https://amgreatness.com/2023/05/06/an-americans-view-of-the-coronation/
The coronation of King Charles III was a stirring spectacle. I watched only a few of the more elaborate bits—some climactic moments in Westminster Abbey, some of the procession up the soldier-lined Mall in that nifty golden carriage, the King’s recognition of the troops assembled in the garden behind Buck House.
As an Anglophile, I appreciated the pageantry. No one does it better than the Brits. They manage to make ostentation tasteful and regal display humane and welcoming. It’s impressive without being forbidding. I am an American democrat of Madisonian inclination, but I harbor fond feelings about the British monarchy. I enjoy the ceremony and heartily approve of this affirmation of “the rich tapestry of our island story.”
Nevertheless, I came away with an impression of something bittersweet, not to say melancholy. As a performance, the coronation was thrilling. As a reality? I am not so sure. I fear there was something posthumous about the production.
To date, Charles has acted with greater dignity and discretion than I would have predicted. His Christmas address to the nation was pitch-perfect. And he seems to be soft-pedaling some of his woke enthusiasms about “climate change” and the like. All that augurs well for the future of his reign—if “reign” is the correct word for the ceremonial bureaucracy of a man who assumed the throne at the end of his 73rd year.
The Crown’s real estate is intact. So are the family jewels and haberdashery (the ermine fringed robes that he and Queen Camilla modeled were especially striking).
But that may be the extent of his domain. Perhaps one should resist the temptation to peek behind the curtain. The English essayist Walter Bagehot, writing in the 1870s, was right. “Above all things our royalty is to be reverenced,” Bagehot wrote, “and if you begin to poke about it, you cannot reverence it. . . . Its mystery is its life. We must not let in daylight upon magic.”