You know the king in the kings speech ? Was he the queens dad ?

[Lardlizard]

?

I am sure he will be King Charles. There are obviously negative associations with Charles I but why Charles II? The Merry Monarch?

Seriously? You don't think the fact that he was deposed, had to flee the country in disguise and spend 9 years in exile in France is a negative association?
You don't think being the King who actually lost the monarchy, resulting in an actual Republic, is a negative in a King?

Not to mention Diana was a direct descendent of Charles II

Charles II fled the country after his father had his head cut off and he lost the battles that followed. Not really fair to accuse him of being the King who lost the monarchy is it? He had a lot of faults, but he did succeed in restoring the monarchy in a reasonably civilised fashion. There have been far worse Kings.

• You don't think being the King who actually lost the monarchy, resulting in an actual Republic, is a negative in a King?

No, because he got it back again. 'Restoration' is a positive image. On the plus side, this was the era when the Royal Society was founded, wasn't it?

sheesh you're all so highbrow. I'm still giggling at my King Charles Spaniel joke

You're quite right. Personally I think the most important contribution to public life made by the monarchy in recent times is their centring of short dogs.

@ErrolTheDragon

You're quite right. Personally I think the most important contribution to public life made by the monarchy in recent times is their centring of short dogs.

Though no one, unprompted, actually likes corgis, do they? I'm a dog lover, but all the corgis I've ever encountered in the flesh were nippy, barky, uncertain in temper and notably flatulent.

PMOK father is also some sort of cousin to Prince Phillip with Victoria having so many children, them all surviving to adulthood AND securing such 'good' marriages for them, it's hard to find a member of European Royalty or British aristocracy who ISN'T the cousin of the queen or Prince Philip (who are cousins in some form or other themselves).

Princess Michael is no relation to the DofE or any royal.

Descendants of Queen Victoria, for anyone will all the afternoon to spare:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Descendants_of_Queen_Victoria

I think it is thought that Prince Charles is not likely to be King Charles because of his predecessors of that name.

All the more reason to keep the name. We should maintain the tradition of Charles' (Charli, Charlopodes?) being shit at kinging.

So in terms of Kingly husbands how would Charles II rate against Henry VIII and George IV? Charles is supposed to have been kind to Catherine of Braganza, which you could hardly say is true of Henry or George. Then we have Edward VII and poor Alexandra.
I think it will have to be Athelstan II. As he never married we should be on safe ground. Phew.

I agree that Charles II was very kind to Catherine of Braganza. He was put under a lot of pressure to divorce her because she couldn't give him an heir, but he refused knowing that she would be shamed and lose all her status.

@peaceanddove

I agree that Charles II was very kind to Catherine of Braganza. He was put under a lot of pressure to divorce her because she couldn't give him an heir, but he refused knowing that she would be shamed and lose all her status.

Kind or not, I doubt C of B was very chuffed when all Charles's mistresses started popping out illegitimate children.

@AllAboutHallowsEve

Little known fact: The Queen's real name is Brenda.

Coming to this thread late.

Chinese proverb : "The child who knows their father is truly wise"

I agree that Charles II was very kind to Catherine of Braganza

Oh yes, terribly kind, having many many children by endless mistresses. Lovely husband.

Charles II had mistresses and illegitimate offspring before he had a wife and, as a restored monarch with a thug of a brother with only daughters himself as an heir, divorcing his wife for being childless was pretty remarkable.

I love tracking descendants of Victoria and the endless complexity of the links between the Greek- Danish royal family, the Russian royals and the British and German royal houses.

Another fun fact: Thanks to Charles II's proclivity to produce illegitimate children who married freely into the British nobility, Prince William will be first British monarch to be descended from Charles II.

@FudgeDrudge

I agree that Charles II was very kind to Catherine of Braganza

Oh yes, terribly kind, having many many children by endless mistresses. Lovely husband.

In the terms of the day, yes he was considered unusually kind to his wife. It's a mistake to judge his behaviour by today's standards.

His wife would have fully accepted he would have mistresses, it was just a given. The best she could hope for was that he wouldn't flaunt them too much in her face, and that he would always respect her rank as his wife (which he did).

Interesting fact, the reason Green Park is called Green Park is because it has no flowers growing there. Whilst walking in Green Park Catherine of Braganza was jealous when her husband picked and offered a rose to another woman. She insisted that all the flowers be dug up, and insisted that no more flowers were ever to be planted there, a decree which stands to this day.

Charles II's loyalty to Catherine of Braganza is actually somewhat remarkable and also highly significant from a historical standpoint. Had he divorced her (or more likely had the marriage annulled) and married someone who could have given him an heir, the whole James II debacle could have been avoided. It's interesting to speculate what would have happened.

Also she brought tea drinking to Britain.

Oh dear.

He was named Albert to placate Queen Victoria as he made the mistake to be born on the anniversary of Prince Albert's death. And his father the duke of York was worried about what the Queen would say. She took it quite well apparently.

Apparently Queen Victoria decreed that all eldest sons were to be called Albert in memory of Prince Albert.

She also decreed that all girls should have Victoria in their name. Elizabeth was the first to be born without it. Queen Mary wrote about George and the Queen mother not using it. She didn't think it was necessary.

@Toddlerteaplease

He was named Albert to placate Queen Victoria as he made the mistake to be born on the anniversary of Prince Albert's death. And his father the duke of York was worried about what the Queen would say. She took it quite well apparently.

Sorry, I am a bit lost here who are you referring to?

@HollyandIvyandallthingsYule

My fun fact (which is actually true 😉):

Edward VIII was christened Edward Albert Christian George Andrew Patrick David. Quite a mouthful!

The Kings of Denmark traditionally alternate, in Regnal names, between Frederik and Christian. As Queen Margrethe’s father was named Frederik, she counted herself as having been in the place of Christian, which is why her son is named Frederik (and his son, Christian).

Edward VIII's middle names incorporate the patron saints of the 4 nations, I've just noticed.

Very diplomatic.