King Charles III had been waiting his whole life for this moment. At his birth 73 years ago, he became second in line to the throne and, for seven decades, after his mother ascended the throne when he was three, he was heir apparent.
He was brought up, trained and endlessly coached for a job that has finally come to him at an age when most people want nothing more than a peaceful retirement; a time that, in his case, might have otherwise involved growing organic vegetables and painting watercolour landscapes.
How he handles his reign will shape the future of the monarchy – and, indeed, determine whether it has a future at all. Edward VII, his great-great-grandfather, came to the throne (aged 59) in 1901, after the 64-year reign of Queen Victoria, with a reputation as an amiable but talentless and feckless wastrel – that’s certainly what his mother thought. Yet when he died nine years later, he was regarded as a successful monarch who had enhanced the institution, improving its popularity and making it more accessible in a democratising nation.
Can Charles accomplish something similar? Can he engage the monarchy with a country whose population is mostly much younger than him? Particularly one whose politicians, business leaders, generals, police chiefs are decades his
