Term-Limited By God
We'll not see the likes of Queen Elizabeth again
(A little NS&CB bonus coverage)
As an American, I’ve never understood the significance of the British monarchy to the average British citizen. But, then, I’m not supposed to. I didn’t grow up with a royal family whose matriarch sat on the throne for 70 years- that’s not a typo- before passing away yesterday at age 96.
I’ve always held the British monarchy in disdain. In a country struggling to maintain its First-World Status, the royal family sucks up resources that can and should go to better use. That said, the Brits haven’t revolted against the royals, and it’s their question to settle, no?
It shocked the world when Queen Elizabeth died yesterday at her Balmoral estate in Scotland. Yes, she was 96 and had been frail for some time. But she’d been a fixture on the world stage for 70 years. Day in and day out, 365 days a year, the Queen would be at one public function or another, most days at several. She saw it as her duty and did it stoically with a typically stiff British upper lip. No complaints, no whining- simply getting on with it and doing what needed to be done.
Keep calm and carry on.
It was easy to take her for granted. How could one not? She’d been Queen for 70 years and seemed as if someone had permanently affixed her to English life. Born in 1926, she was crowned Queen in 1952 and immediately presided over the death throes of the British Empire. She ruled as Britain contracted to lead a commonwealth, and Elizabeth became the technical sovereign of 15 countries. But, in reality, she was a figurehead. She didn’t select or appoint leaders; she only acknowledged their arrival. Nonetheless, receiving the imprimatur of the Queen was considered a necessary formality.
During her reign, Elizabeth met 14 Americans and 15 British Prime Ministers, the last just two days before she died, when she asked Elizabeth Truss to form a government.
It was about doing her duty to the end.
She came of age during WWII and the bombardment of London, during which time she wore her country’s uniform and served as many of her compatriots did. She understood the suffering and horrors of war because she’d experienced them. Likewise, her experience connected her to today’s world of social media, ubiquitous TV cameras, and the harshness of daily existence.
Despite this, Elizabeth maintained her sense of humor. Her wonderfully droll and self-deprecating ability to not take herself too seriously endeared her to her subjects. She could look dour, but she had an endearing ability to demonstrate that she was anything but humorless.
I heard one story about a party at the British Embassy in Washington when a doyenne of the Washington social scene managed to maneuver herself to the front of the receiving line. Upon meeting the Queen, she blustered, “I’m SO honored to meet you!” Elizabeth looked at her with a wry smile and said, “Oh, dear. Why?”
Perhaps she sensed that her life wasn’t her own but belonged to her country, which kept her on an even keel. She understood her role, accepted it, and conducted herself for 70 years with enduring and wholly genuine grace and dignity. She was a person uniquely suited for the time she ascended to the throne, and yet she was able to adapt to a country that changed rapidly and not always for the better.
I’ve been to England a few times, but not nearly enough to understand why the Queen was crucial to the British people. While the monarchy’s popularity as a concept has waxed and waned over the years, Queen Elizabeth has always remained popular and, even more than that, respected. I doubt another monarch- or, more likely, monarchs- would have garnered the same love and respect Elizabeth did.
Having not been raised in England, it’s difficult for me to understand how one diminutive woman could’ve maintained such an iconic status for seven decades. America has never had anything like Elizabeth. Her 70 years on the throne is more than one-quarter of the entirety of America’s history as an independent nation.
The Dodgers were still in Brooklyn and the Giants in New York when Elizabeth became Queen. The Korean War was still tearing the peninsula apart. Televisions in American homes were black-and-white with tiny screens. They were also cumbersome and quite rare; they’d yet to assume their holy status in the average American home.
She ascended to the throne during a historical moment when England confronted the reality of no longer being a country of empire. Where once it had been true that the sun never set on the British Empire, now the sun appeared to be setting on England altogether. A World Cup soccer trophy in 1966 made Brits forget their problems for a while, but it wasn’t long before England seemed to be once again coming apart at the seams.
I remember traveling outside London into the British Midlands in the mid-80s and being struck by how depressed and downtrodden the country seemed. It was as if the entire country was on the dole. Whole towns and regions lost mining and manufacturing industries to overseas competition, and nothing arrived to replace those failed commercial enterprises.
Margaret Thatcher came along and seemed determined to remake the country without acknowledging the suffering of the British people. Then, as she pushed England closer to bankruptcy, the Falklands War fell into her lap. The resulting bump in patriotism and popularity the victory over Argentina created helped Thatcher to overcome, at least for a moment, her reputation as “The Iron Maiden.”
During these times, Queen Elizabeth was a spectator. Though she carried on with her duties as Queen, there was little she could do save for trying to cheer people up and asking them to hold on. But, eventually, things did improve. As the ’90s arrived and England bought into the new information economy, the country recognized that its future would be very different from its past. England’s future prosperity wouldn’t and couldn’t lie in mining and manufacturing. Instead, it would be in technology and information.
Elizabeth was the last head of state connected to the world as it was during WWII. She reigned over the final stages of the death of the British empire. She oversaw the near-death of England and then the rebirth of the country. At the same time, historians may debate how much credit/blame she deserves; the fact remains that she was the one constant connecting England’s Greatest Generation to the Information Revolution.
Without her steadying influence, it isn’t easy to know what will become of England now and in the future. The one sure thing is that it’s going to take some time to get used to hearing “Long Live The King!”
I can’t begin to imagine what King Charles III’s reign will be like, only that it won’t be 70 years. He may be Elizabeth’s son, but he’s certainly not her equal. But, then again, who could be?
There will be a time in the future to debate the future of the monarchy. I wish my British friends well, and I hope the best for them now and in the future. While I can’t begin to understand the magnitude of their loss, I know the death of their Queen is significant and heart-wrenching.
She was, as I heard MSNBC’s Mike Barnacle say this morning, “term-limited by God.”
My condolences.