British Republicans!!

[daleduke17]

They may make the silver. Gold MAYBE

Charles is 63 right now. If he took over tomorrow, he would be the following ages at "Jubilee" time:

- Silver: 88
- Gold: 113
- Diamond: 123
- Platinum: 133/138 (depending on if it is 70 or 75 years for this).

It is surprising Prince Philip is still around as his father and grandfather (along with a couple "great" level grandfathers) didn't see 70. So, Silver may be a stretch for Charles.

A Diamond for William or Harry would be pushing it, but could happen depending on the Queen's longevity.

[AdminAssistant]

It's also entirely possible that Charles would voluntarily pass up the throne, allowing William to ascend immediately. It would probably be best for all involved - William is young and has his mother's charisma and charm, and Kate is well liked and admired. Charles is a bit....awkward?...and then there's the whole Camilla situation. Camilla won't even use the 'Princess of Wales' title out of fear of public backlash; how well do you think Queen Camilla would go over?

ETA: As I said elsewhere, I've seen interviews with Prince Charles and he seemed quite intelligent and likeable and all that. But he lacks that sense of grace and dignity that one expects of a monarch.

[Hyena Dandy]

Wouldn't she be more Queen-Consort Camilla at least?

[Rapscallion]

The Diana-obsessed section of the population may not like this, but they don't have any say in how the royal family dictates their affairs. Charles will be king at the moment his mother dies, whether people want him to abdicate or not. That's the system and even they cannot buck it.

Camilla is the Princess of Wales, whether people want her to be or not. It's an understandable move for her not to use the title, but it's giving in to the desperate notion that there was something overly special about Diana. I just see her as yet another human. It's going to take a lot of time for the sparkle the public created for itself to wear off.

Would Camilla be queen? I don't know - I've had to look this up, and I think the spouse of the reigning monarch isn't granted a monarch's title. Phil the Greek isn't known as a king, he's the Duke of Edinburgh, so I suspect Camilla will gain some similar title when it comes to it.

Rapscallion

[Hyena Dandy]

I think Phillip may have had to specifically decline the title.

[Rapscallion]

I'd have to do more research than the quick google I did for the above to have any idea of what the case is, I'm afraid. While I don't really have any axe to grind against the royals, I don't have any reason to get involved with their lives. I just don't know.

Rapscallion

[SongsOfDragons]

Philip is only a prince because it's his wife who is the monarch, therefore she is higher than him - and a Queen is not higher than a King. Therefore the husband of a Queen is always known as a Prince Consort. Albert was one too with Victoria. The wife of a King, however, does not come a cropper of the hierarchy stuff (it's even more fun when you throw 'Emperor' into the mix) so she is free to use the title of Queen. The consort will affirm their loaylty and be given their new title at their spouse's coronation (even though it happened already; in the UK there is no interregnum, the new monarch is automatically monarch at the moment of the old monarch's death and a coronation is not technically required).

There is no way Charles is going to let go of whatever kingship he can get his hands on. Poor bugger's waited enough!! Camilla is being very sensible when it comes to placating the public. It could be that William and Catherine are made Prince and Princess of Wales when Charles becomes King, but AFAIK that title had not been used for some time before they decided to resurrect it for Charles.

It's also unlikely that Charles will use his first name as his Royal name...bad stuff happened to the previous Charles', especially Charles I!! Using Arthur would be presumptious, so we might end up with a King Philip I or a King George VII.

[AdminAssistant]

Charles II seemed to have a pretty good run - exile in France, comes back to stomp out the Puritans and screw actresses.

[Gravekeeper]

The notion that there is a sliding scale of quality of people based solely on parentage is obscene to me, and totally contrary to democracy and egalitarianism.

Yet it utterly flourishs in every functioning democracy in the world right now. Being born into wealth is the same everywhere. The only functional difference between royalty in the UK and the filthy rich in the US is at least the royalty is obligated to the well being of the UK.

Hell, the Queen owns a fuckton of land in the UK which she allows the public and the government to use freely does she not? She's more than paying for herself. God help you all if she started charging rent. >.>

[Ginger Tea]

I thought Camilla was the Dutchess of Cornwall or some such and would retain that title (more in the not wishing to offend column more than anything else)

Having said that I don't follow the monarchy just as much as I dont follow celebs, esp those that are famous just for being famous.

All though not in power, they hold alot of sway with forign affairs and are more noted abroad than our own government, people in China would not know who cameron was but they would know the queen a mile off.

I would not like Charles to abdicate letting William become king just cos hes more popular and who his mummy was, IMO he's too young to be King in an age where royalty does not go into battle like the olden days.

And yes I am aware that most if not all princes have spent time in active duty and I belive they do it cos they want to not that they are forced to, what I mean is when was the last time a King was out fighting in an actual war chancing his life to perhaps have his 6 year old take over in his place?
The concept sounds stupid in the first place win the battle but loose the king only to have a 6 year old leading the country, without reading up on it I do hope that none of our past kings ever did something that stupid or we had the sence to put an adult in charge till the kid was old enough.

I saw parts of the first episode of some modern day roundhouse/cavalier show, the hisory aspects were nice but the "modern day cavaleirs" bit made me want to kick
the TV in.

edit:

It's also unlikely that Charles will use his first name as his Royal name...bad stuff happened to the previous Charles', especially Charles I!! Using Arthur would be presumptious, so we might end up with a King Philip I or a King George VII.

They knew their first born would be next in line, afaik it is first born regardless of gender, they knew the names history, one would think that they might actually have no beef with there being a Charlse III, I mean they have an option at the 9th effing Henry assuming something happens to the line.

[Rapscallion]

I don't know about other royalty, but there's a religious requirement in the UK version. I ignore this as it's she who has to go through the motions and it doesn't affect me.

Rapscallion

[AdminAssistant]

It's taken a bit of Googling, but, the Prince of Wales is the title given to the heir apparent to the throne, if male. The Princess of Wales, then, is his wife, but is not referred to as Princess SuchandSuch because she is not a princess in her own right. ("Princess" Diana technically could not be referred to in that way.) As the current wife to the heir apparent, Camilla is the Princess of Wales, but chooses not to use the title. Charles has many titles, included Duke of Cornwall and Duke of Rothesay (for the Scots). Camilla uses Duchess of Rothesay in Scotland and Duchess of Cornwall elsewhere. (ETA: Just as William is now the Duke of Cambridge, and will keep that title when he becomes the Prince of Wales upon Charles's ascension.)

As far as I can find, Charles has not officially discussed or announced his name as monarch, but chances are it will be either Charles III or George VII.

Also, in Tanzania, Charles's title is The Helper of Cows. I love Wikipedia.

[SongsOfDragons]

The idea of 'what name shall I use?' has been going on a lot. One of the documentaries mentioned that someone asked Elizabeth what her Royal name was going to be, and she answered 'Elizabeth, of course!!'

Queen Victoria's first name was Alexandrina. The Queen's father was named Albert; he became George VI. I think her uncle also used a different name (haven't seen the King's Speech for a while) Prince Charles - am I getting muddled up like Diana did at her wedding or is his first name not Philip? *swoops on Wiki*

This is a pleasant thread. ^^ Thanks for being nice.

And Gravekeeper - have a round of applause. *applauds*

[Ginger Tea]

There was a radio advert for a glossy weekly magazine today which had the line "and Harry in that uniform." me and a guy working near by both had the same thought "What the Nazi one?"