The Ridiculousness of Royalty
Traditions Whose Time Has Really Past Rear Their Head Once More
This Saturday the world is going to go crazy over a 74 year old suddenly given the right to wear the hat above. That’s what a coronation is. Its the formal “crowning” of the new King or Queen. It doesn’t matter that he has technically been King since his mum, Elizabeth II, died. In reality, the King of England is less important to the world now than the position has been since William the Conqueror crossed the English Channel in 1066 and took over. Everyone seems to realize that except King Charles Phillip Arthur George III.
I get the interest. Since we haven’t had one since the 1950s, it’s kind of a big deal I guess. All the pomp and circumstance. All that centuries of tradition bubbling up back into the mainstream consciousness. However, when you take a step back and look at it, it really is a level of buffoonery that just doesn’t mesh well with modern culture, and so much of it seems to stem from their subjugation of Scotland particularly. Here are just a few examples:
The Stone of Scone and the Coronation Chair of St. Edward
Taken from the website of Westminster Abbey:
The Coronation Chair in St George’s Chapel is one of the most precious and famous pieces of furniture in the world. It has been the centrepiece of coronations for over 700 years when it is placed in the centre of the Abbey, in front of the High Altar. The Coronation Chair was made by order of Edward I to enclose the famous Stone of Scone (a.k.a the “Stone of Destiny”), which he brought from Scotland to the Abbey in 1296, where he placed it in the care of the Abbot of Westminster. The King had a magnificent oaken chair made to contain the Stone in 1300-1301, painted by Master Walter and decorated with patterns of birds, foliage and animals on a gilt ground. The figure of a king, either Edward the Confessor or Edward I, his feet resting on a lion, was painted on the back. The four gilt lions below were made in 1727 to replace the originals, which were themselves not added to the Chair until the early 16th century. The Stone was originally totally enclosed under the seat but over the centuries the wooden decoration had been torn away from the front…The Chair has been in use at the coronation ceremony since 1308 although opinion is divided as to when it was actually used for the crowning, but this was certainly the case from 1399 when Henry IV was crowned in the Chair.
Look at this chair. It’s ugly, beat up, and seems to be used just because it holds a stone originally stolen from Scotland, and has been used for 700+ years. I’ve seen benches in parks with more appeal. I’m constantly reminded of this scene from The King’s Speech. It’s just a chair.
Speaking of the “Stone of Scone”, here is the rock that apparently has it’s own ceremony and is put in the chair, since apparently, Charles can’t be King unless it’s included under his arse.
The Queen’s Crown and Camilla
Camilla is not exactly a loved royal; certainly not as much as Princess Diana ever was. Nonetheless, she’s married to King Charles and stands to ascend as “Queen Consort.”
I don’t know any Brits who really look forward to her as Queen, particularly when the last one held the position for 70 years and was pretty much loved. Prince Harry even had some not so great things to say about her in his recent book to boot.
So the world gets to be treated to this:
And what does the crown look like? Well….
Nobody is really looking forward to this at all.
“The Oath”
Members of the public watching the coronation on television, online or gathered in the open air at big screens have been invited to swear allegiance to King Charles. A spokesman for Lambeth Palace said: “The homage of the people is particularly exciting because that’s brand new.”
The oath is:
“I swear that I will pay true allegiance to Your Majesty, and to your heirs and successors according to law. So help me God.”
What was the reaction to this new oath?
‘Nuff said there.
The Wardrobe
Much has been made how King Charles and Queen Camilla are reusing past wardrobes for the coronation under the guise of “sustainability.” It certainly makes it cheaper and prevents the need to make new garments just for this one day. But it plays up again that “tradition” item that makes the Royals seem out of touch, adhering to the long past and looking stuffy and ridiculous. So what does Charles’ garb look like?
Conclusion
It all seems much ado about nothing really. I know I’ll be sleeping in skipping it. For those who are like “It’s a once in a lifetime event” no it isn’t— Charles is 74. We’ll likely see the coronation again when he dies within the next 25 years and William ascends to the throne.
PurpleAmerica’s Recommended Stories
Prince Harry is showing up (without his wife who is staying in California) and then 2 hours after the festivities is flying back. Can’t blame him. He has to make the appearance but I’m not sure I’d want to stay either.
I’m reposting my earlier post regarding the Royals from when Harry published his book. Enjoy!
PurpleAmerica’s Obscure Fact of the Day
Queen Elizabeth’s Coronation was the first live event carried worldwide. You can see pretty much the whole thing here:
Outstanding Tweet
Footnotes and Parting Thoughts
Let me know what you think of the page. Please share and comment!
I get not caring about the crown; this country was born so we wouldn’t have to care about it. It’s unwise to dismiss the monarchy as a mere relic of a bygone era, however. We thought the same of empire and that mindset hasn’t gone away. If anything it’s trying its damndest to reassert itself. I think it’s partly because most people have this nostalgia for a traditional aesthetic.
They want to believe in the good king, the British Crown that’s more important than the individual, that impulse of nobility that somehow used to exist but doesn’t anymore. It never really did of course, but that’s how nostalgia works. It’s not terrible in and of itself but as we’re seeing overseas nostalgia can be easily used for evil purposes.
On paper, having a neutered monarch can present some advantages. Since their rich lifestyle is subsidized by the country and they can’t lose it unless the country dies, they can be above typical political machination and be a voice for the people in a way that politicians can’t. That’s what people thought of in Queen Elizabeth II. The problem is that if they aren’t in touch with the people then they’re effectively useless. And since the gap between the rich and poor keeps growing (both financially and culturally) there’s even less connection between the royalty and the common folk. Much as I value traditions for culture’s sake, if they aren’t helping or they’re acting as a hindrance they should be reformed or demolished.
Monarchy itself doesn’t really matter much to me regardless. Far as I’m concerned the only true King has yet to return to us, all the others are just pretenders.