Backwards or forwards? That is Maestro's question
The ‘Palace’ announced in August 2009 that the tradition of walking backwards when leaving the presence of the Queen is being consigned to the history books. A breath of fresh 21st-century air blowing through the monarchy at last? Let’s look at this story more closely:-
In olden times Walking backwards in the presence of monarchs is believed to have started in medieval times i.e. the age of absolute monarchs, the divine right of kings etc. The practice was favoured by such progressive societies as the Aztecs - who were very big on human sacrifice. In Africa, it was de rigueur in moribund imperial Ethiopia. In Britain the practice died out in the Victorian era.
Edward VII's 're-inventions' After Victoria’s death in 1901, Edward VII ‘re-invented’ the walking backwards tradition for his new court, and the royal family have remained peculiarly attached to it ever since, notwithstanding the massive social changes that have occurred in the meantime. It was also Edward VII who re-invented the elaborate ritual of the State Opening of Parliament which had virtually disappeared after the death of Albert: this ritual has required a government minister to walk backwards down the steps from the throne throughout the 20th century and up to the present day.
Health & Safety We are told that the practice of walking backwards from the Queen is being discontinued because of Health & Safety Regulations. Health & Safety Regulations have been in existence for years, and so has the possibility of royal courtiers falling backwards over each other as they leave the royal presence. Why has the change only just been introduced? And if there were no Health & Safety Regulations would the practice continue, notwithstanding its resonance with the age of absolute monarchs?
No change for 57 years The Queen has been on the throne for 57 years. Did it never occur to her that people walking backwards on leaving her presence was a trifle odd, if not even dangerous for her older ‘retainers’? Did she never think of changing the practice during all the years she has been the monarch? She has no need to follow outdated protocol. She can change it whenever she likes.
21st-century feudalism Walking backwards, we are told, is a sign of respect for the Queen. That is quite wrong. It is not a sign of respect, but an act of self-abasement, appropriate to another time and another place. The practice is grossly archaic and manifestly ridiculous. It reeks of an age of ignorance and servility and one of vaunting royal arrogance and absolutism.
Having it both ways The walking backwards story has been spun by the ‘Palace’ PR machine in an attempt to please everybody. For modernisers it is sold as an example of how our rigid, old-fashioned monarchy is at last changing its ways. For traditionalists the ‘change’ is being forced on the Palace by those killjoys in the Health & Safety Executive.
One step forward, two steps back But don’t despair! Step forward the Marshal of the Diplomatic Corps and the Queen’s Equerry who will continue to walk backwards to Christmas and beyond. And of course the Lord Chancellor will continue to walk backwards down the steps from the throne after presenting the monarch with the words for the Queen's Speech at the State Opening of Parliament. Plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose!
- Maestro's blog
- Login or register to post comments
Backwardness at Buckingham Palace and the Palace of Westminster
How can Britain claim to be an advanced modern country with a sophisticated democratic system of government when:
1 the British Head of State insists on her two most important attendants walking backwards in her presence
2 a British government minister wearing a brightly-coloured costume has to go to the House of Lords, kneel down in front of the Queen, take the Prime Minister's speech out of a special 'purse', hand the speech to the Queen, and then walk backwards down the steps of the throne
3 the Queen goes through the pretence of reading the speech aloud as though it was her own speech?
State Opening of Parliament
Not only will the Lord Chancellor, Jack Straw, walk backwards down the steps from the throne on Wednesday November 18th, the Prime Minister and a random number of MPs will be 'summoned' to stand in a huddle just inside the House of Lords to hear the Queen read out the Prime Minister's speech to an assembly of their 'superiors' i.e. the 'lords', who will all be sitting on red benches and wearing red and white fancy dress. Is this ridiculous or is it ridiculous?
Parliamentary circus performers
On the 18th November I watched the televised State Opening of Parliament with growing incredulity and disquiet. What more graphic evidence could there be of parliamentary self-satisfaction and national nostalgia for the empty pomp and circumstance of a past age?
The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh entered the House of Lords blinking in the bright lights and looking as if they were taking part in a pantomine being performed by residents of an upmarket care home.
We used to have journalists attacking this medieval mummery as a ridiculous spectacle, but they seem to have given up on their criticism. After all, why be cruel to an 84-year old lady and her octogenarian husband who are being used by the political establishment in the old ‘bread and circuses’ ploy?
These ruritanian State Openings of Parliament must be stopped. The time for extravagant fancy-dress parties funded by taxpayers is long gone. We should all grow up and set our faces to the future.
And the Queen and the Duke should be left to dress and behave in a manner more appropriate to inhabitants of a 21st century country.
No more ventriloquism
For the Queen to have the Prime Minister’s speech thrust into her hands and be expected to read it out as if she had written it herself is very demeaning. The Queen shouldn't be used as the Prime Minister’s puppet or his ventriloquist dummy. This practice is lèse-majesté.
There's no need for state openings of Parliament
Why do we need state openings of Parliament? If the government want to announce their plans for the next year why doesn’t the Prime Minister just get up in the Commons and tell us all about them?
All this for a 6-minute speech?
Last week’s State Opening of Parliament was a waste of everybody’s time.
First, Buckingham Palace staff were up early to prepare the horses, carriages, footmen’s and pages’ outfits, and regalia needed for a royal procession.
A little later, the Queen put on a ball gown with assorted finery while the Duke of Edinburgh dressed up in his admiral’s uniform and medals. Then the Queen and the Duke in one carriage and the Crown, the Cap of Maintenance and the Sword of State in another carriage were conveyed in procession to Parliament. Here the Queen was taken to a Robing Room where she changed into a special robe with even more finery and an enormous train. She then made her way into the House of Lords, manoeuvred herself onto the throne, and read out somebody else’s speech for 6 minutes.
After that, the Queen went back to the Robing Room, changed back into her original clothes, and returned in procession to Buckingham Palace.
Was the Queen’s journey really necessary?
Bring the Opening of Parliament into the 21st century
A 21st-century Opening of Parliament could be something like this:
Best of British
The State Opening of Parliament is British pageantry at its best and it reflects Britain’s glorious history. The Queen is an old pro who carries out ceremonies like this with self-assurance and dignity. She has demonstrated her strength of character and her resolute devotion to duty for over 50 years and has never put a foot wrong. The State Opening of Parliament is a great national event which I hope will continue for many years.
Harking back to Merrie Olde England
tradjazz is quite wrong. The State Opening of Parliament is not just a bit of harmless British pageantry or entertaining Parliamentary theatre which gets the tourists coming to London. Oh no! Symbols are important, and the whole ceremony is the complete opposite of how a modern democracy should present itself.
It is a piece of fusty mumbo jumbo which sends out all the wrong signals about our Parliamentary system. It projects the image of an outdated, class-ridden, and elitist regime in which the elected representatives of the people appear to pay homage to their ‘superiors’ and ‘betters’ i.e. the Queen on the throne and the aristocrats on their red benches.
What’s the answer? Discontinue the Opening in its present form. Invent an alternative tradition which does away with the arcane rituals and recognises the absolute primacy of the House of Commons.
An impressive new ceremony
Milestogo’s suggestions are the way to go: a new Opening ceremony with stirring military music that reflects a robust Parliamentary system. A modern ceremony would help Britons feel pride again in their political institutions, and would impress foreign visitors with a demonstration of democracy in action.
Clean the Augean stables!
It’s no good having a modern State Opening of Parliament ceremony without cleaning up both the Monarchy and Parliament.
Taxpayers are sick of being ripped off by royals, MPs, and bankers. It's outrageous for Prince Charles to be paid a salary of £18 million out of the public purse and for hard-pressed taxpayers to bear the cost of his international junketing e.g. the 10-day tour of South America with a plane-load of royal servants in March 2009.
Reform of royal and Parliamentary expenses is long overdue.