King since the death of his mother on September 8, 2022, Carlos III is about to receive the Crown of Saint Edward on May 6. What kind of sovereign will he be? To try to guess it, you have to understand its position, and the meaning that Elizabeth II’s mother gave it for almost 72 years.
It could be an advertising slogan of the monarchy: there is no age to start a life. At 74, Charles III will be the oldest British monarch to be crowned on Saturday May 6 and the only one in Europe to be so since 1830. His first challenge, partly won in his eight-month reign, is to succeed Elizabeth II in the still mourning hearts of the British people, who for the most part have only known her.
“Even tourists continue to be interested only in the late sovereign, as evidenced by the souvenir shops, where the many objects bearing the Queen’s effigy dwarf the rare pennants and tea towels announcing the coronation of her son. Recovering the crown later of such an emblematic event is almost impossible for Carlos”, reports the French magazine Paris Match in a special issue dedicated to the event, which has not been seen for 70 years.
Carlos’ popularity never really took off, for many well-known reasons: his personality, considered boring, his blamed failed marriage to a deceived but world-renowned princess, the family’s dirty laundry recently washed in public by his son Enrique , etc. His son his William his, the future William V, has already taken off, well helped by his wife, Duchess Kate, a paragon of elegance. On April 26, an Ipsos poll gave 62% favorable opinions of the dolphin, well ahead of his father, with 49%.
Carlos’s unpopularity, actually very relative, contrasts with that of his mother, which has only increased between 2002 and 2022, after fluctuating in the 1960s and 1970s. “His first challenge will be to reconnect with the people,” judges Denis MacShane, Tony Blair’s former Labor minister. But is 74 the right age to start a career as a monarch? Observers agree that the accession of a grandfather king does not arouse the same enthusiasm as that of a 26-year-old queen. According to the Ipsos Institute, no less than 42% of the British believe that Charles III should cede the throne to his son. Almost most of the minions.
A good king is first and foremost a popular king, “who does nothing, but who represents the country well and lifts its morale when necessary,” says Marc Roche, a journalist and well-known specialist on the British royal family. His primary function is to unify the country without entering into the political game, from which he is banned, while at the same time being a prominent adviser.
Political issues
Officially, the monarch does not interfere in the political affairs, internal or external, of the kingdom, and has done so since 1688, when Parliament seized control of the Crown by controlling the royal treasury. “The financial control of the Crown was a key moment in the history of the British monarchy,” says Philippe Chassaigne, professor of history at the University of Bordeaux-Montaigne and author of La Grande-Bretagne et le monde, from 1815 to our days.
Later, under the reign of Victoria (1837-1901), the powers that the sovereign could still exercise were progressively taken away in favor of Parliament. Since then, he has had to resign himself to implacable political neutrality and keep his opinions to himself. This is not enshrined in any text, since it is the uses and customs, sometimes ancestral, that in the United Kingdom have the force of fundamental law. “The sovereign is the physical embodiment of the entire nation. That is why he cannot take sides politically: he would alienate a part of the population. This is also what has allowed the perpetuation of the British monarchy, as well as other European monarchies”, underlines Philippe Chassaigne.
Therefore, the role of the monarch is narrowly limited, “he cannot do anything”, says even Marc Roche. “He can only act with the agreement of the head of government”, adds Philippe Chassaigne. Thus, State visits are decided at 10 Downing Street. For his first official visit, Carlos III wanted a Commonwealth country; Rishi Shunak imposed France and then Germany. “The Government uses the sovereign as an element of soft power at the service of British diplomacy”, says the historian.
At the end of 2022, faithful to his environmental convictions, Carlos III expressed his desire to attend COP27, the climate conference, in Egypt. Unfortunately, Liz Truss, a short-lived Conservative Prime Minister insensitive to climate change, was in charge. It was a “no”, and Carlos III could only nod.
Thus, the political rights of the monarch can be summed up in three key words: “to be informed, to encourage, to warn”, as Walter Bagehot said. It is in this capacity that once a week, in the secrecy of a Buckingham hall, he meets with his head of government, whom he has appointed but not elected, since he is the majority leader in the House of Commons. who is automatically appointed. This moment is a consultation and the prime minister is not obliged to follow the recommendations of his interlocutor. But he is reputed to be the best-informed head of state in the world. “Prime Minister Harold Wilson always said that the most useful advice he received was the one slipped by the Queen in fairly innocuous comments,” says Denis MacShane.
In theory, he can also defeat the government if he expresses distrust of his prime minister. “In practice, it is unthinkable, it would open up a political crisis whose consequences are difficult to imagine,” says Philippe Chassaigne. Not even the notorious case of Edward VIII, forced to abdicate in 1936 (before his coronation), could with the Baldwin government, which rejected his marriage to the double American divorcee Wallis Simpson.
Elizabeth II, Queen of Spades
During her reign, the longest in Europe, Queen Elizabeth II observed a strict duty of secrecy. She has only addressed her subjects five times (in 1991, 1997, 2002, 2012 and 2020), in addition to the traditional Christmas speeches. Her last speech was delivered – and well received – during the coronavirus pandemic that sent much of the world’s population home with a ban on sticking their noses out.
“The sovereign has the duty to tune in with the sentiments of his subjects, in good times and in bad”, comments Philippe Chassaigne. When Princess Diana died in Paris in 1997, the tragedy of the century for an entire nation, “the queen finally understood that staying in her Balmoral castle and pretending nothing had happened was not good. She returned to London, headed to the nation on Friday, September 5 and managed to win back public opinion”.
Although unable to position herself publicly, the queen had no qualms about sending messages that she knew would be picked up by all knowledgeable observers in the realm. In 1986, leaks from Buckingham – from the Queen’s press secretary – made the front page of the Sunday Times: “Queen appalled by Thatcher’s callousness.” A bomb. And the article explains that the queen does not like the “aggressive and socially divisive” politics of the “Iron Lady” of Downing Street. Ultra-liberal politics are not liked in the palace, where tradition demands a sense of social duty.
This, against the backdrop of a Commonwealth of Nations (of which the Queen is head) threatened with loss of membership due to Thatcher’s ambivalent relationship with the apartheid regime in South Africa. This article “exposed the fact that the queen had doubts about Margaret Thatcher’s policy,” deciphers Philippe Chassaigne. The possibility of a historic resignation opens. According to the specialist, history recalls the tears of a humiliated prime minister, who praised the monarchy, before the queen called her to console her for this malicious rumor.
More direct this time, on September 11, 2014. Four days before the Scottish independence referendum, Elizabeth II leaves the Sunday morning Anglican service at the Scottish estate of Balmoral. Interrupted by a bystander, she says, “I hope people think hard about her future.” Outcry and jokes: the queen has taken sides.
June 2017. Westminster opens negotiations on Brexit, voted for by 52% in a referendum last year. It is the Queen’s annual task to inaugurate the new Parliament. She delivers the Speech from the Throne, endorsed by the prime minister as required, so there is no risk of surprises. But the queen arrives dressed in blue, with a hat of the same color… with small yellow flowers. From there to seeing in it support for the European Union, a step that many Europhiles have taken, there is only one step.
Whether in reconciliations with the 15 prime ministers of her reign or through subliminal public messages, the mischievous-eyed “little queen’s” advice has not always been followed. Above all, she has rarely wanted to give them away. “In general, she accepted the changes and did not try to intervene,” summarizes Denis MacShane, in the Foreign Office from 2002 to 2005.
He did not even react to the numerous scandals that marked his reign. The word is made of silver, like the coin that is put back into the machine when you want to turn it off. The matter of his son Andrés, accused of sexual abuse of a minor and linked to American pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, “could have dynamited the entire family,” says journalist Adélaïde de Clermont-Tonnerre. “However, the Queen immediately isolated Andrew, removed him from all official duties and never commented on these allegations. If she had started talking about it, the British monarchy would not have recovered. Andrew’s attempt to justify himself remains the worst. media flop in years,” he says.
Silence is gold. It is even “a mime”, compares the sociologist Jean Viard, “everything is in the suit, in the gestures, the work of the smile, the hat”. “All of Elizabeth II’s advisers that I met praised her sense of moderation, her ability to listen, she did not impose her point of view, she did not pit one against the other,” describes Marc Roche, author of The Borgias at Buckingham. “He does the complete opposite: he is a Machiavellian,” she asserts.
This article has been adapted from its original published in RFI.
