King Chas? No thank you!

[5129frederick]

Going back through history we've been known as the Tudors, Elizabethans, Georgans, Victorians and what will we all be known as once this plant talking heir takes to the throne takes over about ten years from now? A right load of Charlies!  

[cee-dee]

If this is true, NO FANG KYU! :-

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/queen-elizabeth-fears-britain-not-ready-king-charles-152945993.html#UONOLx...

[mustard-tree]

If and when Charles does become King, I dont think he will use the name Charles.

After all, George V1`s real name was Albert.

[lhasa.two]

It would be a bit odd to change his name now don't you think? He's always been known as Charles.

These books/articles etc coming out about him are not official biographies, more like swipes by Republicans... It's true he will be a different type of monarch but perhaps that's no bad thing considering the times we live in.

I like the Queen and think overall she's been a very good monarch and I'll be sad when she goes.

[5129frederick]

I remember reading about his birthday falling on Anne's wedding day to to mark Phillips.  Quite funny, actually.  Can you imagine the scenario?  With all the kerkuffle going on, Charles comes down the stairs for breakfast somewhat quiet.  A bit subdued, maybe.

"Morning Mum, morning Dad.  Erm, any post for me?" 

I also remember his wedding to Diana.  If fell on my birthday and was declared a public holiday, so I got my birthday off and went golfing 

[malacandran]

Charles has waited a long time to become King.  His long wait, results from the rather exceptional longevity of his parents.

 Queen Elizabeth II, and her consort the Duke of Edinburgh, are still going strong.  The Duke is 93, and the Queen, if she emulates the example of the Queen Mother, could go on to reach the age of over 100.   I hope she she does. The Queen has been one stable presence, in a changing country.

Nevertheless, this does seem  to present a problem for her successor.  How will he be remembered in History?  Will it it be just as a kind of footnote to Elizabeth?  Or can he stamp his own name on his reign - by giving it a distinctive name.

The names used in the past have been such as "Elizabethan", "Georgian", "Victorian" and "Edwardian".  All these relate to special periods, which are associated - not with the name of the ruling dynasty, or house - but with the first name of the ruling monarch.

For example, in the 20th Century we've had the "Edwardian Age".  This was quite brief - it only lasted from 1901 to 1910.  (Or it's sometimes considered to extend to the outbreak of the First World War in 1914.)

Anyway, a short period.  But it immortalised the name of  King Edward VII.  This was a big achievement for the King.  He had to follow a very long-serving Queen, ie Victoria - yet he managed to give his name to a new historical era.

Now it seems to me, that Prince Charles must do the same kind of thing, if he's to be remembered.  He must have his name associated with a new era or  "Age"  So what names has he got to choose from?

His forenames are "Charles Philip Arthur George".   Looking at these:

The "Georgian" Age  - has already been done, in the 18th/19th centuries.

The "Arthurian" Age -  sounds impossibly medieval

The "Phillipian" Age  - sounds like something fom Ancient Greece (notwithstanding the Duke)

That leaves "Charles",  and that's the one he ought to go for: "King Charles III". 

Admittedly, the two previous Charles's screwed up - the first one precipated the English Civil Wars, and the second was way too merry.

But a King Charles III could restore honour to the royal name, and usher in a new Age.  This would be called, if we adopt a latinisation of the name:   The New Carolian Age

Doesn't it sound inspiring?