I cannot hide my sadness, tears, or fear. The last of an old kind of Englishman had sadly been lost. A queen who through the most revolutionary periods in this nation’s history, has remained resilient and proud of what she represented. The greatest kind of life! A life of service and devotion to our nation. Perhaps the last? One cannot be sure. For what she represented is often now hidden and hushed: swept under the rug and only whispered between those trusting one another. Queen Elizabeth II was a proud Briton. Unapologetic for what she represented, which was a steadfast nation of hope, justice, enlightenment, discovery, thought, duty and fairness. With her tragic passing, this has been lost. Perhaps I exaggerate? After all, many wish to continue this legacy. Alas! They are few in number.
She was, after all, the monarchy. She was very much the institution itself. She – the institution – united the present and the past. She united the Britain that was and the Britain that is. Through her strength and devotion, she ensured the country was connected across the generations with those who saw Britain as mighty and good. It was through her that the last embers of patriotism were allowed to be shown without being harassed or hissed at by others. It is without her, that we make our first steps in a new country. The language is English, and many of Britain’s greatest achievements remain standing in stone, the names of the hamlets and the cities are the same, but the country feels different already. Against so much ill-will, she stood in defiance and was immovable.
Do not forget, when she came to the throne, the Prime Minister was Winston Churchill! A name now frowned upon. Yet, for those who know, a name to be venerated as long as our memories, both collective and individual, allow us. Let us never forget hers!
Charles III will ascend the throne and become King. Our only role now is to ensure the monarchy remains in these, no doubt, tumultuous and turbulent years ahead and is passed to William for future generations to enjoy. That is how we honour that wonderful, wonderful woman!
May she rest in peace, for she truly deserves peace!
I can only direct you to the words of T.S. Eliot for comfort. A poet whom she no doubt, knew when he was alive, and whom she no doubt often read like many of us in uncertain times:
In my beginning is my end. In succession
Houses rise and fall, crumble, are extended,
Are removed, destroyed, restored, or in their place
Is an open field, or a factory, or a by-pass.
Old stone to new building, old timber to new fires,
Old fires to ashes, and ashes to the earth Which is already flesh, fur and faeces,
Bone of man and beast, cornstalk and leaf.
Houses live and die: there is a time for building
And a time for living and for generation
And a time for the wind to break the loosened pane And to shake the wainscot where the field-mouse trots
And to shake the tattered arras woven with a silent motto.
…
And what there is to conquer
By strength and submission, has already been discovered
Once or twice, or several times, by men whom one cannot hope
To emulate—but there is no competition—
There is only the fight to recover what has been lost
And found and lost again and again: and now, under conditions
That seem unpropitious. But perhaps neither gain nor loss.
For us, there is only the trying. The rest is not our business.
Tonight the Heralds will call
The Queen is dead! Long Live the King!
Well said!
Prince Philp was a TS Eliot aficionado, overlooked in favour of “reports” about his brusque, terse manner.
The King’s father wrote several notable books, and his speeches and jokes have been collected and published. I did some research work for someone who knew him along with the actor David Niven as a “drinking” companion, and understand that he was not as “brusque” as he seemed when he was a walkabout partner to his Wife.
Very saddenned by the death of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, as I was at the death of Prince Phillip. I think King Charles will make a good King and I pray that he does, although of course he is very much wrong in his views on the fallaceous global warming come climate change scam. King Charles the Third is as it should be, and King William the Fifth is for long into the future, at the death of King Charles, which is as it should be, and I’m a loyal constitutional monachist from North Queensland, born and bred as my father was before me, and millions more of my compatriots are, if the last vote on a so called “republic” here is anything to go by.
I’m British working class, I didn’t need the royals to defend me, not they require me to defend them. It is unwritten and unnecessary. It goes without saying.
You can’t kill an idea.
This we will maintain.
Why do so many royalists overlook the legacy of Elizabeth?
The native people of the island are now below 80% of the population and set to become a minority in the next 40 years. The institutions grovel to minorities at the expense of the native people and actively work against us.
The late Queen and other royals did and said nothing to defend the country or native people.
I cannot fathom why so many still respect the royals.
@ Richard Madden
The Queen and her Successor are required to go along with these political “institutions”. We the People are not, and it is our responsibility to change the political order. See however the hints in “A Question of Balance” by the King’s father, not to mention Professor Hamid Dabashi, “The priceless racism of the Duke of Edinburgh,” Al Jazeera, 13 August 2017, online.
In this centenary year of Philip Larkin’s, a bearer of the Queen’s Medal for Poetry, the poet summoned this sentiment 45 years ago to celebrate HMQ’s Jubilee:
‘1952 – 1977’
In times when nothing stood,
But worsened, or grew strange,
There was one constant good:
She did not change.
Vale The Second Elizabethan Age.
God Save the King! says this rural New South Welshman.
They went after Churchill and within my lifetime they will go after the Queen. The Anti-monarchist Republic set have been waiting for this day for decades. They daren’t touch the Queen while she was alive because they knew she is, was and will always be rightly adored by the vast majority of the British people.
Charles is a different matter and it is only a question of time before the fake tears of the main stream media dry up and they show their true colours and begin their long waited for assault on the Monarchy and with it the entire constitutional basis of life in the UK.
Her qualities of compassion, duty and fairness made her and her subjects great but they are the exact qualities that are being used now against the British people who are too polite, too tolerant and too compassionate to see or do anything about the damage that has been done to this once great nation by the woke-socialist alliance who now openly despise this country, its history and its people.
She was wonderful and after the horrors of WW2 was exactly the type of Monarch a bruised and battered nation needed but we do not need another Monarch like her.
What we need is a fighter who will defend the faith and stand up for his true subjects. The best play Charles could make if he cares more about the future of the Monarchy rather than his own as King would be to pack up the Eco-friendly Duchy biscuit bandwagon, abdicate now and allow William to become King.
Like it of not the fact is that William sits a whole lot better with the British people and it is he who has the best chance of keeping the Monarchy relevant to the British public and denying the anti-Monarchists their Republic dream.
If neither of them can do that then they are no longer fit for purpose and the whole lot of them should just pack their bags and leave and allow something or someone else to emerge as the true representative and embodiment of the British people and perform the constitutional function of acting as a check against the rampant woke-socialist excesses of the State.
God Save the King indeed – he’s gonna need all the help he can get!
I’m a republican for two reasons.
The first is the succession based on birth. This can work with the right person but can be a disaster if the individual isn’t fit to hold office.
The second reason – the royals have been parasitic and sponged for themselves whilst presiding over the replacement of the native people of this country. We are on course to fall below 50% of the population in the middle of the century. No royal has ever done or said anything about the demise of the native people.
I do not and never will support the royal spongers.
Yeah, let’s have a republic and vote for a president. The presidents that Americans elect are of such exemplary character, and you can’t beat the way elected presidents work as a unifying force that brings everyone together. Yeah, right.
Another layer of ghastly politicians: ex or failed prime ministers, usually the same, party political apparatchiks, smirking faces appealing to the Highest, or lowest, common denominator, to be sent packing when the nation’s mood swings, every one depending on the party they represent and, almost certainly the result of a general election re-run. Blair, Brown, Cameron, May, Johnson and doubtless Who representing the Illiberal Dictators.
We have emasculated the royal family so that they are just figureheads in political life. You and others would have it no other way, neither would I. However having removed all power from them you cannot then lament their powerless.
Richard, you are right. I avoided this site after the Queen’s death because I didn’t want to read all these “tributes”. I’m a republican – I’d rather have had an elected head of state to provide scrutiny to the government.
Public images of “Charles” and “William” have been concocted to some degree by the media; for example, the so-called conservative “Daily Mail” has sniped at the former continually – even before Diana’s divorce. It is no good sneering at his commercial ventures and then calling him a financial parasite. William is ostensibly “woker” than his father and has a lot to learn. The Commonwealth as a notional “entity” will become a problem, not a solution for anything.
God Save Our Gracious King from the “Woke” peril and the “Commonwealth” pitfalls!
Dear Ashton: As a citizen of a Commonwealth nation – not Papua New Guiana – I think you have me confused with someone who gives a damn what you think.
@ johnhenry
I only care about what others think of our respective arguments and manners.
David, I can’t actually understand who you refer to in mentioning our “respective arguments and manners”, but if you’re comparing the behaviour of Englishmen born and bred to that of Commonwealth people, I beg to differ, unless you mean Aussies specifically.
I’m gobsmacked by the violence you people perpetrate on each other, and which I had occasion to experience approximately 67 years ago.
@ johnhenry
Simple enough: I refer to YOUR comments and MINE as read by others on this blogsite.
Personally, I have never perpetrated violence on anyone, but welcome the exposition of your experience from “our people”. I know of others who have experienced violence at the hands of criminals, including immigrant gangs. As a little boy in Australia in 1951 I was “bullied” at school as a “bloody Pom”, but have always supported amity between the former “White Dominions”.
Such a wonderful symbol of Civilization was our Queen. An uncle of mine (a courtesy uncle, not a blood relative) the esteemed Canadian photographer Frank Royal (b. Franciszek Rychlewski, 1909) a war photographer during the Sicily campaign in WW2, was one of HM’s and Philip’s official photographers during their first visit to Canada – c. 1951.
Here’s a picture taken of ERII by Uncle Frank. Not sure who the bloke is.
https://squaredancehistory.org/files/original/51bc9f795dab6a527f91009c495a6a6e.jpg
The bloke is her husband.
How do you know that? HM is dancing a square dance, which entails more than one partner. But I could be wrong.
@ johnhenry
You are wrong (again). An internet search of the Canadian visit will confirm Mr Arnold’s statement.
@ David Ashton (infra):
I cannot reply directly to your correction at 12:46 a.m. EDT. because this august periodical limits the number of replies. I hope you see this.
I now acknowledge that you and Dick are correct, although – not to put too fine a point upon it – I never actually denied that “the bloke” was the Grecian in question. I merely and respectfully asked Dick how he knew that, whilst admitting that I could be mistaken. God bless all Greeks.