I'm sorry, but the future British King should not follow the example of European monarchies. We have always done things differently to Europe. Pomp and circumstance is what we do in this Kingdom. The Commonwealth and the UK should remain united.I think that a King "George VII of England" (the regnal title I expect Charles to take) should look to Juan Carlos of Spain as a model to emulate. I think under "George VII" there may be a move to codify the English constitution, Scotland may succeed (and hopefully Wales too), many Commonwealth countries may go republican, and "George VII" will have an opportunity to recast the monarchy in England from an "Imperial" monarchy to one more in line with the Spanish or Scandinavian examples.... streamlined court, less excessive pomp or fuddy duddyness, yet while honoring those aspects of hereditary monarchy that do play a role in a democratic nation.
I think he can best let his sentiments be known by the causes he patronizes, rather then becoming a spokesman... which may conflict with his constitutional duties. The King of Spain does have opinions that on occasion he lets be known in public, and he does vote in referendums (and maybe in elections, this I don’t know for sure.) But he has tact to know the difference when to speak his mind and when not to.
I like Charles, and hope his wife becomes queen of England. I think he will do a great job, but it may be temptious as England will be going through many changes during his kingship.
I just had a giggle of a thought. If and when Charles and Camilla become King and Queen/Princess Consort, they may opt out to call each other King Fred and Queen Gladys in private.
A brief history of the nicknames:
Charles and Camilla Nicknames, Gladys and Fred : People.com
Is there any monarch over history whose name started with an E and he was the only one? Take the name Edmund for example. If there was only one King Edmund, if Charles chose to use that for a regnal name, no changes need to be made. He'd still be EIIR.
No. For many reasons.
1. Charles is not Charles Philip. He doesn't have a double first, Philip is one of his middle names,
2. Even the British kings who did have double barrel, ruled by only 1.
3. And if he broke with tradition he would simply be King Charles Philip, It is a Swedish thing to put the number in between. The Brits have a pretty remote link to Swedes, no reason they would adopt their odd style. Like Willem-Alexander. Instead of William IV Alexander, he is simply Willem-Alexander. If he had chosen to use the ordinal he'd have dropped Alexander from his first name.
I don't believe there was ever an English King who had a double name.. Even with some of the Georges I think they were loosely known as George Louis to distinguish them from other Georges.
WRT the Dutch I believe that John Friso who died, he called himself Prince Friso later on, so I think that they are more inclined to drop the first name.. WA's daguther is called Catherina Amalia but goes by Amalia.
I don't believe there was ever an English King who had a double name.. Even with some of the Georges I think they were loosely known as George Louis to distinguish them from other Georges.
WRT the Dutch I believe that John Friso who died, he called himself Prince Friso later on, so I think that they are more inclined to drop the first name.. WA's daguther is called Catherina Amalia but goes by Amalia.
Not quite - the numbering for English monarchs starts at the Norman Conquest in 1066. Prior to the Conquest English kings had "nicknames" attached by history to their given names to distinguish them i.e. Edward the Martyr, Edward the Elder, Edward the Confessor, Edmund Ironside, etc. so a future King Edmund would be the 1st. Also, it was decided at the beginning of the reign of Elizabeth II that all future monarchs of the UK would use the highest ordinal of either the English or Scottish monarchy where there were duplicate or original names. This became an issue because Scotland had never had a previous "Queen Elizabeth". Neither Charles, William or George will be affected but say, a future King James would be James VIII and not James III if the UK monarchy survives (presuming they don't count the Old Pretender, but that's a whole 'nother kettle of fish.)Is there any monarch over history whose name started with an E and he was the only one? Take the name Edmund for example. If there was only one King Edmund, if Charles chose to use that for a regnal name, no changes need to be made. He'd still be EIIR.
Of course they had more than one name, but they weren't generally known by it.. that's not what I mean by double names...
Not quite - the numbering for English monarchs starts at the Norman Conquest in 1066. Prior to the Conquest English kings had "nicknames" attached by history to their given names to distinguish them i.e. Edward the Martyr, Edward the Elder, Edward the Confessor, Edmund Ironside, etc. so a future King Edmund would be the 1st. Also, it was decided at the beginning of the reign of Elizabeth II that all future monarchs of the UK would use the highest ordinal of either the English or Scottish monarchy where there were duplicate or original names. This became an issue because Scotland had never had a previous "Queen Elizabeth". Neither Charles, William or George will be affected but say, a future King James would be James VIII if the UK monarchy survives (presuming they don't count the Old Pretender, but that's a whole 'nother kettle of fish.)
You're probably right - I'd forgotten about Harold.The exception, I suspect, to all of that would be the name Harold. Harold Godwinson was known as Harold II and so a new Harold would be Harold III. We know that the Edward's name themselves from after the conquest but I am not so sure that a Harold would do so given that Harold II is the name used in History for Harold Godwinson.
What someone is known in private doesn't change their legal name or how they choose to reign.
That is most unlikely indeed but we have seen it before, didn't we? Queen Victoria went by the name Alexandrina but used her second name: Victoria. Prince Charles´very own grandfather went by the name Albert (Bertie) but used his fourth name: George.
Did she go by Alexandrina? Everything I've read indicates she went by Victoria as a princess, although she was called "Drina" by the family when she was very young.
Bertie, of course, was a special exception owing to the abdication; he deliberately chose to go by George as monarch instead of Albert to convey continuity with his father's reign in a time of crisis.