the new Carolean era
Charles's remarkable contradictions
The modern Carolean era began almost exactly 8 months ago when Queen Elizabeth II passed from the scene after an astounding seventy year reign but today’s coronation in the unparalleled splendour of Westminster Abbey will be the beginning most people recall.
I missed the last coronation by a couple of years but she was an enduring presence; I actually caught myself wondering idly this morning when she would arrive at the Abbey (seriously; I am a slow learner). Besides the King and his sister, only a small number of the more distant Royals—and neither of their younger brothers—were there for the young Elizabeth’s enthronement. Most people did not have television sets. Contrast to today where thousands were along the parade route and multiple British television stations could provide live feed if people desired watch. For that alone, this ceremony was notable in its accessability and inclusiveness for a country which has had a rough few years, much less truly major change in that 70 years.
I saw the Queen once, in November 1979 on a cold morning when she, the Prince Consort, and the Prince of Wales all met Indonesia’s Suharto for what probably was a State visit. I was struck by how bloody cold, penetrating cold, it was for this woman in an open carriage to meet the Indonesian who must have been freezing to his core. I only glimpsed all of them but I remember Prince Charles looked extremely youthful.
He had yet to announce his engagement to Diana. That occurred the winter after I departed with my degree in hand after studying there for a year. Prince Charles had been the heir apparent for my entire life so he just seemed an appendage to the Queen’s reign. There were anecdotes about his disapproval of modern architecture (hard to argue with that when one considers the magnificent architecture in many British cities but it seemed a bit picky to care if he liked or disliked building design), his habit of conversing with plants, and the never ending fascination with when he would finally find a bride, much less ascend the throne. Poor man could not catch a break, it seemed back then.
Fast forward to this morning. King Charles is the oldest monarch ever annointed sovereign. This is rather more interesting that that might appear. He is 74 and a half, eight years older than ‘full retirement’ age in the United States yet he assumes the de jure leadership of state. I am not sure precisely how Britain defines retirement age but we have recently seen Emmanuel Macron spark widespread riots because he is raising France’s retirement age to 64.
The King and all of the ‘working Royals’, regardless of age, may keep packed calendars but they have tremendous support, physical and financial, to meet their state obligations so I am not suggesting anyone weep for what he is embarking upon. And he has prepared for this since that coronation 70 years ago in February. I do find it fascinating for different reasons. His task seems much harder to me than I would have expected.
The new monarch obviously is concerned with maintaining cohesion of society’s fabric based on the meticulous care manifested during the ceremony as he reached out to , especially the young, Britons of all creeds to a dramatic degree. The procession into the Abbey included the most diverse array of religious denominations that one could conceive.
To Americans that seems perfectly normal except that we are a secular state (yes, yes, I know I ignite a firestorm but the Constitution is clear on this in the First Amendment that we have freedom of religion rather than a single state denomination) but the heart of the Coronation is a Church of England religious service at a site of worship for more than a millenium. There is absolutely no doubt about that: the Sovereign is the head of the Church of England.
King Charles, however, deemed that Greek Orthodox, Church of Wales, Sikh, Muslim, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Roman Catholic, Church of Scotland, and probably others I missed participate in the service. If you think about that, you start to see a complex individual who has assumed the crown. The Archbishop of Canterbury, the senior cleric of that same Church of English, led this service out without hesitation. Certainly he did it with the monarch’s direction but this is the same Church that has had some heartburn on accepting women into the clergy, marrying gays, and other social issues.
Then there was Camilla. Twenty-six years ago this September, then Prince of Wales’s ex-wife died in a high visibility car accident that almost, by some accounts, brought down the House of Windsor as the public mourned her death. In a widely-watched television interview, that ex-wife blamed the Prince’s former girlfriend and renewed married paramour for the disaster that was the Royal marriage. In late 1997, it was impossible to see that paramour ever seated by her Prince to assume the position as Queen.
Yet this morning, she was not only crowned along with the King but departed the Abbey as Queen Camilla rather than Camilla, the Queen Consort. I believe Prince Philip actually remained the Royal Consort for his entire marriage after the Queen ascended but some Brits, in Twitter posts (admittedly tiny survey and imprecise) resisted what they saw as a convenient revision of Royal promises not to confer that title. Upon their marriage in 2005, Buckingham Palace preemptively addressed the question by saying she would be Queen Consort. Queen Elizabeth endorsed the full title as Queen but it was, for a few, yet another contradiction for a new era.
After all, it was the issue of a divorced woman besotting Edward VIII in 1937 that allowed Charles III to reach today’s events. The new Queen appears well-suited to the same desire to include as many portions of British society as possible in the new Carolean era as the King and Queen personify a world of social acceptabilities unknown in 1953. They also have the luck and joy of obviously being best freinds.
The King and Queen sought not only to expand the sense of participation in the service but they sought to modernise the faces of Britain’s society over all; this has been clear for years and no less so today. Britain’s Tory Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, a practicing Hindu, read from the Christian bible. The Afro-British octet singing beautiful choral music was stunning in their white dress to accompany the white ties worn by so many. The several women marching in the procession, including the stylish teal-clad Lord President of the Privy Council MP Penny Mordaunt carrying the Sword of State, were Afro-British, South Asian, and Caucasian. The First Minister of Scotland, Humza Yusef, cut quite a dashing figure in his kilt. The new monarchs’ concerns about inclusivity and sensitivity to reaching across society were impossible to ignore.
Yet, the Carolean reign faces raising scepticism that the entire monarchy retains value for the country. Britain faces many challenges, including the industrial actions I have mentioned in several columns over the months. Those strikes appear no closer to overall resolution. As one strike ends, related groups within the same sector often begin strikes anew as has occurred within the National Health Service. The King is apolitical so he cannot solve the problems.
The Tories suffered devastating losses in English local elections only two days ago, losing a thousand Council seats primarily to Labour and the Social Democrats. The Prime Minister will need shore up his Party’s support in these areas quickly as a General Election must occur no later than early 2025 but is expected earlier.
Probably the greatest contradiction for King Charles is his attempts to show heartfelt commitment to reach youth’s concerns yet it’s those same young who are most apathetic to the monarchy. The constant drumbeat of stories about the Royal Family has unsurprisingly raised questions of why it deserves respect, much less the extravagant financial support it requires to carry out duties. The King pledges to pare back the costs yet the coronation itself appeared a rather lavish. In an era of still racing inflation, uncertainty about Britain’s economy post-Brexit, and the sense of distance so outside of London feel for the system, one has to wonder how this King’s rule will help that sense of disjuncture. Poor man is often damned for anything and everything he does.
The Prince and Princess of Wales are now 40 years old themselves, with lovely children, but hardly living amongst the less than advantaged in the Midlands or Glaswegian inner city. They represent not only hope for a new generation but a solid financial encumbrance the nation will face as it struggles to address the British options a quarter of the way into the 21st century. For too many, the system of privilege according to birth just doesn’t ring true. And yet there remain many supporters, largely older who remember a stronger role for Britain in the world with fewer doubts about its future path.
The King is now crowned and clearly eager to make his mark as Charles III. He has a sister and brother (and that brother’s wife) who rarely stumble in their work, welcome additions to the Queen, and the Wales. But, contemporary Britain is a highly complex arrangement which will be hard to sustain. I don’t know how things will unfold but I do know the new Carolean reign will be a fascinating one which can only hope it finds a manner to harness the enthusiasm and joy evidenced by crowds on the Mall today. Time alone will tell, won’t it? I give him and those of ‘the Firm’ so much respect for a tough row to hoe.
I also know that at present we in America should take no solace in thinking this is only a British problem. We have two leading candidates for president each over 75 years in age. Our Senators from both parties remain largely old and white. Our own tensions, factures, and economic burdens augment terrible doubts about our future without an apolitical head of state to crown.
Whether by election or by birth, leading in the twentuy-first century is quite a challenge with many contradictions.FIN