King Charles Breaks With 200-Year Tradition by Refusing to Live in Buckingham Palace
June 8, 2025
In a move that could signal a quiet royal revolution, King Charles III is poised to break with nearly two centuries of tradition by refusing to take up residence at Buckingham Palace, the iconic London home of British monarchs since 1837.
This unconventional choice, highlighted in the Channel 5 documentary Royal Residences: A Map of Britain, positions King Charles as the first sovereign since Queen Victoria to opt out of living in the palace, instead continuing to reside at Clarence House, just a short walk away.
A Royal Shift with Historic Implications
Since the passing of Queen Elizabeth II on September 8, 2022, King Charles has inherited a sprawling royal estate portfolio. According to Forbes, this includes 10 castles, seven palaces, 12 houses, 56 cottages, and 14 ruins—a reflection of the British monarchy’s multi-billion-pound property network. Yet Buckingham Palace remains the symbolic heart of the monarchy.
Traditionally, monarchs relocate to Buckingham Palace shortly after ascending the throne. In May 2023, Charles and Queen Camilla appeared on the palace balcony, honoring ceremonial expectations. However, what followed was unexpected: they did not move in.
“Even though Buckingham Palace has been the monarch's London residence since Queen Victoria, Charles and Camilla have chosen to remain at Clarence House,” the documentary narrator notes. “So, is King Charles quietly launching a new royal precedent?”
Why Clarence House?
Built between 1825 and 1827, Clarence House holds personal significance for the King. Once home to the late Queen Mother, it also served as the residence of Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip following their marriage in 1947. Today, it provides a more intimate and less ceremonial setting than Buckingham Palace.
This residence reflects Charles's personal preferences and possibly a broader vision for a "slimmer monarchy", something he has long advocated. The King and Queen Camilla reportedly appreciate the relative privacy and comfort Clarence House offers—elements harder to come by in the more institutional Buckingham Palace.
Who Owns What?
It’s important to note that most royal properties are not privately owned. Instead, they fall under the management of entities such as the Duchy of Lancaster, the Duchy of Cornwall, and the Crown Estate. The Duchy of Lancaster provides income for the reigning monarch, while the Duchy of Cornwall supports the heir to the throne, Prince William, who earned over $30 million (£22 million) in his first year from the estate, according to People magazine.
Properties like Sandringham House in Norfolk and Balmoral Castle in Scotland are personal holdings of King Charles, inherited from Queen Elizabeth II. However, Buckingham Palace remains Crown Estate property—a public asset managed in trust.
Buckingham Palace: A Symbol Without a Sovereign?
With its 775 rooms, including 19 State Rooms, 52 royal and guest bedrooms, and 92 offices, Buckingham Palace continues to operate as the administrative headquarters of the monarchy. The State Rooms open to the public during summer months, attracting millions of visitors each year. Yet its role as a lived-in royal home appears to be fading.
Despite ongoing renovations expected to stretch until at least 2027, Buckingham Palace's symbolic value remains intact. But if King Charles continues to reside at Clarence House, future monarchs may feel emboldened to reconsider whether tradition should always dictate personal living arrangements.
A Modern Monarch for a Modern Era?
In many ways, Charles’s decision to forgo Buckingham Palace reflects his modern approach to monarchy. Known for championing sustainability and streamlining royal expenses, his choice aligns with broader shifts in how the monarchy interacts with the British public.
Rather than embracing all trappings of tradition, King Charles may be redefining royal norms—quietly but significantly.