Monarchy
New Zealand
The Journal of The Monarchist League of New Zealand Incorporated
ISSN 1174-8435
Volume 8 Issue 3 August 2003
The Monarchist League of
New Zealand, Inc.
Patron: Hon Sir Peter Tapsell, KNZM MBE MBChB FRCSEd FRCS
The Secretary, 72F Ladies Mile, Remuera,
Auckland 1005, New Zealand
Website URL: http://www.geocities.com/Capitolhill/Parliament/7802
Council:
Chairman: Noel Cox, Esq., LLM(Hons) PhD GradDipTertTchg
Secretary: Chris Barradale, Esq.
Treasurer: Stephen Brewster, Esq., MBA BCA CA
Councillors:
Nicholas Albrecht, Esq., MA(Hons)
Roger Barnes, Esq., FHSNZ
John Cox, Esq., LLB MNZTA
Mrs Jean Jackson, BSc
Neville Johnson, Esq.
Ian Madden, Esq., MA LLB FSA(Scot)
Robert Mann, Esq., MSc PhD
Carl Nordstrand, Esq.
Professor Peter Spiller, BA LLB PhD LLM MPhil PhD AAMINZ
League Officers:
Legal Adviser: Noel Cox, Esq., LLM(Hons) PhD GradDipTertTchg
Librarian and Archivist: Noel Cox, Esq., LLM(Hons) PhD GradDipTertTchg
Provincial Representative, Wellington: Mathew Norman, Esq., BA
Provincial Representative, Manawatu-Horowhenua: Kevin Couling de St Sauveur, Esq.
Provincial Representative, Waikato: Professor Peter Spiller, BA LLB PhD LLM MPhil PhD AAMINZ
Editor, Monarchy New Zealand: Noel Cox, Esq., LLM(Hons) PhD GradDipTertTchg
Assistant Editor and Advertising Manager, Monarchy New Zealand: John Cox, Esq., LLB MNZTA
Honorary Chaplain: Revd Gerald Hadlow, LTh
Webmaster: Noel Cox, Esq., LLM(Hons) PhD GradDipTertTchg
Monarchy New Zealand is published by The Monarchist League of New Zealand Inc. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the policy of The Monarchist League of New Zealand. Correspondence should be addressed to the Editor, Monarchy New Zealand, 123 Stanley Road, Glenfield, Auckland 1310, New Zealand. Tel: +64 9 444-7687; Fax: +64 9 444-7397; E-mail: noel.cox@xtra.co.nz
Editorial
In the fifty years since the coronation of Her Majesty The Queen there have been enormous changes, both to the monarchy and to the political and social life of New Zealand and the Commonwealth. It may perhaps be instructive to look at what the coronation involved, and what it meant. In this we may perhaps find some indications of its importance, and guidance for the future.
Coronations were adopted relatively early in England, largely because England was unified at a time when most European countries were in state of flux. With the recovery of England from the Vikings by the warrior kings of Wessex, those kings were able to impose effective control beyond their own traditional kingdom, and to claim overlordship even as far as Wales, Strathclyde and beyond. King Edgar’s fourth law-code avowedly intended to embrace "all who inhabit these islands", and at his coronation amid the Roman buildings of Bath in 973, he received the submission of a number of sub-kings. Edgar styled himself, perhaps somewhat grandiosely, Albionis Imperator Augustus – which might be rendered as Emperor of Britain.
Continuing the deliberate emulation of Rome, King Edgar’s coronation consciously echoed those of Charlemagne and Byzantium. It owed more to the Roman imperial tradition than it did to the Germanic tradition of the king as tribal leader. It was the first recorded English coronation (although almost certainly not the first actually held), and was the model which all subsequent coronations have followed.
For Byzantine rulers the coronation was of great political significance. Sixth century theorists focused on the election and the consent as crucial elements in imperial inauguration. This was the divine choice through officials, senators and people (a belief paralleled in Saxon and later royal theory).
As translated to England, the coronation incorporated and perpetuated features which put limits and conditions on the king – as well as emphasised his authority and regal status. They stressed the idea that the king was a servant of God and the Church, and had assumed important Christian duties, and it also called loyalty to the king’s person and to the office. The claimant had been put in possession of the Crown, throne, and kingdom as securely and as publicly as the wit of man could devise.
The new king’s power had been legitimised. He was required to swear that he would ensure that the Church of God and the whole Christian people within his dominions would keep true peace. Further, he swore that he would forbid impure and wrongful acts to men of every degree, and that he would order that justice and mercy should be observed in all legal judgments.
The coronation oath, central to this theory, remains a central element of the coronation, along with the recognition, the anointing, the investiture, enthronement, and homage. Each of these reflects a different aspect of the royal office, its originally quasi-elective nature (the recognition), its sacred (the anointing), and political nature (investiture and enthronement), as well as the allegiance owed to the king (homage).
In the last years of the life of Queen Elizabeth I, Father Robert Parsons believed that it was the "coronation and admission that maketh a perfect and true king". The succession was based on consent and acceptance, rather than purely hereditary. His contemporary Peter Wentworth maintained however that a coronation was a declaration rather than a creation of right. Wentworth’s view was upheld by the courts in Calvin’s Case (1608), when Sir Edward Coke, Lord Chief Justice of the Court of Common Pleas, held that a coronation, as a consequence of hereditary succession, was not a legal necessity.
Doubtless this reflected the then contemporary legal position. But, recalling the dual nature of Byzantine coronations, and the history of the early English monarchy, there was more to the coronation than merely "a royal ornament and solemnisation of the royal descent" (as Coke described it).
After 1685 the constitutional and social significance of the coronation went into decline, as the kingship itself was surer – and perhaps as the place of religion in the state declined. The coronation ceremonial itself was treated in cavalier fashion in the 1700s and 1800s in particular.
Coronations in Hanoverian times lacked the attention to detail that characterised those of earlier periods, when the political role of the coronation – and its religious nature – was better understood, and when the thoroughness of one’s coronation might prove instrumental in shoring up a shaky claim to the throne. The coronation of William IV was a mean affair; that of Victoria, only marginally better. By the time of Victoria’s coronation, however, there were signs of a desire for the revival of a ceremony of some splendour. Twentieth century coronations were models of how such events should be conducted.
Much of twenty-first century thought is critical of ceremonial, opposed to religious symbolism or beliefs, and hostile to tradition. What then is the future of a service which calls down God’s blessing on a king, and which involves ancient rites and ceremonies? The danger is that the Government of the day would simply decide that such an extravagance was unnecessary. But is it so costly? The inauguration of an American president is considerably more expensive, and occurs every four years, whereas a coronation is, by definition, once a generation.
The best surety that the coronation will survive in a suitable form is to emphasise that, despite strict legal principle, a coronation – and one with some splendour – is constitutionally and politically necessary. Every king and queen has been crowned for over a thousand years (except those who died or abdicated too soon to be crowned). But the precedent of a thousand years of history doesn’t necessarily mean that coronations should continue in their traditional form. They have been discontinued in some European countries, but none of these had the same long tradition of coronations.
The coronation publicly declares, as no other ceremony could, the essential nature of monarchy – the lifelong dedication of an individual to the service of the nation, in the face of God and people, and the offering of fealty and loyalty in return for the royal undertaking. This is (in the form used in 1953) to "solemnly promise and swear to govern the people of this United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the other realms and territories, according to the statutes in Parliament agreed on, and the respective laws and customs of the same".
Many elements in the coronation help us understand what it means to be the Sovereign, and which make it abundantly clear that any authority the Queen has is derived from God, and that in all things she is His servant. That it not to diminish the role of the people, for though the Sovereign is the elect of God, she is approved by the people. There is also no doubt that The Queen takes her coronation oath seriously.
Doubtless there will be changes in the next coronation, as there were in 1953. The constitutional position of the realms of the Queen mean that separate coronations could (or perhaps should) be held in each realm. But this is probably unrealistic – and Scottish coronations ended in 1633 for similar practical reasons. What is more likely is an increase in the involvement of Commonwealth representatives.
It would be a pity if King Charles III were saddled with a "half-crownation", as William IV was, or none at all. A coronation is something which ought to be done well. Over one thousand years of experience of coronations at Westminster Abbey must count for something, even if for ministers and bureaucrats only as a tourist attraction. For those of us with an appreciation of history, and a deeper understanding of the monarchy, a coronation is a time of re-dedication.
Dr Noel Cox
Editor
News in Brief
Countess of Wessex expecting a child
In May Buckingham Palace announced that HRH The Countess of Wessex was expecting a child. The child is due in December, and will be the first child of the Earl and Countess.
His Royal Highness The Prince Edward was created Earl of Wessex and Viscount Severn on the day of his wedding to Miss Sophie Rhys-Jones in 1999.
It was also announced in 1999 that Prince Edward would be created Duke of Edinburgh when that title reverts to the Crown, to reflect his continuation of the present Duke’s work for the Duke of Edinburgh’s Awards.
Although it is unusual that the prince should have to wait for a dukedom in this way, it is fortunate that Sophie was not left with the inelegant style of Princess Edward.
Two aspects of the 1999 announcement however were unusual. Firstly, that the prince would be created Duke of Edinburgh upon the title reverting to the Crown. Since this must occur upon the succession of the Prince of Wales – assuming the death of the present Duke of Edinburgh before that of Her Majesty – there could well be a wait of several decades. Why not simply create him a duke upon marriage, as is customary?
Secondly, it was stated that any children born to the couple would not be given the royal style and title of prince/princess and His/Her Royal Highness. This is quite unprecedented.
The practice on the Continent is for all members of a royal family to be princes or princesses. For example, in Belgium, all are styled HRH Prince/Princess of Belgium including (since 1991) descendants of the King in the female line.
In Denmark, the children of the Sovereign and children of the heir are all HRH Prince/Princess. Other more distant relatives are HH Prince/Princess, and those who contract "unequal" morganatic marriages (a practice unknown in the more democratic British practice, but common on the Continent) are styled counts of Rosenborg.
In Liechtenstein and Monaco all royal family members are His/Her Serene Highness Prince/Princess. In Luxembourg the children of the Sovereign are HRH Prince/Princess of Luxembourg, Bourbon-Parma and Nassau. More distant descendants of the Grand Dukes are all styled His/Her Grand Ducal Highness Prince/Princess.
In the Netherlands all are HRH Prince/Princess of the Netherlands, Prince/Princess of Orange-Nassau, and for the descendants of the present Queen, also Jonkheer/Jonkvrouw van Amsberg. In Norway and Sweden all are styled HRH Prince/Princess, unless they have contracted civil marriages, in which case they lose the royal title.
In Spain the children of the Sovereign, and the children of the heir are all HRH Infante/Infanta. The rest of the royal family have no legal style, though are commonly called Prince/Princess.
In the United Kingdom such precedents are not followed. Indeed, prince is not a title of great antiquity, the custom of giving the courtesy title to all male descendants of the Sovereign being foreign to English traditions. It was not until King Henry VII’s reign that sons begin to be styled "prince". As late as the time of King Charles II the daughters of the duke of York (later King James II) were called Lady Mary and Lady Anne.
The daughters of Queen Anne were also called Ladies. Even later there were throwbacks to the earlier custom – Princess Augusta, eldest daughter of Frederick Lewis Prince of Wales (father of King George III), was also styled Lady Augusta.
Under the influence of Hanoverian practice, from 1714 to 1917 all descendants of the Sovereign in the male line were princes. The children of the Sovereign, and children of the Sovereign’s sons, were also Royal Highnesses, other family members more simply Highnesses.
Since 1917 the children of the Sovereign, the children of sons of the Sovereign, and the eldest living son of the eldest son of Prince of Wales, have been HRH Prince/Princesses of Great Britain and (now Northern) Ireland. Great grandchildren in the male line use the style and title of children of dukes – that is, as Lord/Lady.
The children of the Duke of York are Princesses and Royal Highnesses. Now it seems that the child of the Earl and Countess of Wessex due to be born in December will be simply (for example) the Honourable Charles Mountbatten-Windsor, or Lady Anne Mountbatten-Windsor. If a son, he would also bear the courtesy title of Viscount Severn, this being the Prince Edward's secondary title.
Does it matter that the children of the Earl and Countess of Wessex would lack royal titles? These children will be treated by the public as members of the royal family, whatever they are called. It is more satisfactory for all concerned if they have some title to distinguish them as such.
Their cousins, the Yorks, are princesses. This would leave the Wessex’s as "second-class" family members.
The almost universal practice in monarchies – other than the United Kingdom – has all the members of the family, at least in the male line, being styled prince/princess.
A belief in "modernising" – or more accurately reducing – the monarchy cannot justify a change that denies the Wessex children what might be seen as their entitlement.
It might also be observed that the proposed change requires a new royal warrant to supersede or modify that currently in existence. It is to be expected that the Governments of Her Majesty’s realms will be consulted about this proposal, since it affects them. As well as being constitutionally appropriate, this step might also help avoid some of the errors contained in past royal instruments of this nature.
In particular, the press release of 19th June 1999 suggested that any children borne to the Earl and Countess of Wessex could be styled Prince or Princess, without the appellation Royal Highness. Although this is probably not the intention (though it is possible to be a Prince or Princess without being a royal highness), it is reminiscent of the doubts, settled only after ten years, about whether or not the Duke of Edinburgh was a Prince as well as a Royal Highness. It is regrettable that such matters are treated in such a confused and apparently inconsistent and arbitrary manner.
Queen’s Counsel axed?
As anticipated, the new Lawyers and Conveyancers Bill, introduced into Parliament on 24th June, proposes renaming Queen’s Counsel "Senior Counsel". The Hon Phil Goff, MP, Minister of Justice, in describing the Bill, said that the classes of people eligible to be appointed to the position would be expanded to include all litigators, not simply those at the separate Bar (so solicitors could become SCs), and that there would be greater transparency in the appointment process. Both of these changes would bring the office into line with current arrangements in the United Kingdom for QCs.
However, no reason was given for renaming the office. It might be argued that the name isn’t important, but if that were so, then why is it being changed? It would appear to be another attempt to remove a symbol of the link with the Crown.
"QC" is a well-known and understood brand of excellence; "SC" would be much less respected, as the experience of several Australian states has shown.
We might be particularly concerned at the wording of clause 106(1):
As from the commencement of this section, –
The office is not being renamed so much as banned! – notwithstanding that current QCs are allowed to keep their titles if they wish to do so. This appears to be a determined effort to remove the Queen’s Counsel "root and branch". This is clearly also an attempt to prevent future Governments from reviving the appointment without new legislation.
This type of reform has no place in the legal profession, which should be – and seen to be – non-political. It should be asked whether The Queen has given her consent to the limitation of her prerogative in this respect – or whether Her Majesty had even been consulted.
Coronation service in Wellington
On Wednesday 28th May 2003, I was invited as a guest by the Visits and Ceremonial Office at Parliament to represent the Royal Society of St George at the Service of Celebration and Thanksgiving for the Occasion of the 50th Anniversary of the Proclamation of "The Queen of New Zealand" and the Coronation of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.
The Service was held at the Wellington Cathedral of St Paul at 12.30pm. It was well attended with a full Cathedral. The Service started with the RNZAF fanfare for the arrival of HE The Governor-General of New Zealand, the Hon Dame Silvia Cartwright, PCNZM DBE, who not only attended, but gave the Reading of 1 Peter 2:13.
Following the arrival of the Governor-General, there was a parade of Colours by the RNZN, RNZAF and NZ Army, lead into the Cathedral to a slow march that was well executed. Other dignities arrived including the Rt Reverend Dr Thomas Brown, Bishop of Wellington, His Eminence Thomas, Cardinal Williams, ONZM, Major John Townsend of the Salvation Army, actress Miranda Harcourt, ONZM, all whom gave readings. Many prayers were said including The Blessing given by the Rt Reverend Dr Thomas Brown, Bishop of Wellington.
There were many Navy, Air Force, Army and Police Officers present, all resplendent in their uniforms and lots of military medals. There were some American officers there too. Quite a few people were wearing their traditional medals like the KCMG, CVO, MBE, OBE, QSM etc ….. which was so nice to see, and those who have the NZ Order of Merit, which one has to say looks rather unimpressive compared to the British Orders.
The event was well organised by New Zealand Herald of Arms Extraordinary to The Queen, Mr Phillip O’Shea, LVO, who also read the Preamble to the Royal Titles Act 1974. I was surprised that New Zealand Herald did not wear a Tabard or an Insignia of Office. The music included Handel’s Zadok the Priest, Jerusalem, God Defend New Zealand, and God Save The Queen. The Wellington Cathedral Choir also performed some items. The Service concluded at 1.30pm.
Kevin Couling
Coronation coins and stamps
The anniversaries of The Queen’s Accession and Coronation have been marked by the issue of special commemorative coins.
Collector coins, which are issued as legal tender – but do not circulate – are only available from New Zealand Post’s Stamps Business.
The ‘Coronation coin’ was inspired by the Queen’s Coronation gown, with its embroidered floral symbols of the United Kingdom and the countries of the Commonwealth. It displays a representation of St Edward’s Crown (the Coronation crown) between a stylised sprig of roses, thistles, shamrocks and the New Zealand fern.
The coin is cast in sterling silver with 22-carat gold highlights, and is also available with a numismatic first day cover combining the coin with the 2003 Queen Elizabeth II – 50th Anniversary of the Coronation stamp issue.
Coin Specifications:
Denomination: $5.00
Finish and Composition: Frosted proof, Sterling 0.925 silver with the Queen’s portrait highlighted in 22 carat gold
Weight: 28.28gms, diameter: 38.61mm, obverse Design: Ian Rank-Broadley, England. Reverse Design: Robert Lowe. Issue Limit: Worldwide maximum of 25,000. Mint: Royal Mint
The Queen’s Birthday Honours List
The principal awards in this year’s Queen’s Birthday Honours List include two new Companions of the Order of New Zealand (ONZ). These were the Rt Hon David Lange, as an additional Companion, and Dr William Pickering, an honorary Companion.
The honours list also included four new Distinguished Companions of the New Zealand Order of Merit (DCNZM) – Eion Edgar, Mrs Alison Roxburgh, Archie Taiaroa, and Mrs Robin White.
The 12 Companions (CNZM) included retired High Court Judge the Hon Anthony Ellis, playwright Roger Hall, Auckland University of Technology Vice-Chancellor, Dr John Hinchcliff, and broadcaster Paul Holmes. The 28 Officers (ONZN) included opera singer Patrick Power, and Law Commissioner and Territorial Force Brigadier Timothy Brewer. There were also 53 Members of the New Zealand Order of Merit (MNZM) appointed, including MP Warren Kyd.
The awards of the Queen’s Service Order included six QSO for Community Service, and 10 QSO for Public Service. There were also 29 Queen Service Medals (Community Service) and 39 QSM (Public Service).
Overseas, The Queen’s Birthday Honours lists included Sir Charles Mackerras (a CH), and actress Helen Mirren, environmentalist Jane Goodall, and Anita Roddick, founder of The Body Shop (all made DBEs). Actor Roger Moore became a KBE for his services to international goodwill.
Royal Diary
Prince’s stamps and coin
Portraits of HRH Prince William appeared on a special set of British stamps issued to mark his 21st birthday.
Four portraits of the prince were released four days before his birthday on 21st June.
The Royal Mail printed 20 million of the stamps and expects interest from around the world.
Three of the photographs used for the stamps were taken in September 2001, on the day Prince William began a course in art history at the University of St Andrews in Scotland.
The fourth was taken at Highgrove, when Prince William was 18.
The stamps have face values of between 28 pence and 68 pence.
The Royal Mint also issued its first special coin of William – an Alderney £5 crown – which went on sale on the prince’s birthday.
The coin will be available for less than four months, with the last day of sale 30th September.
Prince Harry leaves Eton
HRH Prince Harry of Wales has left Eton. It is believed that he will enter the army after a year’s break. His choice of career is not unexpected, given his success in the Eton cadet force.
On 27th May Prince Harry, as Parade Commander, took command of a 48-strong Guard of Honour on College Field, Eton, for the annual Combined Cadet Force Tattoo. The parade was inspected by Brigadier James Balfour, Director of Infantry, in the presence of HRH The Prince of Wales, and 500 guests, including Tiggy Pettifer, former nanny to Prince Harry.
The Eton CCF dates from 1860, and is a volunteer corps 140-strong. Pupils may join in the 6th form. Prince Harry was promoted Cadet Officer (the highest cadet rank) 19th May 2003.
Prince William was also a member of the corps during his time at Eton, and received the Sword of Honour in 1999 as best first year cadet.
League News
Coronation Dinner and Service
The Monarchist League of New Zealand hosted a dinner in Auckland on 8th June to mark the 50th anniversary of the coronation. John Collinge, former High Commissioner to London, was guest speaker. Toasts to Her Majesty The Queen, and HRH The Prince of Wales were proposed by Hon Richard Prebble, MP, and Dr Robert Mann respectively.
Following after the official Wellington service, and one week after the dinner, the Cathedral of the Holy Trinity, Auckland, held a Service of Thanksgiving on 15th June.
About 400 people attended the special Evensong to mark the 50th anniversary of the Coronation. The preacher was the Rt Revd Peter Atkins, retired Assistant Bishop of Auckland.
The musical highlight presented was Sir Hubert Parry’s fine work ‘I Was Glad’ admirably sung by the cathedral choir under the direction of Peter de Bois.
Champagne and apéritifs were provided in what was a very pleasant social hour in the Monteith Centre, immediately after the service.
A copy of the Bishop’s sermon may be read on the Monarchist League website, and is also available from the Secretary.
Annual General Meeting
A new Council was elected at the Annual General Meeting of The Monarchist League of New Zealand Inc. on 18th May 2003.
Dr Noel Cox remains Chairman, and Stephen Brewster, Treasurer. Councillors re-elected were Nicholas Albrecht, Roger Barnes, John Cox, Neville Johnson, Ian Madden, Dr Robert Mann, and Professor Peter Spiller. Carl Nordstrand and Mrs Jean Jackson have joined the Council.
Merv Tilsley retired as Vice-Chairman, and Captain Chris Barradale, as Secretary. Captain Barradale however remains on the Council, and is acting Secretary pending the appointment of a permanent replacement.
In his annual report the Chairman reviewed the past year with respect both to royal events and the activities of the League. Particularly noteworthy were the Golden Jubilee events in May and June 2002. He also remarked on the failure of the national television broadcaster to show the jubilee events in London.
At a meeting of the Council following the AGM, Professor Peter Spiller was appointed Provincial Representative for the Waikato.
Overseas News
Floral replica
The Queen received a replica of her Coronation bouquet during the celebrations marking the 50th anniversary of her crowning.
The Worshipful Company of Gardeners, who presented the original bouquet in 1953, gave the Queen the same type of floral arrangement that they had done at the coronation.
The all-white bouquet was made up of orchids and lilies of the valley from England, stephanotis from Scotland, and carnations from Northern Ireland and the Isle of Man, with additional orchids from Wales.
In 1953 The Queen carried the bouquet on her journey to London’s Westminster Abbey to be crowned.
The replica was presented at Buckingham Palace following the 50th anniversary service at the Abbey.
During her return to the Palace after the commemorative service, the Queen, accompanied by the Duke of Edinburgh, unveiled a plaque marking an extension of the Jubilee Walkway, which commemorated last year’s Golden Jubilee.
Royal Poetry
The Queen’s poetic talents were displayed for the first time earlier in the year when the Castle of Mey, the Scottish home of the late Queen Mother, was opened to the public. A 16-line poem in the castle’s guest book, which The Queen wrote as a "thank you" after a three-day visit to The Queen Mother in 1987, was among the items on show.
A spokesman explained that the poem was relayed from the royal yacht Britannia after the Queen’s stay at the Highland retreat. Before HMY Britannia was decommissioned, there was a final tour of the Western Isles, before the Queen was taken to Aberdeen for her annual holiday at Balmoral. The yacht moored off Scrabster and the Queen met the Queen Mother for lunch at the Castle of Mey.
Professor John Kerrigan of the English literature department at the University of Cambridge, was reported as saying that the poem was "technically … as competent as anything by Bob Dylan". The poem is "a cheerful piece of doggerel", he said, "with an airy informality which does the author – so often thought grand – some credit". Poetry Society director Jules Mann was also pleased by the verse: "We often think poetry is something that happens in times of grief, but it’s lovely to hear someone is moved to write about a happy occasion."
The monarch’s literary contribution to the guest book was as follows:
Although we must leave you,
Fair Castle of Mey,
We shall never forget,
Nor could ever repay,
A meal of such splendor,
Repast of such zest,
It will take us to Sunday,
Just to digest.
To leafy Balmoral,
We are now on our way.
But our hearts will remain
At the Castle of Mey.
With your gardens and ranges,
And all your good cheer,
We will be back again soon
So roll on next year.
Royal visits
The Queen Mother 1966
Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother visited New Zealand 1st-14th February 1966. The Governor-General, Viscount Cobham, and the Prime Minister, Sir Keith Holyoake, received her. The Director of the Royal Tour was AG Harper, CVO CBE, Secretary of Internal Affairs.
The tour had a particular focus on the South Island. Her Majesty began the tour at Bluff. She visited Christchurch, Dunedin, Arrowtown, Queenstown, Alexandra, Roxburgh, Wanaka, Invercargill, and Clyde, amongst other towns and cities. The emphasis was primarily on children, and Her Majesty unveiled a children’s statue, by Sir Charles Wheeler, in Invercargill.
The Queen Mother subsequently travelled to Australia, where she saw the Prince of Wales at Geelong Church of England Grammar School.
Royal Residences past and present
Edinburgh Castle
Towering over the city of Edinburgh since at least the ninth century, the Castle has stood as a fortress, a royal palace, a treasury, a prison, and a barracks Each successive generation has extended, replaced or restored the stone legacy of its forebears.
The earliest settlement here has been dated to c.850 BC, and the first fortress on the site is said to have served the semi-mythical British King Mynyddog in AD 700. Much later, in the eleventh century, it was the fortified palace of King Malcolm Canmore. It was probably his son, David I, who built the tiny stone chapel to the memory of his mother, Queen Margaret, who died in 1093. This survives today as what is probably the oldest place of worship still in use in Scotland, and dates from c.1123.
The shape of the fortress as it is seen today dates from the fourteenth century when David II constructed a huge gatehouse on the southern end of the Castle’s stone fore-work (which for many years served as the royal residence) and greatly strengthened the vulnerable eastern approach. After his death here in 1371, Robert II and Robert III continued this work.
The Great Hall, now much restored, was begun in 1496 by James IV, and his successor James V added adjacent royal apartments on what today is known as Crown Square. This is where the Scottish crown, sceptre and sword of state are now displayed. James VI (James I of England), who was born in the Castle, lavished money on the royal apartments between 1584 and 1615, and these were later visited by his son Charles I in 1633.
Cromwell besieged the castle, eventually overcoming resistance but failing in his bid to plunder the Scottish regalia. After the Restoration, Charles II did much to repair and strengthen the defences and was the last reigning monarch to visit the Castle until George IV in 1822.
After the occupation of James VI and I, the Castle ceased to be a royal palace, becoming a military garrison. From the mid-eighteenth century it served as a barracks and military prison.
The object of controversial restorations during the nineteenth century, it continued in this military capacity until 1923, when the last troops marched away. Their long occupancy is recalled, however, by the regimental and United Services museums now situated here, by the Scottish National War Memorial, and by the Edinburgh Military Tattoo which takes place annually on the Castle esplanade.
Though the castle is open to the public, a ceremonial guard still mounts watch over the Castle’s gatehouse, and at one o’clock each weekday afternoon a gun (famously known as Mons Meg) is fired from the battlements as a time signal for ships’ captains in the port of Leith. The General Officer Commanding Scotland is traditionally the Governor of the Castle, and as such is a member of the Royal Household.
The most important rooms include the Crown Room, where the Crown Jewels of the Kingdom of Scotland are kept, and the St Margaret Chapel, referred to above. There is also a Banqueting Hall, and a Hospitality Suite for the use of official visitors.
Book Review
The Royal Yacht Britannia: The Official History, by Richard Johnstone-Bryden
Published 29th May 2003, by Conway Maritime, ISBN 0851-779379, 320 pp, £25 rrp. A special offer discount of £20 and £4.60 pp, is available until 31st December 2003, from Mail Order, Conway Maritime Press, The Chrysalis Building, Bramley Road, London W10 6SP, United Kingdom (quoting reference DM/03/02).
The origins of HM Yacht Britannia date back to 1938 yet, due to the war, it was not until 5th February 1952 that the Clydeside yard John Brown & Co Ltd was awarded the building contract. She was launched by HM The Queen on 16th April 1953 and commissioned on 7th January 1954.
During her 44 years of active service, Britannia steamed a total of 1,087,623 nautical miles, conducting 696 Royal visits overseas and 272 in British waters. Among her numerous deployments she sailed to the Antarctic in 1956/57. She was used to open the St Lawrence Seaway in 1959, and in January 1986, while on passage for the Queen’s State Visit to New Zealand and Australia, Britannia was diverted to assist in the evacuation of refugees from Aden.
In home waters around the United Kingdom she became the focus of national events such as The Queen’s 1977 Silver Jubilee Fleet Review, and in 1994 she embarked an unprecedented number of Kings, Queens and Presidents for the 50th commemorations of the D Day landings. Britannia’s final International period of royal duty came in 1997 when the Prince of Wales presided over the formal hand over of Hong Kong to China.
In addition to her official duties, Britannia provided the Royal Family with a place to relax, in particular on the annual cruise of the Western Isles. She was also increasingly used to promote British industry abroad, with considerable success. After abortive attempts to commission a successor yacht, Britannia was decommissioned on 11th December 1997. She was subsequently preserved in Leith.
This Official History of the Royal Yacht was prepared by Richard Johnstone-Bryden, and had the full support of Her Majesty the Queen and HRH The Duke of Edinburgh. As part of his research the author has interviewed a cross section of those involved in the story of this great ship, from members of the Royal Family through to junior Royal Yachtsmen, as well as those who built her and those involved in her preservation. Many of the photographs have been made available by the Ministry of Defence and Royal Archives, including a number of informal photographs of the Royal Family.
Letter to the Editor
Sir,
John Cox’s hoity-toity contempt for republicans in his reply to Mathew Norman’s "Monarchist Avante Garde", epitomises the lack of understanding so rife within the League.
So Superior we are that the retarded assertions and baseless generalisations raised by republicans risk going unchallenged. The risk of the monarchy disappearing through apathy and ignorance is hardly "slight" as John asserts, and such a statement is further testimony to the redundance of an organisation mired in the sentiments of another century.
Public debate of the monarchy is unavoidable. What monarchists must decide is whether it is they or the republicans who fire the first salvo and have the last laugh. To be an organic, evolving institution as John claims, the monarchy needs reform. To dismiss removal of male primogeniture and religious discrimination is to ignore some of the most fundamental principles of human rights. Failure to be at the forefront of such positive change justifies the image of monarchists as eccentric, middle-class biscuit-tin collectors.
The league never fails to disappoint in its dismissal of the threats to the monarchy, its irrelevant and frankly embarrassing publications, and its refusal to seriously consider valid criticisms from its members. Relying on a dogmatic conservatism and a 30 second sound-bite of Prince Edwards’s marriage will not save the monarchy. A league which will grasp the bull by the horns, tackle the real issues and combat the geriatricification of its members, can at least move forward knowing the challenges it faces.
Conal McPhillips