Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Queen Elizabeth II, RIP
Queen Elizabeth II died at Balmoral Castle Thursday, surrounded by her children and grandchildren. She was 96 years old and the United Kingdom’s longest-serving monarch — a 70-year reign. Her husband, Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, preceded her in death 16 months earlier.
Elizabeth’s eldest son has succeeded her, a plan agreed to 2018 without requiring an official coronation. King Charles III will return to London Friday.
Born in April 1926, Elizabeth began to undertake public duties during World War II, serving in the Auxiliary Territorial Service. In November 1947, she married Philip Mountbatten, a former prince of Greece and Denmark. The royal couple had four children: Charles; Anne, Princess Royal; Prince Andrew, Duke of York; and Prince Edward, Earl of Wessex.
She ascended to the throne in February 1952, following the death of her father, King George VI.
Published in General
The plan, sometimes referred to as “Project 70,” was the start of a transition, by Charles’s 70th birthday, to “up” his involvement and reduce the strain on his then-ninety-two year old mother. Part of it was the revising of a detailed plan and script for every moment immediately before and following the Queen’s death.
Charles has always been the heir apparent; what’s unusual here is that he’s been doing many of the ceremonial roles of state (opening Parliament, etc) for a couple of years as his mother’s health has declined. She was determined to die rather than abdicate, but she increasingly needed help; that’s what the 2018 plan was about.
Will there still be a coronation at some point?
I doubt we will see her like again.
I recall reading a story from early in her reign about her hosting a visit from a member of the Saudi Royal Family. They wanted Elizabeth to take him on a tour of the grounds of Balmoral. She insisted on driving the Land Rover herself. (A giant f-you to the customs of her guest where women were not allowed to drive.) She had driven trucks during WW2 and apparently was quite good at it. So she took her guest on a white-knuckle drive around the grounds. While not an unpleasant word was spoken, her point was made. Good for her.
Rest in peace.
I believe there has to be. The coronation is a religious ceremony. The Archbishop of Canterbury has placed the crown on the monarch’s head almost without interruption since 1066.
Im not crying, your crying.
Yes, there will be. Amongst all the pageantry and hoopla, it’s an anointing of the monarch with holy oil, as he or she receives the crown and various other impedimenta and regalia signifying the right to rule. The monarch also takes several vows, and receives homage from sundry “lieges,” including princes of the church, other members of the Royal Family (Philip had to swear homage and fealty to Elizabeth at her coronation), and various members of senior nobility.
There’s no set time limit on when a coronation has to occur (I don’t believe). Charles is King without the coronation. It’ll be after an official period of mourning, and after much planning. I’d look for it to happen at a touristy time–next Summer sometime, perhaps?
I think Toby Young had it right when we talked this afternoon. The monarchy is more likely to survive than the Commonwealth. Countries such as Canada and Australia were bound to the United Kingdom through their love of, or at the very least, the grudging admiration for her.
Some of the Greens in Australia are agitating for a break from the Commonwealth before the body has even turned cold.
The satirist Mark Russell knew the value of a family that could represent a nation. I paraphrase here but his take was something on the order that the Kennedys could serve the same function here as the Royal family of America. “People could fawn over them, they could open supermarkets, have no real power…”
We’ve been a Republic for over 233 years, yet we still gravitate to Royalty. Boys have Arthurian tales, little girls have Disney princesses, their moms have the Hallmark Channel… There’s a little bit of royalist in all of us.
Charles the Third. Let’s hope (and hope is never a good plan) he proves to be better then the first two.
If I were a British subject, I would say, at least inwardly, “God save us from the King!”
Not I.
I don’t plan to address Charles for some time.
Lizabeth was Queen for 16 months before her coronation.
I think Charles is going to be king for a fair bit of time, because he will want to give his kids and grandkids more time together. The grand kids are so young and the parents should be with them as much as possible. For all our thoughts on the Monarchy they are still people and we should think about that.
I expect him to be king till George is at least 16.
Oh no. In order to abolish the Monarchy, Canada would have to reopen the Constitution. And NO ONE here wants to do that.
Its easier for Britain to give up the Monarchy than Canada.
Yeah. Still, it’s a small, but encouraging sign that he’s sometimes capable of recognizing and bowing to reality. His mother is said to have remarked, just after ascending to the throne, and on being asked what she wanted to be called going forward (her father King George VI ought by rights to have been King Albert I), “Call me my own name, Elizabeth, of course!”
Charles Philip Arthur George doesn’t have a lot of good options. You’ve spotted the problem with “Charles.” “King Philip” has uncomfortable resonances of Bloody Mary. “King Arthur?” Impossible to live up to. “George” is probably the safest option, except that it’s digging as deep as his grandfather (Albert Frederick Arthur George) already had to, he’d be the seventh George, there’s an eighth one in the pipeline already, and some of the Georges weren’t so great either.
So Charles it is.
‘Cromwell Gazing at the Body of Charles I’, after 1850. Oliver Cromwell, the Lord Protector, gazes at the body of the king. The scene depicted is meant to have taken place shortly after the public execution by beheading of Charles I on 30th January 1649. (Photo by Museum of London/Heritage Images/Getty Images)
I think Oliver Cromwell already said it.
That is spectacular!
I think you’ve a typo there. It was Edward who became Edward VIII, and he was the son of George V.
Victoria’s son Albert became Edward VII, and George V’s son Albert became George VI.
Mark Steyn has an excellent column today about the death of the Queen. In it he makes a point he’s made often, one which make the case for a constitutional monarchy about as succinctly as is possible:
One very good and–these days, refreshing–thing about the British parliamentary system is that no-one in the country has any illusions that its politicians–as celebrities or VIPs–are all that important. It’s unfortunate that the country has been ill-served by a rather undistinguished crop of them for a number of years, but the recent “peaceful transfer of power” (to coin a phrase) from Boris Johnson to Liz Truss, and the workmanlike and humdrum manner of its process makes that point pretty well.
Even after it was finished, however, and Ms Truss was the Prime Minister “elect” (except that’s not really the right word), the process wasn’t complete until Boris had tendered his resignation to the Queen, and the Queen had asked the leader of the Conservative party to form a government.
All in all, not a bad system.
I really hope he returns the favor.
My 20-something daughter tells me the people she works with (all Lefties) are happy as it is the end of some kind colonial oppression. Sadly, they all vote.
Heh. I shall withhold comment and wish the man well.
If you want to feel bad about the world, look on Twitter.
I was driving home from Fargo and heard the news from my Daughter, announced via the Siri voice in the car. The settings use the Irish accent, so I heard an Irish lass say “The Queen is Dead” in the middle of the day in the middle of the American continent. Texted my friend in England with condolences, and the Irish robot said “We’re in tears. Thank you. “
Turned to the BBC World Service on the satellite, and they were running an interview about energy costs and taxes with some small businessmen in Darby. I expected they would’ve gone straight to Holst or Walton.
The latter’s wonderful Coronation piece, originally intended for Edward before he abdicated, then played for George.
Walton’s Orb and Sceptre, for Elizabeth’s coronation, a bit more flashy, sounding to modern ears a bit like John Williams scoring Princess Leia’s wedding (but only because he borrowed from the best). Man, does this go Full England at 2:00, and Boult’s the man to do it:
Charles is enough of a traditionalist in artistic matters that I expect he might well use one of these. Given his Islamophilia, I would also not be surprised if he included tonalities of the Middle East in his ceremony.
Apropos very little: Elgar, Imperial March, in a video composed of zooms on clips showing some real beauty:
Under-promise and over-deliver. Easier to exceed expectations as a Charles than as an Arthur.
It’s an impulse as least as old as the Bible:
No one here CAN do that. Amending the Constitution requires the agreement of Parliament and 7 of 10 provinces with at least 50% of the population. And that would not be a simple change, it would be a complete re-write. Even simple amendments are impossible in practice.
Think of what it would take to amend the US constitution to CREATE a monarchy.
That’s why they’ve just done it without us.
Election of a Democrat POTUS and a few more Democrat justices would do it if they wanted too. I am sure they can find it in the constitution by cutting and pasting the words together and a few redefinations.