Charles in Charge?

by The Laird o’Thistle
June 7 2012

The great Diamond Jubilee of Queen Elizabeth II has now come to its climax, even though it will still be slowly winding down over the coming weeks and months. The events of the weekend of 2 to 5 June 2012 presented many fascinating sights and scenes that will take some time to unpack. But I thought it worth taking an initial stab at it right away.

In a way, the most remarkable element amidst the great spectacles was the role of Prince Charles and his family. We had been forewarned that the focus of the weekend would be on the Queen and the immediate line of succession, but it seemed somewhat startling nonetheless.

It began with the Spirit of Chartwell on Sunday. The Thames Pageant was a breathtaking sight, without doubt. The creation of the bell barge to lead the river procession was inspired, and the new row-barge Gloriana is amazing. I was rather less keen on the temporary royal barge itself, which seemed a bit over-the-top in its Edwardian decoration. There has been discussion in the press as to whether the Queen and Prince Phillip ignored the plush “thrones” out of distaste, or simply because the massive red chairs provided a welcome shelter from the chill wind and rain. But ignore them they did as the elderly couple stolidly stood for the several hours it took for the entire pageant to unfold.

What seemed more striking, and rather unsettling, was the absence of the Queen’s other children and grandchildren on the royal barge. The Queen and Duke were joined onboard by the Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, and Prince Harry. But the Princess Royal, the Duke of York, and the Earl of Wessex followed on behind in lesser vessels… looking (in Prince Andrew’s case, at least) perhaps a bit put out. While I can certainly understand putting the Gloucester and Kent cousins on the lesser vessels, it simply felt odd to see Anne, Andrew, and Edward similarly relegated.

The hospitalization of the Duke of Edinburgh on the following day was undoubtedly a blow to the Queen. True to form she carried determinedly on, but HRH’s absence seemed to underline what a pair they are. Her Majesty’s solitary figure climbing the steps and proceeding up the aisle at the Service on Thanksgiving on Tuesday was particularly poignant. And then, more than at any other time in the weekend, she looked her full eighty-six years.

Like many, I was struck by the choice to have the Duchess of Cornwall, rather than the Prince of Wales, seated next to the Queen in the carriage procession in Prince Phillip’s absence. It seemed a sort of echo of Princess (later, Queen) Alexandra accompanying Queen Victoria in 1897, even as it spoke volumes of the status Camilla has finally achieved in the royal pecking order. Once again, however, I missed the Queen’s other children, and that feeling only grew stronger when the Queen appeared on the palace balcony with just the Prince of Wales’ family. Even if all of their spouses and children had stayed back inside it would have been so right and good to see Anne, Andrew, and Edward standing out there with their mother and their brother’s family for that climactic moment.

How and why did this occur? The final decision was undoubtedly the Queen’s, but it simply does not feel like her way of doing things. Her tendency throughout her reign has always been to pull in the full familial supporting cast on such occasions. To my mind it seems more reflective of the Prince of Wales’ aloofness, and his recognized intention for the future shaping of the royal family.

Rumors of tensions between the Prince of Wales and his siblings have been in circulation for years. And it is notable that it has been, I believe, at least ten years since Charles and his family have joined the other royals for Easter at Windsor. Beyond any ongoing sibling rivalries, the rhetoric in circulation has been that Prince Charles anticipates having a smaller and more “lean” royal family in the future, shorn of various “lesser” royals. That undoubtedly makes sense in relation to his siblings’ children – Beatrice, Eugenie, Louise, James, Peter, and Zara. But it makes far less sense in regard to his brothers and his sister who, even if they do ultimately find their royal duties reduced, at least deserve to be treated with an appropriate degree of dignity (if not affection) by their elder brother.

In a word, Tuesday’s balcony appearance struck me as slightly “sad” and a bit lonely. The royal family was incomplete. One key member of the family firm was missing, and three others were not included. The latter runs contrary to the standard practice of the British royal family stretching back to the days of Queen Victoria, and I found it unsettling to say the least. If the influence behind the choice was that of the Prince of Wales, then I think he seriously erred in his judgment, and I say that as one who has been far more supportive of him over the years than many. When the day comes that he is King then he can stand there with just Camilla, William, Harry, and their families. But while “Mummy” lives they really need to make room for all of her children.

Yours aye,

-Ken Cuthbertson