and Norwegian royal families.
Click to expand...

The house name of the Danish and Norwegian royal families is simply Glücksburg/Glücksborg. No "Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg".

https://www.kongehuset.dk/en/the-monarchy-in-denmark/history
https://www.royalcourt.no/seksjon.html?tid=28435&sek=27259

Their Schleswig-Holstein ancestry is not (purely) agnatic, as King Christian I of Denmark was a Schleswig-Holstein on his maternal side, not paternal.
 
Tatiana Maria said:
Yes, there is. :flowers: You can find it here:

Windsor/Mountbatten-Windsor: Name of Royal House and Surname




The house name of the Danish and Norwegian royal families is simply Glücksburg/Glücksborg. No "Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg".

https://www.kongehuset.dk/en/the-monarchy-in-denmark/history
https://www.royalcourt.no/seksjon.html?tid=28435&sek=27259

Their Schleswig-Holstein ancestry is not (purely) agnatic, as King Christian I of Denmark was a Schleswig-Holstein on his maternal side, not paternal.
Click to expand...

They call themselves ”Glücksborg” yes, though that name was added by the father of King Christian IX, Friedrich Wilhelm Duke of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonserburg-Beck when he was given Schloss Glücksburg by King Frederik VI.

If we should look really far back they are the House of Oldenburg.
 
Last edited:
Long Live His Majesty The King and Her Majesty Queen Camilla
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Ista
General News for Charles III and Queen Camilla Part 2, February 2024-
2
Replies
56
Views
12K
iceflower
iceflower
Marengo
  • Locked
Charles III: Coronation Information and Musings - Part 2
15 16 17
Replies
501
Views
53K
Marengo
Marengo
Blog Real
King Carlo Emanuele III (1701-1773) and Wives
Replies
1
Views
344
CyrilVladisla
CyrilVladisla
Marengo
  • Sticky
The Coronation: Big Lunch, Concert, Big Help Out, 7 and 8 May 2023
2 3
Replies
83
Views
11K
Somebody
Somebody
Marengo
  • Sticky
The Coronation of King Charles III and Queen Camilla, 6 May 2023
30 31 32
Replies
946
Views
93K
Somebody
Somebody

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom