I wonder if anyone knows how it would work if Charles doesn’t become king. Would it instead go to an eldest brother or sister, and from there be in possession of one of their fruitcake families? If that case could be argued, it might make sense to have “King Charles” for a few years.
It goes through the eldest bloodline. So it would be Charles, then William, then William’s children, then Harry, then Charles oldest sibling, (then through his oldest child and his heirs and so on)
Not very complicated.
If Charles abdicates, it would likely go to his eldest child, William. When Charles’ uncle Edward abdicated in 1937 or so, he had no children so that is why it passed to his brother (Queen Elizabeth 2’s father); but it was the first abdication in English history. Thus, Parliament had to pass a special bill declaring the terms, such as that any of Edward’s future descendants could not claim the throne.
ATM the succession is
Charles
William
George*
Charlotte*
Henry
Andrew
Beatrice
Eugenie
Edward
James*
Louise*
Anne
Peter
Zara
...These being the descendants of the Queen. Following this list would be the descendants of the late Princes Margaret.
*Minor children ATM. Would need some sort of Regent or Protector, probably from an adult further down the list.