The Coronation : Reflections and Ruminations I

Having watched the Coronation on BBC, re-viewed some of it, thought about it and read some of the plethora of available online commentary I will try to set out my reactions in a series of posts over coming days.

Something of my sense about the event is to be found in an article by Tim Stanley in the Daily Telegraph which can be seen at The Coronation was a triumph of progressive traditionalism – a true blend of ancient and modern

I will just add that as a former Anglo-Catholic he should know better than to claim that Anglicans believe in Transubstantiation. Some do ( I did ) but the doctrine of the Real Presence is vaguer, and the Thirty Nine Articles clearly reject it.

A German friend who teaches English and History together in Stuttgart wrote to his English contacts asking us to set out our reactions to the Coronation to provide material for his students to discuss. Here is what I wrote in reply on Sunday:

As a staunch monarchist and a historian interested in the history of the Crown I think the Coronation went very well. It was at times genuinely emotional. Given that there were some minor adaptations due to the age of the King and Queen and the aim of seeking to be inclusive it was different from 1953. However all coronations vary one to another due to circumstances of individual monarchs and the times when they are held. After some disturbing rumours in the press early on about attempts to ‘modernise’ the ceremony it was a relief that what we saw was in essence and largely in substance what was done 1050 years ago at Bath for King Eadgar, and the rite is probably fifty years  older than that. Personally I wish some details had been more like 1937 or 1953, but what we saw was a living tradition, not a historical re-enactment or stage production. It evoked much of our collective past as a people and nation. Too much criticism before such events from a vocal but tiresome minority is swept away on the day by the enthusiasm of a country that keeps its national pride quiet until an occasion like this allows us to celebrate - and then the British stiff upper lip falls back into place!

I will add that I have long admired the King as a man, not just as Prince and now King. I also have great respect and regard for the Queen. who strikes me as a superb help to him, and I imagine would be jolly good fun to meet. I have once met the King ( when he was Prince of Wales ). Though it was only a handshake in a line of people I was struck by the intelligence and character in his face. That was long before his first marriage.

He is also fortunate in the new Prince and Princess of Wales and their family who acquitted themselves very well yesterday.

So I was happy yesterday and today to drink several glasses to His Majesty!

I then added a further note:

I am watching the Coronation concert from Windsor. Here we have a celebration for an institution that is more than 1200 years old headed by a man in his seventy fifth year following a medieval coronation rite yesterday, that is full of the latest technical wizardry and contemporary pop culture that stresses the commitment of the King and the institution to the future of the planet - that is a living and vital tradition which this country, the Commonwealth and the wider world need to pay heed to.

That summarised my feelings last weekend and provides an introduction or background to what I will say in my forthcoming posts. Some of the points I want to make in them might appear trifling but I think them worth making. Writing that I realise that the overall picture of the Coronation I have is very much an assemblage of smaller scenes, whereas my perception of 1953 is a more coherent and grand one. That points to a significant difference between the two occasions.

More so even than in 1953 we have film - all in colour - of the processions and ceremonies as well of course as the formal photography at the Palace afterwards - not quite the quality of Cecil Beaton perhaps but still striking images.

Since 1953 the development of television has allowed more intimate coverage than was possible then, but the result tends to diminish the scale and setting. Thus there was, I think, as a result less sense of grandeur. For those watching television the medium inevitably filters and forms our impressions, and one curious one was that the Abbey seemed smaller, yet somehow crowded, whilst in fact only holding about a quarter of those present in 1953.

To be continued