What if the Queen of England died in early 1998?

Who would have taken over if Queen Elizabeth died in early 1998?


  • Total voters
    95

Baby Kata

Banned
A few months after Diana. Charles was at the height of his unpopularity, and William was only 15.

What would have happened to the monarchy?

Would the Queen Mother have taken over? What about Prince Philip? What about other close relatives? (All of her children are in the poll)
 
Only one answer here: Charles. Unless Charles says something asinine like "Yeah I killed her because I hated her boyfriend," in which case he's still King by default but likely gets forced to abdicate by Parliament that says "It's either William or a Republic, pick." Absent that, Britain's stuck with him, and given his unpopularity and especially his desire for a stronger monarch, you might well see a Republican Britain by the mid-to-late 2000s.
 
Last edited:
No, I believe the line of succession passes to Charles then to William. Charles, if alive, will be the next king IF (1) he is capable of taking the throne, and (2) he does not abdicate/deny in favor of his son.
 
Yeah, the Acts of Settlement is still in effect, which means Charles will automatically be king. Heck, if King Edward gets to be King for a few weeks for having pro-Nazi leanings who married a divorcee, I doubt that Charles would get ousted for a lesser reason.

Here's the Line of Succession by 1998:

  1. Prince Charles
  2. Prince William
  3. Prince Henry
  4. Prince Andrew
  5. Princess Beatrice
  6. Princess Eugenie
  7. Prince Edward
  8. Princess Anne
  9. Princess Zara
  10. Princess Margaret
Prince Philip (as a Prince of Greece) is waaaay down the list, somewhere after the King of Norway. And I don't think the Queen Mother is even on the list.
 

Baby Kata

Banned
Yeah, the Acts of Settlement is still in effect, which means Charles will automatically be king. Heck, if King Edward gets to be King for a few weeks for having pro-Nazi leanings who married a divorcee, I doubt that Charles would get ousted for a lesser reason.

Here's the Line of Succession by 1998:

  1. Prince Charles
  2. Prince William
  3. Prince Henry
  4. Prince Andrew
  5. Princess Beatrice
  6. Princess Eugenie
  7. Prince Edward
  8. Princess Anne
  9. Princess Zara
  10. Princess Margaret
Prince Philip (as a Prince of Greece) is waaaay down the list, somewhere after the King of Norway. And I don't think the Queen Mother is even on the list.

But Edward was ousted, which is the point.

Charles was extremely unpopular in the aftermath of Diana's death, but people loved the Queen Mother.
 
Charles. Regardless of his popularity, he IS the LEGAL monarch.
Now, given his popularity and his attitude, I can see him severely damaging the monarchy.
 
Last edited:
Well, the Government can only function if both Parliament and the King are able to co-operate with each other. In Edward's case, his pro-Nazi leanings was the issue that clashed with Parliament, not necessarily him marrying a divorcee.

I doubt that Parliament in 1998 will oust Charles for something as minor as infidelity or unpopularity, as many previous monarchs reigned despite these.
 
There is strict succession line what is not changed easily without good reason. So Charles is next monarch. There is not way that he is just skipped. Only way is if he refuses, dies bedfore coronation or in some reason not be acceptable as king of United Kingdom. Another question is how strong republican movement there would be.
 

Baby Kata

Banned
There is strict succession line what is not changed easily without good reason. So Charles is next monarch. There is not way that he is just skipped. Only way is if he refuses, dies bedfore coronation or in some reason not be acceptable as king of United Kingdom. Another question is how strong republican movement there would be.

0409charles2.jpg
 
What other answer would there be? Of course Charles would be king. It is the law. I think too many people are getting into the anti-Charles, Saint Diana crusade. In real time, all kinds of things happened. It wasn't just his fault. He is a good chap, he does a good job supporting the nation and his mother, and his turn will come and I hope William does the same for his father that Charles does for his mother.
 

Baby Kata

Banned
What other answer would there be? Of course Charles would be king. It is the law. I think too many people are getting into the anti-Charles, Saint Diana crusade. In real time, all kinds of things happened. It wasn't just his fault. He is a good chap, he does a good job supporting the nation and his mother, and his turn will come and I hope William does the same for his father that Charles does for his mother.

I don't hate him or anything, but he was extremely unpopular at the time, and the monarchy survives on the goodwill of its subjects.
 
Would Charles have the time to regain his popularity to current levels if he is not overshadowed by his mother? What happens to Harry and William since i have a feeling Charles will have Little time to help them in their grief of losing both their mother and grandmother in such a short time and at that age.
 
Would Charles have the time to regain his popularity to current levels if he is not overshadowed by his mother? What happens to Harry and William since i have a feeling Charles will have Little time to help them in their grief of losing both their mother and grandmother in such a short time and at that age.

I don't know about William but Harry might go even in worse situation with drugs and alcohol. He was that whom Diana's death hit worsely than William.
 
Charles is the one true king of Westros!

But why was he so unpopular? And arent they all figureheads anyway? What is he planning?
 
I don't know about William but Harry might go even in worse situation with drugs and alcohol. He was that whom Diana's death hit worsely than William.
No one expects Princes William and Harry to "Get over" their mothers death. But they are grown men. Why would their grief suddenly become so deep for their mother the same now as it was 22 years ago? They have moved forward, taking her memory with them. They also have a love for their father who raised them during that difficult time of their lives. But no disrespect, but the Queen is 90 plus. She can't live forever. When she passes, it won't be the shock to them their mothers untimely death resulted in. And as far as the Charles' popularity, if the people of Britain are loyal to the crown, then they will be loyal to their new King. And it will be Charles. I think Britain lucky to have him. He doesn't just sit around "being a prince". He is out there, he shows concern, he meets the people. He helps, (The Prince's Trust). And as a grandfather, he has a genuine concern for the world and his country that he hopes his grandchildren will be able to enjoy when they grow to adulthood.

And to think that William and Harry will be falling apart because their grandmother died, is an insult to two young men who have accomplished quite a bit themselves. Surviving their mothers death, serving in the military, marriage and now parenthood. Looks to me like the monarchy is in good hands for the next two generations. Not inspite of one or the other.
 
I think the public might get over Diana faster if Charles becomes King; at least diminishing the cult of Diana. He probably will not wed Camilla (and she's savvy enough about the rules at that level to play Alice Keppel).

PS: Edward VIII was not ousted, he was running from the responsibility looking for a way out (long before his father died) but failed to mention this plan to Wallis, who wanted to be Queen. He forced the government to tell him Wallis wasn't acceptable (and, since he didn't know his role as King - he thought it would give him more power in government), he played the moral outrage card and quit. Like the spoiled brat he was, after the abdication, gobsmacked to learn he had placed himself outside the society he wanted to adore Wallis as a perfect woman, just as he did.
 

Devvy

Donor
To explain to those in the US. Many of you may hate Trump being president; but does that diminish your belief in the overall political system / office of the President? I’d hazard a guess at most likely not.

Same here; Charles might not have been hugely popular following Di’s sad demise, but the Crown / Monarchy as an institution continues to enjoy significant majority support. If the Queen died, Charles would have become King automatically, and everything would have continued as normal. Charles would have to seriously interfere with the democratic process to stand a chance at being removed, and while we might joke about his IQ score, he’s not that stupid or poorly advised for that to happen.
 
It is true that the heir becomes monarch at the instant of the previous monarch's death. But recognition of the new monarch is not automatic.

The new monarch is recognised by the Accession Council, which is a meeting of the full Privy Council that takes place as soon as possible after the death. The new monarch must also swear an accession declaration relating to their duties as head of the Anglican church: this declaration is made in Parliament at the next State Opening.

So if you are looking for a way to prevent Charles being recognised as King, those are your openings.

Additionally, the Commonwealth Realms other than the UK have to recognise the new monarch. I think this is done by the High Commissioners attending the Accession Council, but happy to be corrected.

https://www.royal.uk/accession.
 
Top