A queen, a prince of blood, castles, privileges and gilding that an entire country reveres.
Posted at 5:00 a.m.
How could all this hold up for so long in a modern democracy? How can it even still exist?
I got the answer one day in April 2011.
It was at the time of the wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton. A Welsh lord had shown me the parliament at Westminster.
A millennium had passed before my eyes. I walked in the footsteps of dead kings, not always naturally, but always succeeded by a new king.
It was all fascinating.
But above all, I was waiting for the response from Martin Thomas, a former “liberal democrat” criminal lawyer reputed to be radical – at least in this chamber.
“I’m going to tell you the secret of the British monarchy,” Lord Thomas told me very slowly, between sips of a bad tea in the parliament cafeteria.
“You fail in this world, and after 12 or 15 months of existence, someone starts talking to you about a queen. In my case, it was a king. And you grow. And his daughter is getting married. I remember very well Elizabeth’s marriage to the Duke of Edinburgh in 1947. Then the king died. And the queen is crowned. And she has children. And so on.
“Call it a soap opera or a fairy tale, if you will, it is deeply rooted in our lives. »
The queen, her family, it’s all part of the decor, “it’s so to speak the backdrop, the tapestry, the fabric on which the country embroiders its history”.
So don’t ask the British to imagine themselves without a queen or a king. It would be to deny oneself.
They are not all swooning over their monarch. Are not necessarily passionate about the adventures of the royal family. But the abolition of the monarchy is a null and void subject, an idea considered largely absurd.
Everything moves, everything changes, in the world and around us. But everything takes place on the same immutable tapestry.
Everything is called into question, everything tumbles too quickly. But there remains this immutable, permanent, reassuring figure – reassuring by its very immutability.
Elizabeth embodied much more than the permanence of the state; it was the perpetuation of the British essence through the ages and generations. She was the repository of the elusive soul of the country, around which it was still possible to rally.
It’s here Britishness even who lived in it.
So don’t go asking subjects to scuttle the ship on which they are floating in this unpredictable sea.
It is not for nothing that we exclaim “Long live the king!” as soon as the queen dies: the state must survive the individuals, who are only passing through.
Except that this queen broke all records for longevity, to finally merge intimately, personally with the institution. So much so that the opinion we have of one is inseparable from that of the other.
How will the relationship with the monarchy evolve, the solidity of which has nevertheless varied over the centuries?
The latest polls (YouGov, 2022) indicate that 62% of Britons are in favor of maintaining the monarchy, compared to 22% who want it abolished. A year after William and Kate got married, approval was at 75%. The 18-24 year olds are currently divided at 33% for and 31% against.
PHOTO VICTORIA JONES, AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE ARCHIVES
Prince Charles, now Charles III, and Queen Elizabeth II, in 2019
Charles III will never be as popular as his mother, and not just because of his unhappy marriage to Diana. He lived in the limelight, while his mother, married at 21, came from a naïve media era, by comparison. His life is not seen by anyone as a fairy tale. He has also advanced a few times on political grounds and we do not know what he will do with his duties, he who has been waiting for his turn for so long. He came to power in the midst of post-Brexit turbulence, in a tense political and economic climate.
True, the subject is not on the political agenda for any political party in the UK, nor will it be – perhaps precisely because there is enough turbulence as it is.
The tapestry must remain, immutable, whatever the adventures of history.
The English are not beheaders of kings, after all.
Well, except once, in 1649. Lord Thomas showed me the spot where the king’s head was cut off.
Ah, hey, it comes back to me, his name was Charles, by the way…