27

Current postboxes in the United Kingdom look like this:

Adrian Cable / Hazelwood Hall Postbox / CC BY-SA 2.0

With the "ER II". What will any new ones have on them when Charles is king - will it be CR III?

prosfilaes
  • 364
  • 4
  • 11
Tim
  • 1,954
  • 2
  • 14
  • 24
  • 3
    I think that this question is not primarily about governments, policies and political processes. It's rather about an inconsequential detail of British post boxes. It may be ontopic on history.stackexchange, which have a somewhat broader scope than politics. – NoDataDumpNoContribution Jul 25 '22 at 10:49
  • 1
    @Trilarion I don’t see how monarchal succession (and what changes from that) isn’t a political process? – Tim Jul 25 '22 at 11:04
  • 4
    Not everything is politics just because a monarch is involved. The clothes they wear, the titles they haves, they appearance on stamps or postboxes, I'd say that this is only marginally related to politics. Surely of historical interest but doesn't influence politics really. Just ask yourself, if there would have been other initials there, what would have been the political implication, if there are any? – NoDataDumpNoContribution Jul 25 '22 at 11:22
  • 1
    @Trilarion depending on the initials, something or nothing. But in this case, because of the initials, there is a political implication. – Tim Jul 25 '22 at 11:28
  • Also, will there be a cruise ship called KC3? – BillOnne Sep 08 '22 at 21:47
  • 1
    Pointing out that in the U.K. it is common for a King to take a new name during his reign. If Prince Charles were to, for example, take the name, Elvis and become King Elvis (one could debate if he was King Elvis I or King Elvis II ;)), no change in postboxes would be necessary even if they were changed. – ohwilleke Sep 08 '22 at 21:56
  • 1
    @ohwilleke in this case it has been announced that Prince Charles will reign as Charles III. It is not known what his cypher will be. – Tim Sep 09 '22 at 07:53
  • Just a nitpick: isn't it actually EIIR, not ERII. So it would be CIIIR, not CRIII. Elizabeth II Regina.... Charles III Rex.... – CGCampbell Sep 09 '22 at 12:34
  • @CGCampbell yes; that was corrected in the accepted answer, but I didn’t see a reason to correct it in the question. And note we don’t know yet (or at least I’ve not seen) the new cypher so it might not be CIIIR. – Tim Sep 09 '22 at 22:34
  • @Trilarion Disagree. Postboxes in Scotland do not carry the EIIR monogram because of a political dispute, the so-called Pillar Box War. So it is definitely on topic for politics.SE. – Matthew Sep 14 '22 at 03:15
  • @Matthew That specific issue may be. In general to me this doesn't look very political. Postboxes aren't even an official governmental thing (or is the British mail provider not privatized). A company can decide whatever it wants to put on their things. It's probably interesting to some what they choose but politics? I remain unconvinced. – NoDataDumpNoContribution Sep 14 '22 at 07:21
  • @Trilarion I would be incredibly surprised if Royal Mail can put whatever they want on the postboxes. They may be a private company, but they have a very strict charter. – Tim Sep 14 '22 at 09:59
  • @Tim If they are a private company, they can probably change their charter, if they want to. If they can't, they aren't a private company. – NoDataDumpNoContribution Sep 14 '22 at 18:37
  • @Trilarion I honestly don’t know enough to say if they’re private or not. The company is floated on the LSE. The government has no stake. It’s still regulated by ofcom. Until recently they were required by law to provide a universal service. https://web.archive.org/web/20170117024347/https://www.royalmail.com/customer-service/universal-service – Tim Sep 15 '22 at 11:06
  • @Tim Thank you for the information. So if they would be required to have a certain design of their postboxes by law I would agree that this question is about politics, but otherwise probably not. – NoDataDumpNoContribution Sep 15 '22 at 15:11
  • I’m voting to close this question because itspart of the usual cult of personality. Irrelevant in the political context. – FluidCode Oct 31 '22 at 15:45
  • @FluidCode the royal family is inherently a political organisation. This question boils down to “what will King Charles’ cypher be” (except I didn’t know the term cypher). I don’t see how it’s different to any of the other recent questions tagged [tag:monarchy] – Tim Nov 01 '22 at 00:01

3 Answers3

36

Royal Cypher

The "E II R" is known as the royal cypher. In this case, it stands for "Elizabeth II, Regina".

The design of the royal cypher is not fixed; it doesn't have to take the form of Initial — Regnal Number — Title. They can be a bit more elaborate, such as that of Duke Charles III of Brabant, which used three intertwined Cs (while he was the second Charles to become King of Spain, he was the third Charles to become Duke of Brabant).

the royal monogram of Duke Charles III of Brabant: three red intertwined Cs, not unlike a biohazard symbol, underneath a crown

King Charles III

A few hours after the death of Queen Elizabeth, on the 8th of September 2022, the new King of England has announced that his regnal name will be King Charles III, which puts an end to the speculation (preserved below).

On the 27th of September 2022, his royal cypher was revealed: an intertwined C and R underneath a Tudor crown, with a Roman numeral III in the eye of the R.

A man holding an envelope, showing the royal cypher of King Charles III: an intertwined C and R underneath a Tudor crown, with a Roman numeral III in the eye of the R

Linus Boman offers an in-depth explanation of the design of King Charles III's royal cypher on YouTube.

Also note that current post boxes are not altered; the royal cypher of the current monarch is used on new mail boxes produced during their reign. Over 70 years after his death, some mail boxes bearing King George's royal cypher are still in use today.

What follows is part of my original answer, which was a bit of speculation about the regnal name of the then Prince Charles, prior to the death of Queen Elizabeth.

King Charles

We do not know what regnal name Prince Charles will take when he is crowned King of England. There has been some speculation that, due to negative connotations with the name "King Charles", he might not want to take that name.

Previous Kings Charles

All Kings Charles so far have been Stuarts, while Charles, Prince of Wales, is a Windsor.

King Charles I

King Charles I of England was beheaded for high treason.

King Charles II

King Charles II of England was known for his mistresses and bastard children. About him it was written

Restless he rolls from whore to whore
A merry monarch, scandalous and poor.

King Charles III

Bonnie Prince Charlie, had he succeeded in claiming the throne, would've been King Charles III.

Other Options

Prince Charles was christened Charles Philip Arthur George, so he has other names to choose from.

King George

Prince Charles has denied planning to reign as King George VII:

Officially the Prince's office said yesterday: "No decision has been made and it will be made at the time."

"Charles denies planning to reign as King George", The Guardian, 27 December 2005

Which does not state that he will not do so, but just that he is not planning on doing so.

King Arthur

Choosing to become King Arthur would probably be seen as having illusions of grandeur, due to the legacy of that name.

King Philip

King Philip II was a Spanish king who became King of England through his marriage with Queen Mary I. After her death, he waged war on England, a planned invasion failing after much of the Spanish fleet was destroyed. Again a name with some negative connotations.

Conclusion

I think it's safe to assume that of all options, choosing to be King Arthur would be received worst.

So it could become "C III R" for King Charles III, "P I R" or simply "P R" for King Phillip (I) or "G VII R" for King George VII.

SQB
  • 2,428
  • 17
  • 32
  • Yeah, the same way current currency is legal tender no matter who's face. – Tim May 18 '17 at 11:25
  • "King George" has much worse negative connotations in the USA. For the benefit of the "Special Relationship", I'd think that name would be best avoided as well. – T.E.D. May 18 '17 at 14:48
  • 14
    @T.E.D. I don't think he cares much about hurt feelings in the colonies. – SQB May 18 '17 at 15:07
  • 37
    Wow, the royal cipher of King Charles II of Spain has not aged well; at first glance I thought it was the biohazard symbol. – KRyan May 18 '17 at 15:23
  • 6
    Nobody's feelings would be hurt. Its just really bad PR. It'd be like Burger King naming a new sandwich after a disease. Its entirely their business, but they shouldn't be shocked when a lot of people are reluctant to eat it. – T.E.D. May 18 '17 at 15:29
  • 35
    @T.E.D. Elizabeth’s father ruled as King George (VI), and it wasn’t much of an issue that I can tell. Not sure why we Americans should or would care. – KRyan May 18 '17 at 17:29
  • 4
    @T.E.D. This came up when the young Prince George was born and the consensus seemed to be that nobody in the US much cared. There have been no campaigns to rename Georgia or Georgetown, at least none that I am aware of. – phoog May 19 '17 at 13:52
  • 2
    @KRyan - That's a really good point. If there was ever a time in history good relations with the USA was most needed, it was during his time. – T.E.D. May 19 '17 at 14:06
  • 1
    @phoog not to mention the fact that the G in the GWB linking NJ with NYC has a positive vibe for local residents. – MikeRoger May 19 '17 at 15:05
  • If Charles can pick any of his names to reign under, I'd say he should go with Arthur :-) – jamesqf May 19 '17 at 18:48
  • 1
    If the previous two Charles' were such a bad fit, I'd say third time's the charm – Tobias Kienzler May 22 '17 at 05:49
  • 2
    King Philip II of Spain used the title King of England and Ireland during his marriage to Mary Tudor (1554-58). He was unpopular in England even before he launched the Spanish Armada. Since then, "Philip" has not been considered an acceptable regnal name for English (and later British) kings. So Charles is highly unlikely to choose that name. – Royal Canadian Bandit Aug 04 '17 at 10:02
  • @RoyalCanadianBandit thanks! Updated to reflect that. – SQB Apr 22 '18 at 07:54
  • 1
    An even bigger problem could arise, if and when the crown passes to his elder son, currently Prince William, Duke of Cambridge. Can you imagine "King William V" reigning over Northern Ireland (after the record of William III). To many he would simply be dubbed - "King Billy". – WS2 Apr 22 '18 at 09:44
  • @WS2 his full name is William Arthur Philip Louis. King Arthur would be out, King Louis would seem too French, so if King William is out too, it's King Phillip for him. – SQB Apr 22 '18 at 09:53
  • 2
    The first monarch to use a name isn't known as "the first" during his or her lifetime, so does not use a regnal number in the cypher. – phoog Apr 23 '18 at 02:17
  • 1
    @phoog: The state of Georgia is named after George II. It's unclear who Georgetown, DC was named after: It could be George II, or founders/landowners George Gordon and George Beall. The name "George" isn't at all stigmatized in the US (it probably helps that our popular first president had it), just King George III specifically. Which incidentally is why the US (and France) rejected astronomer William Herschel's name of "Georgium Sidus" for our solar system's 7th planet. – dan04 Jul 27 '22 at 14:05
  • 1
    @dan04 my point is that not even George III is particularly stigmatized in tbe US. There are still places named after him (at least one: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Georgetown,_Maryland), if somewhat less important than Georgia and Georgetown, DC. And Herschel discovered Uranus before the revolutionary war was over, so I don't suppose US astronomers were yet very influential on the world stage. – phoog Jul 27 '22 at 22:51
  • I heard reporting on CNN indicating that he would keep the name Charles and I thought they said Charles the III but I might have misheard that. – Joe W Sep 08 '22 at 18:41
  • 3
    @JoeW the BBC have confirmed that he will use Charles III : https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59135132 – JustAnotherCoder Sep 08 '22 at 18:58
  • 3
    @KRyan: The biohazard lookalike is actually pretty funny if you know the history of that symbol. Basically, they surveyed a bunch of people and found that the symbol was highly memorable but nobody had a clue what it meant - exactly what they wanted for a "new" symbol with a "new" meaning. – Kevin Sep 08 '22 at 19:27
  • 1
    That tie-pin wasn't actually his royal cypher. It was an ornate version of George VI's cypher. Charles' own cypher is now announced: see Tim's answer. – John Dallman Sep 27 '22 at 07:05
8

The cypher of King Charles III has been announced.

It features his initial C, for Charles, R, for Rex, the Latin for King, and the Roman numeral 3.

It has a Tudor Crown above the letters. There is a separate Scottish cypher which uses the Scottish Crown instead.

Cypher of King Charles III, described above

As per BBC:

The monogram combines his initial "C" and "R" for Rex, the Latin for king, plus III for the third King Charles.

It was personally chosen by the King, from a range of designs produced by the College of Arms.

… there won't be a sudden change on post boxes … There are still post boxes in use from the reign of Queen Victoria, Edward VII, George V and VI, and the original cyphers remain until boxes need to be replaced.

King Charles: New royal cypher revealed

Tim
  • 1,954
  • 2
  • 14
  • 24
5

That symbol, the royal cypher stands for Elizabeth II Regina. This is the made up of the monarch's regnal name, including a regnal number if necessary, and the latin word for king (rex) or queen (regina). A suggestion made by Winston Churchill at the accession of Queen Elizabeth II was that where the numberings differ between England and Scotland the higher be used in both countries, although I'm not sure that there's actually legislation about that. It's even less clear what would happen in the event of Scottish independence.

While Elizabeth II used the first of her given names as her regnal name, there's certainly no reason she had to. For example, her father George VI was christened Albert Frederick Arthur George. So if Charles accedes to the throne he might choose to do so, and thus be Charles III, he might also pick another name. One mischievous suggestion is that he might choose another of his middle names, and rule as King Arthur.

origimbo
  • 21,139
  • 2
  • 54
  • 78
  • 1
    That's an interesting point about Scotland- I know king James was both VI and I - and is referred to as "King James VI and I". Would Scotland keep the British monarchy or get a new one if they left the union? – Tim May 18 '17 at 11:24
  • 1
    If Scotland becomes independent, then its choice of Head of State would be decided by the Scottish government, however that ended up being organised. The Scots could easily choose to keep continuity with the previous crown of Scotland, which came into personal union with the crown of England with James VI and I. This would mean the current British monarch would become monarchy of the new Kingdom of Scotland. They would then be free to have different rules of succession though, which was actually one of the issues behind the Acts of Union back in the 18th Century. – origimbo May 18 '17 at 12:23
  • 4
    Given the general decline in the volume of snail-mail, the question might be academic so far as "new post boxes" are concerned (there might not be any!) - but the royal cypher is used for other things, of course. – alephzero May 18 '17 at 14:40
  • 1
    @alephzero I assume that if one needed replacing due to damage it would have a new cypher. In addition, large new estates are being built - at least where I live. Hopefully they will have postboxes within them! – Tim May 18 '17 at 16:16
  • 6
    Charles is not limited to his own name in picking a regnal name. While most British monarchs have reigned under one of their baptismal names, Robert III of Scotland was John Stewart before he assumed the throne. – John Dallman May 18 '17 at 21:45
  • Let him rule as King Arthur II ... – CGCampbell May 19 '17 at 18:48
  • @CGCampbell Could be most apt, since the original King Arthur had a wife - Guinevere - who had an affair with one of his principal officers, Lancelot. However, involving as it does a man who has the most deep-seated crisis of identity anyway, the difficulty over the choice of a name could become a motif for our new and uncertain age. – WS2 Apr 22 '18 at 17:44