Queen Elizabeth II just recently reached the 68th year of her reign. This also means that Prince Charles has been in his post as the next person in line to the British throne for 68 years.
As the firstborn son of the British Monarch, he will soon become the King of the United Kingdom. However, reports said that he might be still far away from becoming one.
As it happened, the Queen has reportedly no intention of leaving her post before she passes away. So, until then, the Prince of Wales will remain in his position.
But, as the British Monarch reaches her age of 94, many have wondered what will happen when Prince Charles ascends to the throne. While almost all things are already set in place when he becomes King, it remains unknown what name he would use.
According to Express UK, all British Monarchs have the freedom to choose their own regnal names. If Prince Charles chooses to stick with his name, he will then become King Charles III.
While it is a possibility, the royal born-Prince may also choose other names. As stated, he could use one of his "Christian names" since he has four: Charles Philip Arthur George.
In the case that he chooses a name other than "Charles," royal experts shared that he is not the first one to do so. The most recent British Monarch who had a name change upon ascension was his grandfather, King George VI. He was reportedly known as Prince Albert prior to his reign.
In a similar report released by Town & Country, it was revealed that speculations about Prince Charles' "name change" first emerged in 2005. It was the time when he and Camilla, the Duchess of Cornwall, just got married.
As claimed, the Prince of Wales had reportedly discussed "giving up" the title, Charles III, for when he becomes King of the United Kingdom. The reason being is that the name has "unfortunate associations" with the first and second British Monarchs who used the regnal title.
King Charles I was the only British royal who was "tried" and "executed for treason." As for his son, King Charles II, his reign reportedly covered the unfortunate "plague" and the "Great fire of London."
Despite the assertions, Clarence House was said to have released an official statement clarifying that there were no truths to these speculations. It will be made "at the time," the statement said.
