Will we learn to love King Charles III as we did his mother?

It has been hard not to feel sympathy towards the new King, who over the last fortnight has personified his family's grief at the passing of Queen Elizabeth II before the eyes of the world.

The State Gun Carriage carries the coffin of Queen Elizabeth II, draped in the Royal Standard with the Imperial State Crown and the Sovereign's orb and sceptre, as it leaves Westminster Abbey after the State Funeral of the Queen. Picture date: Monday September 19, 2022. (Image: PA Wire/PA Images)

Now our much-loved platinum monarch has been laid to rest after one of the biggest state occasions we have ever witnessed, what place might her son and heir occupy in our affections and the consciousness of our nation as we move on from the second Elizabethan age into the future?

There is no disputing Charles III will be a very different kind of ruler to his mother.

After serving the longest of apprenticeships, he will doubtless know the nuts and bolts of the job inside out from engagements to state openings, from audiences to honours.

He knows how to press the flesh with heads of state and how to work the crowd on a walkabout.

He also comes to the throne in late middle age, with his views well-known on topics ranging from architecture to organic farming, from conservation to climate change.

Monarchs are not meant to have opinions. But while his mother acceded to the throne with little more by way of a manifesto than her famous pledge to devote her life to our service be it short or long, Charles comes with far more baggage.

We all know far more about what he thinks with regard to all kinds of issues raging from globally-important concerns to more humdrum matters.

An unwritten rule says the royals are supposed to be above politics.

None of the 15 prime ministers Elizabeth II had audiences with during a 70-year reign, which spanned from Winston Churchill to Liz Truss, has ever let much slip about their discussions over the tea and cucumber sandwiches.

The late Queen kept her opinions, let alone her persuasions, to herself.

Her son has done anything but that. His exhortations on matters such as global warming were dismissed when he first voiced them decades ago as the outpourings of an oddball who talked to his plants.

The Prince of Wales delivers a speech to guests at the Jubilee Hall on his Poundbury development in Dorchester, Dorset, when it celebrated its 20th year. Picture: Chris Ison/PA Wire

Until recently, climate change and the move towards net zero carbon emissions were never far from the centre of political debate.

Visiting Cornwall in sweltering July, the then Prince Charles said: "As I have tried to indicate for quite some time, the climate crisis really is a genuine emergency and tackling it is utterly essential."

Conversations behind the scenes took a similar turn a few weeks later at the Sandringham Flower Show, as Norfolk baked in an almost unprecedented heatwave.

Prince Charles with show chairman David Reeves (Image: Ian Burt Photography)

An environmentalist since the 1970s, before that was what you might term fashionable, Charles told a conference earlier this year: "What we do to the ocean and to nature, we ultimately do to ourselves."

While organic farming was derided not so long ago, it is now central not only to the running of the Sandringham estate under the King's tenure, but a central plank of the growing movement to use regenerative farming to help nature return to our countryside.

As well as the bigger picture, there are projects in Norfolk which His Majesty has taken a keen interest in, ranging from planting trees and hedgerows, to the ongoing campaign to save the curlew.

Prince Charles visited Sandringham Estate on Tuesday, July 27 to release one of the county's most threatened species - the Eurasian curlew. (Image: Martin Hayward-Smith)

Charles's connections with the county have not been as close as those enjoyed by his mother - until three years ago, when he took over the management of Sandringham.

Until then his annual appearance at the show and alongside the family at the Christmas Day church service were pretty much all we saw of him from one year to the next.

If, as expected, he spends more time in Norfolk, that can only boost his popularity in a county where many lean towards his views when it comes to matters such as biodiversity or ridding our fields of chemicals.

But can he still talk the talk and walk the walk as king? There have been suggestions from Charles himself that a change of tone will be needed now he has acceded to the throne.

So no more black spider memos - as his letters to ministers were known because of his unruly handwriting - decrying blots on the landscape, the quality of hospital food, or most recently, the government's policy of packing asylum seekers off to Rwanda.

The latter, barely two months ago, brought a backlash with one un-named ministerial source telling the Times: "Prince Charles is an adornment to our public life, but that will cease to be charming if he attempts to behave the same way when he is king. That will present serious constitutional issues."

But should King Charles really allow himself to be silenced by protocols as ancient as the bloke walking backwards in front of him at the state opening of parliament - or is it time the modern monarchy challenged them?

And does speaking out about climate change or plastic in our seas really undermine the mother of all parliaments - or deliver a kick in the butt to politicians to act before it really is too late?

Perhaps the role of the modern monarch will veer into that of being an advocate of people and planet, who uses his lofty position and the attention it commands to highlight important issues and drive for change.

I wonder whether that would be such a bad thing. After all, the King can not exactly re-write the history books and draw a veil over five decades of campaigning on matters now acknowledged to be of vital concern.

Whatever happens, comparisons are inevitable. His mother was the only monarch anyone aged much under their 80s would ever have known, while his grandfather King George VI will fade from living memory during his reign.

But as he accedes the throne at the age of 73, Charles is unlikely to share Elizabeth II's exclusivity in the affections of her subjects.

For anyone aged less than 50 or 60 could conceivably live through the reigns of three monarchs, and be around to see the accession of King William V and Queen Catherine.

King Charles will have far fewer years on the throne than his mother. And as the glittering coach carries him down the Mall for his coronation, would we rather he kept mum - or will we love him all the more if he continues to press for change?