The King is Coming!

[quote]Visit will mark the 1st time a monarch has delivered the throne speech since 1977

Fucking hell. Moral support because of their unhinged southern neighbour?

The OLD Alcoholic is coming!

King Charles II died in 1685, you dumb cunt.

Repeatedly meeting Zelensjy and acting as King of Canada on short notice. He's in for a fun royal visit when Trump comes to the UK in a few months

Any chance he’ll visit his Nunavutian territory?

It’s about time they show some interest in their Commonwealth member.

Fuck that idiot that thinks he can annex it or whatever the fuck he wants to do with it.

Charles should just say it is ours, back off, bitch.

R3 is Prince William.

Charles isn't HRH anymore. He's HM (His Majesty). As pointed out above, he's not Charles II but Charles III.

[quote] Repeatedly meeting Zelensjy and acting as King of Canada on short notice. He's in for a fun royal visit when Trump comes to the UK in a few months

My Charlie is loads of fun!

How come Charles didn't take another name like his grandfather (Albert/George VI) and the kings before him.

KISS the ring

r10 Because of an already established public identity, basically. Plus, no one really cares about the baggage that comes with the previous two Charleses, that's just not an issue anymore in modern times.

He chose not to. There was speculation he'd go for George VII since the first two Kings named Charles were a bit unlucky, but he decided on Charles III, maybe taking his example from his mother who famously replied "My own, of course" when asked what name she wanted to reign under.

He wanted to be called Loretta

R5 Iqaluit is absolutely beautiful at the end of May, a real "Paris of the Arctic."

[quote] How come Charles didn't take another name like his grandfather (Albert/George VI) and the kings before him.

There was no need for him to do so.

Very few monarchs choose a regnal name other than the one they have been called by, and by custom, they can only choose one of the names they were given at their christenings.

Queen Victoria was christened "Alexandrina Victoria," and when she grew up, she was invariably called "Drina" (short for Alexandrina), but she chose Victoria as her regal name because she was crowned when so young and she wanted to establish her independence from her mother and stepmother.

Her son Edward VII was christened "Albert Edward" at birth, and was expected by his mother to reign as Albert Edward I, and was always addressed and referred to as "Bertie" by his family. But he hated living in his father Prince Albert's shadow, and insisted on reigning as "Edward VII," which would have made his late mother furious.

His grandson George VI was christened "Albert Frederick Arthur George," and like grandfather was always known to the family as "Bertie." He could have reigned as Albert I, but both Baldwin and Churchill suggested to him that the British public really needed some stability after the abdication crisis, and that he should reign under the same name as his recently deceased father George V,

His grandson Charles was christened "Charles Philip Arthur George," so he could have reigned as Charles III, Philip I, Arthur I, or George VII. There was some talk when he was much younger that he would rule as "George VII" (just because he liked to do things against his parents' wishes when he could get away with it), but he kept Charles as his regnal name because he came to the throne so late everyone would have been enormously confused had he chosen the regnal name George. Moreover, by that time he had enormnously reconciled himself to his mother (and vice-versa).

William was christened "William Arthur Philip Louis," so he could reign as William V, Arthur I, Philip I, or Louis I. he will almost certainly rule as William V given that he will want to maintain tradition.

Prince George was christened "George Alexander Louis." He could reign as George VII, Alexander I, or as Louis I (or Louis II in the unlikely event his father reigns as Louis I).

…famously replied "My own, of course…” in a fictional tv series. FIFY

I read of that response by Elizabeth II on books long before The Crown existed.

Show your work—who was in the room to write about it?

The officials who asked her? It's in biographies of her. Perhaps read a few?

Do you think he’ll find it easy to get travel insurance? I do worry so.

I was molested by Larry King

That ship sailed years ago.

The "My own of course" was reported by Michael Parker, the man who asked her the question. It's in Sally Bedell Smith's biography and others and was quite well known before Netflix filmed their series.

He looks like the Winter Warlock after his icy heart melted. Not a good look.

R20 you’re making it up—as did Julian

Cribbing from random internet searches doesn’t count

Since Elizabeth II's full name was "Elizabeth Alexandra Mary," she could have reigned as Queen Alexandra I or as Queen Mary III.

R28 So?

Or “Queen Sharon” if she had wanted. Monarchs call themselves what they like.

There is no style of “HRM”, R9 - why do you Americans bother?

[quote] Or “Queen Sharon” if she had wanted. Monarchs call themselves what they like.

Not in the UK. In the UK they have always chosen one of the names with which they were christened.

It is extremely unlikely this precedent would be broken, and certainly not in our lifetimes.

And then there’s Maud (disputed).

So what?

It used to be that popes “could” only choose one name, or that no pope “could” choose Francis.

Life goes on…

I thought this might be a Gaithers thread with a special appearance by DL fave, Vestal Goodman.

Is the King still in London?

There’s a difference between precedent and legality, R32. But you know that.

[quote] There is no style of “HRM”, [R9] - why do you Americans bother?

Shut up, you!!!

Philip I! Arthur I! Alexandra I!

You don't get a 'I' after your name until someone comes along as a 'II'. I recall reading that they wanted Elizabeth the Second to choose 'Alexandra' because Elizabeth I was such an iconic figure in English history.

It would have been cool if he had taken another name. It would have been the only exciting thing to happen during his reign

Getting back to the topic that OP posted . . . I think what is significant about this story is that it shows the King is giving some important support to Canada at a time when it is being threatened by Trump.

Canada doesn’t need sausage fingers to deal with Trump effectively.

Hers going as Head of State of Canada- he’s King of Canada, so it’s not an issue that he is opening its - his - parliament.

Just speculating but maybe he wants to go while he still can.

Exactly—once before he croaks—nothing to do with Trump, as Chuck has no relevance on that point .

[quote] The King is Coming!

He last came to Canada in 2022.

He wasn't King then r45

I’ve never been pro monarchy but King Charles is better than Dump

I though Elvis died in 1977.

He belongs in Schitt’s Creek.

I look forward to seeing King Charles stand up for his country.