“Across all cultures, ceremonies matter. Studies show that ritual actions can activate deep-seated intuitions about causality in people's minds. But even as they have no direct influence on the external world, ceremonies still fulfill important functions. They can provide comfort, create meaning, and forge a sense of belonging. Collective ceremonies act as social glue. By doing so, they create feelings of unity that can transform individuals into communities”.

Dimitris Xygalatas is an associate professor of anthropology and psychological sciences, and head of the experimental anthropology laboratory at the University of Connecticut, author of “Ritual: How Seemingly Senseless Acts Make Life Worth Living” believes that rituals, including all ceremonies and public celebrations, are very important to society. For they create, as he explains on the BBC News website, a sense of connection and community. Rituals are like milestones – for people, and for societies. Without celebration, important moments are insipid. That’s why the students who graduated during the Covid-19 pandemic didn’t fully enjoy it, because they were deprived of the ceremonial distribution of diplomas.

SIGN UP TO OUR PAGE The coronation of Charles III – the third occasion in less than a year when the British can test the power of rituals – gives rise to such considerations. In June last year, the Queen celebrated her platinum jubilee, the 70th anniversary of her reign, and in September she was bid farewell. In the opinion of British republicans – few albeit vocal – it is a waste of money on an institution they otherwise regard as dysfunctional and redundant.

Manifestation of continuity

Is a coronation necessary? No. A king doesn’t need a coronation to be king. In a hereditary monarchy, the ruler ascends the throne upon the death of his predecessor. Charles III therefore became king on September 8, 2022, when his mother passed away. The coronation is only a kind of ornament, a colorful dot over the “i”, an expression of respect for British traditions, a manifestation of continuity or, finally, that keystone that Prof. Xygalatas writes about.

On Saturday, May 6, in Westminster Abbey, Archbishop Justin Welby, the spiritual head of the Church of England, anointed Charles as king and put on his head the crown of St. Edward, used since the 17th century. It took place according to an ancient ritual in which everything – spoken words, oaths, chants, homage – has its place, in the presence of two thousand invited guests and in front of millions of spectators from around the world. They followed everything but one most momentous moment: when Archbishop Welby anointed the king’s forehead, chest and hands with holy oil. At this point, the king and the bishop were covered with a veil.

Changes were made to the old ritual, however, at the request of both Charles and the Archbishop. The most significant is the participation of clergy of denominations other than Anglican. As it is perfectly known, questions of religion, ecumenism, cooperation between denominations and Churches have always been close to Charles’ heart. That’s why Jewish, Muslim, Buddhist, Hindu and Sikh priests were invited to the ceremony – and they greeted the king with one voice .Their attendance is also a form of emphasizing that Great Britain of today is a completely different country than the one where Elizabeth II was crowned nearly 70 years ago. And so the regalia were presented to the king by four members of the Lords: a Muslim, a Jewish woman, a Hindu and a Sikh.

Catholic clergy was also invited, and that’s a real sensation because the last time they attended a coronation was 470 years ago, in 1553, when Henry VIII’s daughter Mary, called “Bloody Mary”, was crowned Queen of England. The sensation is all the greater because, as noted by the British Dominican Timothy Radcliffe, “anti-Catholicity has been part of British identity for several centuries”. Certainly, however, it was not and is not a feature of King Charles, who visited the Vatican several times, e.g. in 2019, for the canonization ceremony of John Henry Newman, a cardinal who converted from Anglicanism to Catholicism.

The Episcopate of England was represented by its chairman, Cardinal Vincent Nichols, but there was also a visitor from the Vatican, Cardinal Pietro Parolin, Secretary of State. Catholic clergy along with Archbishop Welby and representatives of other Christian denominations, from Orthodox to Protestant, jointly give the king their blessing. As a curiosity, let us note the fact that a fragment of the Bible was read by Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, a practicing Hindu.

Singing in four languages – English, Scottish, Gaelic and Welsh – is in turn a gesture towards the indigenous inhabitants of the British Isles. And Archbishop Justin Welby suggested that the oath of allegiance to the king should be sworn, as tradition dictates, not only by the peers of England present in the Abbey, but all his subjects at the same time – watching the ceremony in the streets, at home in front of TV sets, and even in distant Commonwealth realms.

To be added that Charles was anointed with oil consecrated in Jerusalem and containing no animal additives, because it is important to him; that the St. Edward, on which the king sits during the coronation, was renovated, because after 700 years it was already in very bad condition; that the Stone of Scone – a massive (152 kg) block of stone on which kings of Scotland had stood for centuries at coronations – was placed, in keeping with the tradition – under the chair, the anxieties of the Scots being allayed by the assurance that it would be returned to Edinburgh after the ceremony. The stone has a turbulent past: king Edward I, who took it away from Scotland in 1296, had his coronation chair constructed in such a way that there was room for it. In 1950 four young Scotsmen stole the stone and took it back to Scotland, a year later it was returned to the abbey, and in 1996, by Elizabeth II’s decision, it was restored to the Scottish nation.

By the will of the people

Great Britain is unique. In Europe, there are ten countries with constitutional monarchies, but in none of them the ruler undergoes a coronation ceremony. Everywhere, from Norway to Spain and Liechtenstein, a modest inauguration or swearing-in ceremony is sufficient, usually in parliament, but sometimes only in front of members of the government, with the addition of more or less elaborate religious elements, with or without audience participation.

There are countries in this group where kings were crowned in the distant past, but over time, for various reasons, this was discontinued, but there are also countries where there has never been a coronation. These are Belgium and the Netherlands. The ruler of the ancient Netherlands for several centuries had born the formal title of stadthouder, i.e. governor, so there was no reason to put a crown on his head. When the Kingdom of the Netherlands was established in 1816, it turned out that it was not very clear who would perform the coronation in a nationally and religiously diverse country: a Belgian Catholic hierarch or a Dutch Protestant priest? It was therefore decided that a swearing-in would suffice.

Three European rulers have abdicated in the last ten years, and in each case their successors started very modestly. The inauguration of the reign of each of them aroused interest, but actually only in their own countries – the Netherlands, Belgium and Spain.

In April 2013, Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands stepped down from the throne in favor of her son Willem-Alexander. During the inauguration, which took place as always at the Nieuwe Kerk in Amsterdam, the king, seated on the throne, swore an oath to protect the country and its laws, and took the oath of allegiance from deputies to the States General, the Dutch parliament.

Three months later, after the abdication of his father Albert, his son was sworn in as King of the Belgians as Philip I. Strolling through the streets of Brussels and greeting his subjects from the balcony of the royal palace were the only more colorful accents intended for the general public.

A similarly modest ceremony took place in 2014 in Madrid after the abdication of King Juan Carlos, forced by circumstances (moral and financial scandals). His successor, Philip VI, was sworn in at the Cortes, the Parliament of Spain. There was neither mass nor passing through the streets.

The beginnings of reign in Sweden and Denmark are the most modest. King Carl XVI Gustaf of Sweden, on the throne since 1973, was sworn in in the presence of members of the government, and only later did the ceremony take place in the throne room of the royal palace. This is a visible manifestation of the principle introduced into the Swedish constitution that “the king reigns by the will of the people” – no longer by the will of God. In Denmark, there was not even this: in 1972, from the balcony of the royal palace of Christiansborg, it was reported that Margrethe II had ascended the throne. The spectacular element in Denmark is the shout of "hooray!", repeated nine times by the assembled subjects.

Only Norway follows tradition in some, albeit modest, way; she appreciates it perhaps because for several hundred years, unlike Sweden and Denmark, it was deprived of its own statehood. The king travels from Oslo to Trondheim, where he receives his blessing in the Nidaros Cathedral, the coronation site of Norway’s rulers in the Middle Ages. This is how Harald V began his reign in 1991.

On a pillow or on a coffin

Do the subjects of European kings even slightly envy the British? Would they perhaps wish their rulers to have the same fervent interest in the world? It also confirms that Dimitris Xygalatas is right when he writes about the importance of emotions in building a sense of connection – does not every observer of the recent London ceremonies feel a bit like a good acquaintance of the British royal family?

Contrary to appearances, the question posed at the beginning is not at all easy to answer. The inhabitants of the Scandinavian kingdoms, Spain and the Netherlands treat their monarchs with great sympathy and respect, but without great emotions, which – precisely because of its unique character – arouses the British monarchy, about which everyone knows everything. After all, the whole world is watching broadcasts of weddings and funerals in the Windsor family, and now the coronation. And how many would like to watch broadcasts of the royal swearing-in taking place in the government or parliament? Without all the colorful setting, references to tradition, a carriage ride, moving songs and prominent guests, in a word – without a real royal pomp?

And – perhaps above all – without a crown. The crown is an important element not only of children’s ideas of what kings and princesses should look like. In Westminster Abbey, Archbishop Justin Welby put the crown first on the head of Charles, and then on the head of Camilla, who, according to Elizabeth’s will, would become a real queen, and not just a princess consort, as was once believed. The crown, visible to everyone – in the Abbey, on the big screen or in front of the screen at home – played its role, as it had done for centuries.

Meanwhile, in other monarchies, the crown is there, but a bit as if it wasn’t. It is sometimes present during the inauguration, but not on the monarch’s head, but on a velvet cushion placed next to the king or at his feet. It is not always the crown worn by the kings of old – pure gold, heavy, studded with precious stones, with a cross and rich symbolism. The Dutch crown, for example, is made of gilded silver, adorned with imitation pearls and ornaments made of colored glass. There is not a single precious stone in it.

Only at royal funerals is the crown always present. Then it rests on the coffin of the deceased ruler. Normally, crowns, like other regalia, await their day in national treasuries and museums.

British kings have several crowns at their disposal. Apart from St. Edward’s crown there is the crown of Queen Victoria and the imperial crown, made for George VI in 1937. Let us add, however, for the sake of truth, that in Great Britain the crown, remained, so to speak, only for special occasions. Even Elizabeth II in recent years appeared in parliament not in a crown, but in a hat. And Charles III did not want his image to be portrayed wearing a crown on the new stamps and coins. So decided his grandfather George VI in his time, but then at least the image of the crown was placed next to him.

Not my king

Among friends, in an armchair, with his legs stretched out on a low table – that’s how, according to the description in the daily “The Independent", Edward, Duke of Windsor was watching the television broadcast of the coronation of his niece Elizabeth on June 2, 1953. What was he thinking and feeling then? Probably bitterness, because he was not invited to the ceremony and it was the decision of Elizabeth herself, who did not wish her uncle’s presence. But maybe also a note of regret?

Edward VIII was the only British king who missed the coronation. It was scheduled for May 12, 1937, but six months earlier, after eleven months on the throne, Edward abdicated. The ceremony took place as planned, on the appointed day, only the crown was not put on the head of Edward but of his kid brother George VI. That Edward had not been invited was all too obvious. Not only did he abdicate the throne, but he did so amidst a great moral and constitutional scandal.

“Not my king” – this is the slogan of the anti-monarchist group Republic, calling for opposing the ceremony and the monarchy in general. The coronation, as its members and the favorable media willingly and extensively talk about, is an expensive, outdated, completely unnecessary ceremony, just like the monarchy itself. But Republicans can’t do anything because there’s only a handful of them. Even if the monarchy has significantly lost its popularity in recent years, and the departure of Elizabeth II, beloved by the nation, makes it impossible to avoid questions about its future and the need for change.

– Teresa Stylinska
– Translated by Dominik Szzęsny-Kostanecki

TVP WEEKLY. Editorial team and jornalists