Historically and world-wide, I'm not convinced that a new monarch has always been recognised on the death of the last monarch.
I think this is a man-made idea. Not just because of Cromwell et al, but because other countries have historically tended only to recognise their new king or queen on coronation. I cannot say whether this rule of a monarch being a monarch at the instant of the death of their predecessor has always been true in Britain (as I am not a historian). However, I'm guessing, given the tumultuous exchange of kings and queens here, that they have been recognised only on coronation, in the past. Also, that other countries only recognise a new monarch on coronation. Making the rule arbitrary.
Why does this matter? Because if the divine right of kings theory is true (and this is what our royalty and Government rely on the majority of people believing), then royalists must accept that a king is only a king if God recognises them as such. And, historically, God, and often the people, have tended to recognise kings and queens (of any kind) to gain power at the same time as their coronations.
Leaving the country with 126 days, 5 hours and 51 minutes from me writing this until the day God actually recognises we have a king (or at least that people like me accept a new king). Meaning the country is effectively without any legitimate leadership and all this 'back to business as usual' is, in reality, a façade. If the power of the royalty comes only from the people, and Bolingbroke (according to Shakespeare) was right, then, fair enough, we have a new king, because then, the legitimacy of the power comes only from the people. But if Richard II was right, then a monarch can only rule with legitimacy once recognised as one by God. Under this theory, and especially if the divine right of kings is accepted, the country is effectively in flux and transition right now (and not only because of the worldwide cost of living crisis).
Basically meaning that the country has no legitimate leadership at all.
In practice that is not going to stop those in power using force and taxing us to high Heaven, but it does mean that they are doing so without any legitimate authority beyond that of violent force (which tends to be agreed to be wrong). Or, in answer to your possible next question - Charles will have his coronation on 6th May 2023 and God may, or may not recognise it.
In the meantime -according to orthodox Christianity - the Government is now ruling without any legitimate authority and we have no king yet.
(Apart, debatably, from 'you know who...')
Useful to know, don't you think?
