It’s no denying this is a momentous occasion. Our Queen is dead. Our country is in mourning, and we live now in a different era with Charles III our King. God Save the King.
Yes, I do say, God Save the King, which might surprise some as I am not overly fond of the monarchy as an institution, and I do not approve of the flummery and bowing and scraping that occurs. The royal family is at the pinnacle of a system of class structure that, in my opinion, has done and continues to do much damage to our country. Nevertheless, we are living through a pivotal moment. The Queen has been with us it seems forever. She performed all her constitutional duties with diligence and her whole life was one of duty. And look how she performed those duties to the very end. She was working just two days before her death, but, and I am presuming, it is exactly as she wanted.
For those of you who live outside the UK, on the death of a sovereign the heir becomes the King or Queen immediately, there is no gap or interregnum. The succession of Charles was ratified the next day by a special body called the Accession Council, which includes members of the Privy Council – a group of several hundred selected royal advisers that includes cabinet members, past prime ministers, and leaders of the opposition. After the proceedings of the Council a formal Proclamation was read out by the Garter King of Arms. I had texted my daughter, who was coming back from her holiday in Spain, ‘be prepared, our country has returned to the 1950s’, but after witnessing this ceremony and hearing the trumpeters blaring out before the extraordinarily costumed Garter King of Arms read out his proclamation I should have said, this country has returned to medieval times.
However, I have hopes that Charles for all his quirks, will reform and slim down the ‘firm’ as they call it and reduce some of the hangers-on, and by that, I mean both administrative hangers-on and some of the more distant family members that cling on to the deference, which really, if one wants a monarchy, should only be given to the King’s immediate family.
And do we want a royal family? Well, this piece is not a long treatise on the costs and benefits of a monarchy versus a republic, but really do we want the Etonian elite to represent us? President Johnson, anyone? I feel sick at the very thought. Yes, we could get rid of a President if we did not approve of them, and we could vote for another in replacement. Really? Do we want more elections and all that electioneering? And what a huge constitutional upheaval it would be. Moreover, think of providing the new Presidential style of leader with a suitable place to live and to entertain visiting dignitaries – a huge expense, equal to, I would say, much of the cost that we provide for our current royalty. No, I don’t want that, but I do want a much smaller less expensive royal family, more in the European style of the Swedish, Dutch and Norwegian monarchs and their families who are mainly ignored by their populations. If only!
I don’t expect Charles to be doing anything in the way of reforming things for some time. There is too much protocol to go through both before the funeral and after. This is the timetable of events up to the 19th:
Saturday 10thSeptember the Accession Council met and the proclamation was read by the Garter King of Arms. Around the country High Sheriffs read the same proclamation to the public.
Sunday 11th September the Queen’s coffin was transported from Balmoral to Edinburgh
Monday 12th September the Queen’s coffin will be taken in procession to St. Giles Cathedral for a service and the Vigil of the Princes, where members of the Royal Family stand guard. The public may have a chance to file past the coffin.
Tuesday 13th September the coffin will be flown south and travel by hearse to Buckingham Palace where it will be placed in the Throne Room for staff to pay their respects.
Wednesday 14th September a ceremonial procession will take the coffin to Westminster Hall where the Queen will lie in state for four days. Senior royals and soldiers from units that serve the Royal Household will stand guard.
Thursday 15th to Saturday 17th September the lying in state will continue.
Sunday 18th September the lying in state will end. Heads of state will begin to arrive. I understand that the advice being given is travel lightly, as it will be impossible to accommodate large numbers of staff and security from all the nations attending.
Monday 19th September the Queen’s state funeral will take place at Westminster Abbey. Up to 2000 key figures and heads of state will attend and audiences around the world will be able to watch the service. Afterwards the Queen’s coffin will be taken to St. Georges Chapel at Windsor Castle for a televised committal service. In the evening there will be a private service and she will be buried in the King Georg VI memorial chapel
Expect more very strictly timetabled and near medieval scenarios at the coronation, which won’t be for many months. But for now, he is our King and I do have some sympathies for Charles. He has waited all his life for this and yet it meant the death of his mother. He must feel conflicted.
And the reason I give Charles a lot of slack is I have many memories of him as he grew from a young awkward boy going off to his ghastly school where he was seriously bullied, then as a shy teenager, a student, a young man with hopes and dreams as we all have. And then that terrible mistake of marrying someone he did not love. So very sad for both of them.
Life has somehow mellowed for Charles. He is still an incredibly privileged wealthy man who can be petulant at times, he is used to being surrounded by servants catering to his every whim, but I also have some hopes, as do not forget Charles recognised the dangers of climate change decades ago. Long before it almost became fashionable to care about the environment, he was there. And I also hope, and this might resonate with some overseas readers, that Charles has a long cool look at the Commonwealth. What it is for, and who benefits? Because why is it there in the first place? It is there because of our days of Empire. So, is the Commonwealth an example of the adaptability of our late Queen as she watched over her dominions passing into independence, or what? I am not sure why it still exists, and I would like to know that its members believe that this institution has meaning and that they are content to remain as members.
Yes, I remember Charles way back. I even have a memory of being told that the King had died. That was George VI, the father of our late Queen. I was six at the time and at school at my desk, none of this sitting informally on the floor in groups in the ‘50s! We were all sitting at our desks when the head came into our class and whispered into our teacher’s ear and then went out again. The teacher stood up and said, “Everyone. Stand. Your King is dead. Long live the Queen. We will have two minutes silence.”
There you are, I am in that small minority that remembers a time before our long-lived late Queen.
As for the late Queen, as a nation we are going through an intense cathartic moment. She has been our Queen for 70 years, and it is momentous. But I do think it is a bit much having the amount of wall-to-wall television coverage that we have had – with all that sentiment. The thing is we did not know her and yet because she was so unknowable, people are transferring (or is it projecting) their emotions and feelings about being British and/or English on to her. But, indeed, one has to admit she was, as Simon Schama has said, the idealised personification of our nation. And that was no bad thing because, look around at the Presidents of the world, how do they measure their nations greatness? Often with power and weapons, and militarised xenophobia. In the Queen we had a very much more benign focus of national allegiance.
However, I cannot abide the talk of ‘how she never made any mistakes’. Yes, she did, she was human, and moreover she was very aware of her role and how, above all, the monarchy had to survive. I won’t go into it now but there was also some meddling with the laws of the land and by that I mean the exemptions the crown has from more than 160 laws largely relating to the economic interests of the monarchy.
But setting that aside, her entire life was one of dedication to her people and she carried out her constitutional role with dignity and diligence. Rest in Peace, Elizabeth Alexandra Mary. A life well lived.
God Save the King.
Penny Kocher, 12th September 2022
Further reading: Simon Schama, Elizabeth II became the personification of our national identity. The i Weekend, Special Edition. 10-11th September 2022
S Carrell, R Evans, D Pegg, M Savarese. Revealed: Queen’s sweeping immunity from more than 160 laws. The Guardian, 15 July 2022
Like you Penny, I have severe doubts about the institution of monarchy, but looking at the presidents around the world has tempered my republican leanings somewhat. However I agree a much slimmed down version is needed. Above all we desperately need to get away from the old boys public school network exemplified by this Tory government, and the hereditary peerage system. How, I don’t know. Not while people are prepared to vote like sheep or forelock tugging peasants!
I too was alive before Elizabeth became Queen, although I don’t remember it. I do however remember the coronation as that was the first time I saw a television. We gathered at my aunts to watch it on a tiny black and white screen.
Whilst wishing the new king well – I certainly admire his views on the environment and hope he doesn’t give up those – the wall to wall royal sentimental stuff washing round the tv and the internet is awful. It does seem that everyone on my Facebook feed has to tell me how heartbroken they are! I am not, I have not cried. I did not know her, and yet I suspect she was glad to go.
Admirable person, but outdated institution. All the best.
We have similar views Kathy, as I just don’t think a republic is the answer for this country, but boy does the monarchy need reforming. It’s all the lackeys and the advisers I really distrust. They are surrounded by yes-men and public school boys who have no idea how the other half live.
The wall to wall coverage is beyond awful and the sentimental guff that is going out on the television is nauseating.
All the best to you too
King big ears should also get rid of the dirge of a national anthem stop MPs swearing to serve the monarch, they should be serving us, and stop the monarch meddling in our laws by approving them, or not. Better still say the royals are over
On re-reading my piece I think I come over as more of a royalist than I really am. I do not approve of the monarchy in its present form. At. All! The country is going through a nervous breakdown, but with all the vox pops on the telly and there’s never an opposing view of royalty and the monarchy. There’s plenty like us Maureen, but I’m prepared to give Charles a break and see how it works out.
For goodness sake, King Bigears. Grow up and have some dignity.
I too have Republican sympathies but really cannot think of a better system. President Johnson, President Truss? Certainly not.
The very idea of president Johnson is ghastly! I am sure the Eton elite would make quite sure they climbed to the top of a Presidential pinnacle.
But you can get rid of all those people thru the ballot box. And we do. We can’t get rid of this dysfunctional family who meddles in our laws. They need to go.
And if you think big ears is bad you should hear what we call the rest of them. It is those of us who are grownups who no longer want to be subjects but citizens under a written constitution who can see thru this phoniness and faux grief shown by many
We have constitutional monarchy, not a political monarchy, which means that the monarch plays no part in creating laws – that is done by an elected parliament.
The monarch can comment and ask questions of the prime minister.
I was born in the year HM came to the throne so my ‘significant’ birthdays have coincided with her Jubilees. I think she has done a difficult job well & I admire her sense of style, particularly the wonderful hats she has worn in recent years ; I’m a hat person like you. I have shed tears but am not at all heartbroken or bereft. However, we cannot be unaware that we are witnessing significant history in the making.
I find myself somewhat conflicted watching the pomp and circumstance of current proceedings. The costumes and rituals, whilst anachronistic, are visually gorgeous and for me it would be a great loss to end them. I think it highly likely that the ‘firm’ will be slimmed down in the future but Charles will have to tread carefully. However, his reign is likely to be comparatively short and it will be William who will be the true moderniser. Amongst the sentimentality and superlatives, which she would never have claimed for herself, I read an article in the Sunday Times by Max Hastings who strayed from this narrative. He noted that ‘her considerable failure as a mother ………….. is self-evident’ and bemoaned that ‘Especially in the last decade of her reign she proved unwilling or unable to exercise control over the wider royal family’. It set me wondering what it it means to be a ‘failure’ as a mother or indeed a success. In the same publication Penny Junor’s examination of the partnership of HM and her husband described him as ‘irascible, outspoken and downright rude’ and as ‘a bully with a terrifying temper’. Although she acknowledges that ‘Philip ruled the family’ she does not suggest that he failed as a father or should have controlled the family better. Of course these are the views of 2 different authors but the difference struck me forcibly.
Hi Lynda, yes, her hats! Some years ago I went to the Palace to see the exhibition on Her Majesty’s clothes. The colours, the little suits (she was so tiny), the ballgowns, the handbags, the shoes and those hats. It was magnificent! However, I found the parts of the Palace that we were shepherded through somewhat less magnificent; a faded stair carpet and too much flocked wallpaper, and despite the gilt, the candelabras and the many large portraits, it felt rather drab!
I agree that the costumes and the rituals are fabulous and there’re moments when I am mesmerised, but for me it has begun to get a little too much and feels rather like history as costume drama.
I also agree with you on those two articles. OK, they were/are a dysfunctional family. But hey, families…. And actually how dare Hastings pick her out, at this time, as a failure as a mother. Good grief, in the first instance, what does anyone really know of the royal family, and secondly, who doesn’t feel like a failure as a mother? How dare a man say that of any woman! And yet she was distant from Charles when he was young, but that was very much part and parcel of being in the aristocracy. One didn’t look after one’s children and it was perfectly OK to leave them for long trips abroad. Things have changed and Diana really cared for both her children and Kate is far more hands on than any royal has been for generations. Good.
An elected democratic government with a hereditry non party political head of state is the most stable form of governance.
Some of the comments made against this system show a lack of understanding about how government operates in the UK.
In the 80s Price Charles formed an organisation called Business in the Environment far in advance of any government bringing in Environmental Management Systems, and in my work which included introducing cost effective waste avoidance/minimisation to Small/Medium Enterprises Prince Charles philiosophy and practical actions were instrumental in enabling business to act in a way to reduce adverse environmental impact.
This work was first begun by the Duke of Edinburgh with the WWF.
And there is the Prince’s Trust which has helped thousands of young people who had fallen through the net- which follows the example set by his father with DoE award.
The Commonwealth is not a replica of ‘the Empire’ – it is a group of independant nations who join the Commonwealth (set up by the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh) voluntarily in order to foster relationships between each other – which is hoped will lead to a better political and trade understanding beween countries. There are over 50 countries in the Commonwealth and 14 have our monarch also as their non political head of state.
For as long as there is a democratically elected government in a country, I have yet to be convinced, practically or theoretically, that there is more effective head of state than a hereditary monarch.
Yes Sarah, I agree with you. I’m sure Charles will be a good king as he knows that he can no longer express the personal opinions he did as Prince of Wales and so William will be able to take on that role. Camilla is a supportive influence to Charles,such a shame they did not get married in the first place. Catherine is good for William and I’m sure it’s because she is the only one to have come from a loving,supportive family(and with a Durham miner as one of her ancestors!)
The monarchy does not actually cost that much compared to what it brings in in tourism -when I was in Asia 15 years ago people always wanted to know about The Queen and football,especially David Beckham!
It does seem that anybody who is elected to a role in government are all limited by ‘time’ – so many government policies by necessity have to produce a short term gain, so a policy which produced excellent result within 10 years would probably be rejected. With a hereditary head of state they have the benefit of taking the long view.
I agree with you but critically I wish democratically elected governments would take the long view!
Totally agree with Penny that it is about time the democratically elected government took the ‘long view’.
This shocked me, but ever the medication prescribed by the NHS has to have results within a short time frame even if medication which is proven to be more beneificial in the long term is available. How I found this out was I was sent to a drug conference to represent patients, and this ‘accounts based’ attitude to health emerged.
Hi Hilary I’m hoping that Charles will be a good King and I agree with both of you that a hereditary monarchy combined with an elected democratic government is by far the most stable form of governance
To be honest Sarah, I don’t think many of us are totally au fait with how things are run. I agree with you as I cannot think of anything more unstable than a Presidential head of state with all that electioneering every few years. No thanks.
With regard to Charles and the environment I have always admired his stance and even more so now you’ve given me some details of his actions. Good for him. The Prince’s Trust is a very good organisation which does excellent work.
Yes, I know that the Commonwealth is not a replica of the Empire. Even so there will be some changes within some of the Commonwealth countries, and i will be watching theses changes with interest.
Thanks so much for your informed comment
Sorry if I seemed, no did, lecture you on Empire and Commonwealth and the ‘difference’ – but had just listened to some totally inane news reporter from some US TV channel who was under the illusion that the Queen and now King Charles ‘ruled’ over the Commonwealth. AGHHHHH. So I think there is still alot of education required from ‘news links’.
I am totally royalist, not because I think the Royal Family are a flawless lot – like every family there is good,bad and indifferent – but becuase I beleive in a democratically elected government with a hereditary monarch as non political head of state.
It seems that my reply to Maureen has been moderated and deemed unacceptable as it has not been published. I am not sure how the moderation process works, whether it is through you personally Penny, or another body. However, I repeat that to call the new King ‘Prince Bigears’ is childish and undignified. I do not understand why Maureen’s comment should be acceptable but mine not. Perhaps you can explain.
Hi Lindy, I’m not at my desk all day and both blogs (the frugal one and this one) are playing up (something I am going to share with you all in my next frugal blog) so sometimes I can’t get at the comments from my phone. I do the approving of all the comments as I’m in charge of the blog and as I don’t believe in censorship on this blog all comments are published unless they are completely awful and that thank goodness has never happened. I did wonder if this post would generate a little controversy as I don’t approve of the royal family in its present form. But gosh the Queen has died and I do feel it is a pivotal moment and good luck to Charles. I hope he does well as a republic is not what I want – it would be such an upheaval. Please continue to comment as I value all opinions and believe in debate. I also believe we have to listen to different opinions even if they’re expressed in not quite the way we would express something or what we would like to hear. All the very best Penny
I thought Mary Robinson, Irish president, was quite spectacular in the position. After all we have had some awful sovereigns, so it all depends as ever on the person and the times.
Don’t see why though royalty don’t pay inheritance tax, over £600 million Charles inherits and no tax while my children will have to pay, albeit a very small amount, and working for this country just as hard as any royal, as did all my ancestors way back to the year dot and all I am proud to say were English. And yes I am English but also European and pleased to be both if only allowed.
As ever media have overdone everything.
Yes, Mary Robinson was an outstanding President of Ireland, but on the whole are there any other outstanding Presidents? I think she was exceptional.
I agree with you. There’s always the argument ‘they don’t cost that much’ and ‘they bring in revenue from tourism’. Yes, yes, but actually I wonder if people can produce the actual figures for their argument? I’d like to see a proper cost analysis of this. And indeed their wealth is phenomenal, even the hangers-on who will be nameless but claim that they have little money, have absolutely no idea how the majority live.
Again Penny you seem to have reflected the general consensus of opinion of many of us.
I don’t think of myself as a royalist but think they offer a lot to the country that a Republican state could not give. They do need to be streamlined as there are far too many of them.
I am just anxious about what is happening in politics whilst our attention is diverted by all the pomp and circumstance but we will find out soon enough I expect.
The current terrible crisis in economy, health, politics, and much more will occupy us for a long time yet.
I very much agree with you Sandra, what a wonderful diversion from the hard questions that Ms Truss and her ministers will need to answer. Let’s hope they are busy nurturing the magic money tree ; I’ve heard it estimated that the intervention to reduce energy prices may cost as much in one year as the NHS!
Yes, agree. Everything seems to have come to a complete stop and we are all mesmerised by the rituals that have been happening since last Friday and will be happening over the next few days. Liz Truss is completely out of the picture and the incredible rescue package that she revealed last week has also been temporarily parked while the proceedings continue until Monday’s funeral. But the cost of that package must be questioned and the reasons why the energy companies are not being taxed to pay for the package must be severely questioned. Apparently we will pay for it at some point in the future – it’s all very vague. off the top of my head, as I haven’t checked, I believe fracking has been approved? Yes, we must get back to some kind of normality asap.
Being brought up in a Scottish Nationalist home, where my father bought a tv to watch the Coronation, I am a died in the wool anti monarchist. I lived in Ireland for 15 years and think their system of meet and greet president is good enough. In fact my husband worked with the last president when she was a tv producer. Not all presidents were former deputies or high ranking party members.
As far as Charles goes, maybe too late for your post, but his temper tantrums and sacking staff are quite shocking. Maybe that’s what he meant by slimmed down monarchy not getting rid of his pals. I’m an atheist but I wonder what C of E members think of him being a defender of their faith.
Yes, I’m not far from that but I just can’t quite bring myself to believe that a republic would be better and as we’ve had a monarchy for such a long time and subservience to a monarchy is kind of ingrained into our psyche I can’t see one ever happening in the UK. Charles won’t get the easy ride that the Queen had all these years (his petulance and the sackings are an indication of his privileged existence) and there will be questioning of the monarchy, but an actual republic? It won’t happen.
For the time being though I feel as though I’ve gone down a wormhole into a place where I am quite conflicted. I really don’t approve of the monarchy and it is mainly to do with the fact that they are at the pinnacle of a ghastly class structure and I can’t be doing with it, and yet I feel myself drawn into the pageant that is happening before our eyes and I am mesmerised by the events televised. I really do think normality has to return asap, because at the moment with the rain and the grey skies I feel trapped in an endless cycle of a gloomy weekend!
An interesting read Penny. As an Aussie I have grown up with the Queen as our Head of State and singing God Save our Queen at school ( this has now changed). A few years ago a referendum was defeated on us becoming a Republic but I am sure this view will change in the coming years (as I feel it should).
That said I agree that the Queen certainly had a life well lived and I have greatly admired now King Charles for his stand on climate change and wish him well.
Interesting post, Penny! I don’t think I can truly appreciate what the Queen meant to the British people, but I always appreciated a woman as monarch, and it seems to me she was a stabilizing presence, always present as political parties changed and fought. (Of course none of my tax dollars are paying for their upkeep.) While The Crown is a dramatization, it did impress upon me how demanding and restrictive the monarch’s duties are. You don’t get a day off when you are Queen. I can certainly see where some personality types would not be suited to the role.
I didn’t realize King Charles embraced the concern over climate change so early. I don’t know how much influence the monarchy has on politics, but maybe he can influence the course towards a more green existence. Given how much Princess Diana was loved, I think King Charles may have quite the job winning over some of the populace.
Michelle
https://mybijoulifeonline.com
King Charles was way ahead of the curve on climate change, as his father was on specie loss and the endagering of now just large animals like elephants – but the loss of biodiversity due to loss of not just rainforest but scrubland.
We truly have so much to feel indebted to our monarchy for over heightening the awareness of all environmental issues long before it was ‘popular’.
I learned some by reading this post. Thanks for sharing!
http://www.chezmireillefashiontravelmom.com
I find your blog and these comments to be very interesting and thought-provoking, Penny. As an American watching the antics of a extremist political “base” and its corrupt leader in our country, I appreciate your readers (and your) observations of your form of government. After reading your comments about your former PM, I remember thinking that it’s the same everywhere…
To quote your own countryman and PM, “Unlimited power is apt to corrupt the minds of those who possess it”. William Pitt 1770
I join you in seeking leadership and government that can function for all.
God Bless the King.
God bless America.