The Coronations in XX-XXI cent.

[dmitri]

I think the next Coronation will be a very simple affair. There will be no role for peers as their role has gone. It will simply be an oath taking and crowning ceremony. The other alternative will be no coronation at all and a simple oath taking ceremony similar to what happens in Norway. The Crown of course would be on display. Perhaps we have moved on now from the days of coronations. Times have changed radically and an expensive coronation ceremony may well be seen as a massive waste of public monies. Hopefully there will be no need for another coronation for a very long time indeed. God save The Queen!

[Grace]

I don't think we've 'moved on now from the days of coronations' at all. 

The coronation of a British monarch is a far more important event than a royal wedding and I don't think many people who understand the significance of it would want it pared down in any way (except maybe the Prince of Wales himself!).  Many regard a great public royal event as a morale booster and a special occasion to be remembered always.  After all, it is not something that occurs frequently so I doubt if it could fall into the category of a 'massive waste of public monies'.

Yes, indeed - God Save The Queen!

[Mary R.]

I must agree with Grace, the coronation ceremony is here to stay. The coronation is indeed a rare event that involves the efforts of so many, it is an opportunity for national unity. People look forward to the display of pomp and ceremony. It's true in certain countries such as Norway the ceremony is radically simpler but the customs are different in those cases. Charles perhaps would want a simpler ceremony, I have read that he also wants a multi-faith service. Anyone's thoughts on that? And most importantly... God Save The Queen!

Mary R.

[ChristineM]

Well, the Prince of Wales is on record as saying that rather than being crowned 'Defender of the Faith', he wants to be crowned 'Defender of Faiths'.   Therefore although the new king has no choice but to allow the Archbishop of Canterbury play a pivotal role, he will be assisted by an assortment of mullahs, rabbis, hari krishnas, buddhist priests, humanists, zoroastrians, et al.   It will probably last for days.

What the coronation  will lack without its presence of  peers, it will be made up for in religious leaders - the Christian denominations alone will fill some gaps, but add in all the rest and it certainly will be a colourful affair.   Should Charles (or George) decide to be truly inclusive and include Sunni and Shiites - there could be fireworks as well - all  accompanied to the strains of Handel.

tsaria

[alixaannencova]

I tend to agree with Grace and Mary R. No body does a grand proccessional occassion quite as well as the English! Furthermore the 'people' enjoy the whole spectacle and no doubt would want as such, to demonstrate that they still have it in them to put on a 'good show.'

I like the idea of a multi faith coronation too. Perhaps held 'al fresco' in one of the Royal Parks. The the King would be really close to nature and not too closely associated with the CofE, as he would if crowned in Westminster Abbey. Perhaps then all the prelates and leaders of various faiths could attend him during the ceremony!It could be a very public spririted and inclusive event then.

As a less serious issue, I also believe the Consort will wear something rather good too! After all she didn't let the side down at her wedding!

 

[ChristineM]

So you would be willing to break 900 years of tradition Alixaannecova?   Coronations have taken place in Westminster Abbey for nine hundred years.   In my opinon, to break with that kind of tradition will certainly start the slide on the slippery slope to republicanism.   Monarchy exists because it offers a sense of continuum, history and tradition.   Charles pays lip service to multiculturism (which really does not exist), because, like it or not, we all live in our own little pockets.    This iis the rock on which the monarchy will perish.   The bulk of the influx of refugees and asylum seekers into the UK in recent years, couldn't give a toss whether a monarchy survives or not.   In Scotland we have had 150,000 Polish immigrants in the last year alone - and I believe the country certainly benefits from their presence.   However, they are not remotely interested in the British monarchy, its survival, or otherwise.   It is not part of their heritage or of their tradition.

tsaria

The Scots, proportionately, probably add more to grand processional occasions, than do the English on their own

[alixaannencova]

The Scots certainly do add a beautiful and redeeming aspect to all royal occassions I agree!

As to breaking with tradition, so many have been broken over the last two centuries! The whole role of the monarchy has changed beyond all recognition. I can not help but feel that George III would have found his role beyond recognition if he were transported to 2007!

I just can not see how a future monarch with the track record of the present heir can be crowned in an 'ecclesiastica'l CofE affair without it ruffling feathers and bringing to the fore, the whole 'Head of the Church' issue etc.

My idea of a more public spirited coronation would surely bring an element of national togetherness to procceedings! Rather than the elite clustering into Westminster in their robes etc! Including a convicted felon!
 
Tradition can sometimes appear 'unwaivering' as in the case of the flag at BP in 1997. Surely adaptation and updating are the best route forward? If members of all creeds were included then perhaps others would be more inclined to feel positively toward the monarchy in the future.   

[ChristineM]

Aliixaanencova

You are right - its a whole new can of worms.   Of course arrangements will already be well in hand.   

At the BBC we had started making a memorial documentary probably 40 years before the Queen Mother died.   It was updated annually.   The same applies to the Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh AND the Prince of Wales.   The death of the Diana, Princess of Wales left everyone - including news and documentary editors - stunned and floundering.

However, they can only push the indigenous population so far without a backlash and that's the last thing we need.

tsaria

[CHRISinUSA]

I believe the next coronation will remain (in essence) the same as it has for 900 years, but will have certain significant differences.  Every coronation has had some differences - they just happen so infrquently that the average person doesn't notice!  Of course, differences are going to be much more obvious now that there is television, internet, ceaseless media attention.  (Side note - amazing when you think of it - the last coronation was the first one ever filmed!  A reminder of how long HM has been on the throne!).

Remember that some parts of the ceremony occur due to law, others because of tradition, yet others are probably preferences.

First, I believe the next coronation will occur in Westminster Abby - led by the Archbishop as usual - unless the CoE is disestablished prior to the event.  A British coronation isn't merely the installation of a head of state, but a religious ceremony in which the monarch is annointed.

Charles will be "Defender of THE Faith", regardless of what he would like, unless the British Parliament alters the title (it was created by Parliament in 1544), AND the commonwealth countries all agree (per the 1931 Statute of Westminster preamble). 

I also think the Peers of the Realm will attend as before.  Granted, most of them will be life peers rather than hereditary peers, but the House of Lords is still (in title) the Upper House of Parliament, and Peers are still the monarch's councellors.  Hopefully, they wear their coronets and robes?

Now, there may be representatives of other faiths, and maybe a little less pomp and ceremony than in 1953, but the fundamentals of the coronation will likely remian the same as before. 

What I think will be interesting is what William's coronation will look like.  My guess is that Charles' coronation will cause people to really look at the elements of the ceremony in a modern context, and it will force the debate to begin.  It will probably take too long to decide on major changes for Charles' ceremony, but will pave the way for major changes for William's.

[ChristineM]

Don't forget when Charles was invested Prince of Wales at Carmarthen - it looked ridiculous.   Even the Queen allowed herself to be carried away with the pseudo/retro/medieval theme and wore a hat - 'Tudor' in inspiration.

The Earl of Snowdon was given the task to plan the proceedings.   The only word which adequately describes that particular ceremony is 'farce'.

I sincerely hope Chris is right and the fundamental elements of the coronation ceremony will survive, inevitably - and quite rightly - with a modern twist.   (Music by Taverner or MacMillan will do as starters).

tsaria

[alixaannencova]

The investiture of the PoW did cross my mind as I was writing! I agree.....it was utterly cringeable! Furthermore I do tend to agree that more radical rethinks about procceedings  may be left until the coronation of William V.

[dmitri]

I think the whole affair will be much simpler. Gone are the days of 1953 when most of the once great empire still existed. If this ceremony is to have any relevance it must be in keeping with the times. If it is over the top it will alienate people from the monarchy. I think the next monarch will be crowned but there will be no peers as they are now excluded by changes to the upper house. I am not even sure you will see members of the royal family in robes. I think it will be a monarch and consort only affair. After all there will be no Dowager Queen the next time around. Of course there can be a procession like that involved for a State Opening of Parliament. There won't be the same number of troops marching as in 1953 as many of these came from Commonwealth countries who acknowledged Elizabeth II as their Head of State. There aren't many countries that do that anymore.

[Robert_Hall]

If the precedent of Victoria is followed, the next Jubilee of QEII will be in 2012. That should give an indication of  just how elaborate the following royal events shall be.  I do not think the peerage itself is subject to the changes in the House of Lords. They could well still be part of the ceremony, although not part of the government. Depends on their role. And, if there is no longer a "State Church", it puts the whole event in a new perspective. The present Queen is the only thing to keep this whole show on the road.  For now.

[dmitri]

Yes you are very right Robert about the current Queen. It is important not to confuse support for the current Queen with support for the monarchy. She is widely respected and the glue that keeps everything together. There is no such level of respect for her heir Charles. 

[ChristineM]

Robert - Yes, Yes, Yes and YES - it is the diminutive, octogenarian - Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II - who is 'keeping the whole show on the road'.   Of that there is no doubt.

Long may she reign.

tsaria