It was 1788 when the deterioration mental health of George III put the British government: the king – they pronounced from Westminster – was unable to read traditional the crown speech on the occasion of the annual opening of the seats of parliament, effectively preventing them regular operation. Without the assent of the monarch to the operation of the chambers, it was impossible to go on: thus began a very noisy political debate which led to the conferment of powers – albeit at first very limited – to the firstborn, the Prince of Wales.
Thus, the future George IV – which from 1810 became in effect Prince Regent – began to read the speeches in Parliament taking the place of his father, until 1819, the year before his formal succession. Here, as Robert Hardman notes in the Daily Mail, since that time it has not happened that an heir to the crown has read the opening speech of the chambers instead of the monarch. Which doesn’t mean kings and queens always have attended at the appointment: the same Queen Victoria several times he forfeited, leaving the task to Lord Chancellor.
And so he did too the Queen Elizabethwhen in 1959 and 1963 – only twice in 70 years of reign – did not appear before parliament because it was pregnant: then, despite his age and various ailments, he always carried out the task in first person. Until today. “Her Majesty of hers, because of sporadic mobility problems and after consulting with doctors, she sadly decided to do not participate in the State OpeningThey announced from Palazzo. “Sara the Prince of Wales to read the Queens’ Speechwith this also the Duke of Cambridge ».
Content
This content can also be viewed on the site it originates from.
Well yes, history repeats itself later over two centuries. On the other hand – observes the royal expert again – designate an heir for that delicate function it could, in the memory of George IV, suggest the beginning of a period of regency. Elisabetta, with her usual pragmatism, went beyond her: Carlo sat on the so-called Chair of StateiThe throne therefore remained empty and the imperial crown – according to custom – was nevertheless raised to Westminster to represent the figure of the monarch. A crown on a pillow and around the void.
The queen is not there, but there is. Or better, it is not physically presentbut still send a very strong message to the subjects. It must be said that since 2005, during the government of Tony Blair, the figure of the Lord Chancellor was quite a lot resizedbut in Lilibet’s gesture there is one powerful symbolic charge: first of all he draws the linearity of the monarchywhich through the tandem Carlo-William go ahead and look to the future; in secundis, with the empty throne delimits the “boundaries” of his office, as a territory in which no one, to date, is allowed to enter. Unless authorized by you. The plans for the future are therefore clear: Charles will be more and more regent, Elizabeth II will never abdicate.
And in this sense Carlo, Prince of Wales since 1958, has always been exemplary. Scrupulously correct, he has always refused to talk about his future kingdom plans for do not disrespect to his mother. In the last few years replaced it many times, also in important events such as the recent deposition of the crown at the Cenotaph in Memorial Day. Without making a sound, therefore, for the good of the Crown, supports for a long time his Majesty. Which – as Robert Hardman concludes – remains in any case “Still in charge”. The empty throne testifies to this: the presence in the absence.
The Queen skips the opening ceremony of Parliament
Kate and William will not be in London over the Jubilee weekend
Harry and Meghan will fly to London for the Queen’s Jubilee
The fake priest who spent the night at the queen’s “house”
To receive the other cover of Vanity Fair (and much more), subscribe to Vanity Weekend.
Source: Vanity Fair
