What is the State Opening of Parliament?
Вставка
- Опубліковано 6 лис 2023
- #charlesiii #royalfamily #stateopening #parliament
In this video looking at the British State Opening of Parliament, I talk a little about the nature of the British Parliament, about the ceremony and why it happens and the king's role. I look at the architectural setting, how the ceremony unfolds, and the symbolism of the robes the king and queen wear.
Join this channel to get access to perks:
/ @allanbarton - Розваги
It's not only a symbol of continuity, it's a symbol of adaptability. So many monarchies couldn't cope with the shift from absolute monarchy to a constrained one, then to a democracy, and then from an empire to a commonwealth. Yet yours managed all these transitions -- not always with perfect grace, but it managed them. That's a lot to be proud of.
Well said.
Brilliant video as usual. One slight correction, while no King has entered the Commons since Charles I in 1642, the late Queen, I believe, did get shown around the chamber, but this was obviously while that house wasn't in session. Another cool fact, is that one MP is taken to Buckingham Palace as a "hostage" for the duration of the ceremony, to ensure the safe return of the King
I didn't know she'd been shown around, I bet she made a joke about it!!!! Yes, a hostage every time - it is very nominal as they are also a member of the royal household, Vice Chamberlain of the Household, as well as a government whip!
About the Dissolution of 1681, Charles II dissolved it from the House of the Lords chamber?
No, I don't think he did, but the exlusion crisis wasn't a run of the mill situation.
@@GeorgeL78 The point is that no sovereign has been in while the commons is sitting.
George VI was given a tour of the Commons chamber after it was repaired following the damage it suffered in the Blitz. He was the first monarch to enter the chamber since Charles I.
Excellent. I was appalled today by #Not my king idiots. They should rejoice in the stability the monarchy provides.
They are also wrong - they don't get to choose!
Hi Alan, do you think the late Queen Elizabeth II reinstated the tradition of wearing the Imperial Crown on State Openings? I’ve never seen a depiction of Queen Victoria wearing her Imperial Crown, always opting for a diadem, or later in her life, her Small Diamond Crown. I’ve never seen any depictions of King Edward VII or King George V wearing the Imperial Crown on State Openings of Parliament either, them usually opting to go bare-headed or wear a bicorne. The Crown was always sat on a cushion.
No, all the kings wore it. There are photos of the 1901 and 1911 state openings that show Edward VII and George V bare-headed, but this was before they'd been crowned. There is a photo from 1912 of George V in the robing room wearing the state crown.
Every time I look at these magnificent buildings I am in awe of the men who built them. Great video, thank you so much for your education. Sharing your knowledge is very much appreciated & I wish more people would watch them 👏👏👏
Thank you - I think the channel is gradually building, which is nice and I am glad that they are appreciated by those who watch them.
Thank you, this was a very clear explanation of today's event. The King looked horribly uncomfortable, I thought - he seems to have aged so much since his mother's death. . All credit as usual to to the organisers of this spectacle, especially given the fraught political situation.
I think he probably was, the yards of velvet and ermine and the heavy crown must be a nightmare. Goodness, I pity him starting a new job in his 70s, when he should be putting his feet up.
Plus the King and Queen just got back from Kenya. A bit still jet lagged perhaps?
@@christinesuccop1812 that would make sense.
@@allanbarton it is his birthright and his destiny, It must be hard on him as an individual no doubt, but this is now his role and duty, as he has always known it would be, In someways he is fortunate he got to live a life as an individual before in a long and useful life and now he has to undergo the rigors of kingship, as per his holy vows. We are fortunate he had so many years to watch how his mother met the challenges that now face him. I hope he never considers "putting his feet up" I think that would be a very bad thing for this country
In addition to the loss of both parents I imagine the behaviour of his youngest son and daughter-in-law has had a significant impact on the Kings wellbeing
I am so happy that Charles is'not modernizing the regalia... Still keep using the crown
I had a fear he might have it carried - but no, all the old traditions were retained.
Do you liked of Queen wearing State Diamond Diadem?
I was very pleased to see that.
@@allanbarton It looks fantastic on her :)
As an American, I'm always learning something new to me from your videos. Thank you, Allan
I always found the part involving Blackrod so interesting. It also kind of amused me how much of a dent there is in the door of the House of Commons from all the years of Blackrod knocking on it.
Fantastic as usual! I truly love the history behind each ceremony and pleased that it remains the same! Thank you!❤
Thanks for this informative look at the ceremony and history. I know there's lengthy (and valid) debate about the relevance and cost of maintaining a monarchy, but there's something very reassuring about a formal and somber ceremony that's remained constant across the centuries.
Especially given the way so many of today's politicians and world leaders conduct themselves. 😖
Other Commonwealth Realms, like Canada, have adopted and adapted the Westminster System. The Canadian Senate was intended to emulate the House of Lords, but since Canada doesn't have a system of nobility, eminences grise were appointed by the Crown, initially for life (now to age 75). This continues today, the proverbial "Chamber of Sober Second Thought" being a comfortable landing place for political bagmen and former astronauts alike.
As in the UK, the sovereign (usually represented by the Governor General) opens Parliament from the Upper House, the Commons gathering at the bar. Both King George VI and Elizabeth II (twice) have opened Parliament: I would be delighted if King Charles III follows in this regard.
Thanks for your consistently well-researched, presented, and produced content, Allan! Greetings as always from rainy British Columbia.
It's getting like that here since the semi reform of the Lords and the exclusion of many of the heriditary peers. The Lords is bigger than it has ever been, full of appointees.
Another day brightened by one of your wonderful videos. On my last visit to Parliament I purchased one of Mr Pugins original floor tiles during renovation works. Its fascinating and a wonderful bit of history
Earlier today I was wondering why the King wore the sash of the Royal Victorian Order and not the Thistle like Prince Philip previously (the collar is for the Garter and as far as I know the sash of the next highest order is worn with it). You just clarified that it was a tradition started by Edward VII but do you have any idea why Edward chose to wear Royal Victorian Order in that occasion? It can be seen on his coronation portrait too.
Usually you'd expect the thistle sash as you say - there must be a good reason for it. Perhaps Edward started it in honour of his mother? I'm someone will come along in the comments box who knows.
Always fascinating and educational. Thank you, Allan. 😍👑
Thank you for the explanation of the state opening. There are a lot of parallels with the Dutch state opening of parliament, called Prinsjesdag. Different history and less pomp.
Lovely context for what happens and why. Thanks for making it :)
My pleasure, thanks for watching.
Thank you for filling in all those important details for us Allan. The two throne chairs designed by Pugin are pretty spectacular. ❤
They are very splendid Chris. Poor Pugin, he was dead by the time he was 40, his constant work wore him out.
@@allanbarton I would love to learn more about Pugin if you might consider a video. Thanks 🙏
absolutely, I am really fascinated by him. @@ChrisHunt4497
Always an excellent video Allan. I needed to refresh why the King wasn’t at Parliament in 1951. He had his left lung removed. There’s some discussion on whether Queen Camilla had on the Coronation necklace. Someone suggested it may have been a necklace of Queen Alexandra, called Queen Alexandra’s Collet Necklace. It’s the way the old cut diamonds, are set differently than the a coronation necklace. I’m glad Queen Camilla wore the King George lV Diamond Diadem. And of course it was wonderful to see Princess Royal Anne, as the Gold Stick in Waiting today.
Yes, I think that is probably correct - it has no pendant diamond.
GOD BLESS THE KING.
I wonder if those of the House of Commons fight over who gets to slam the door. I can just imagine someone grumpily saying, "But I wanted to do it this year!"
Another marvellous video! Interesting to note that whilst The State Opening is, as you say, peculiarly British, His Majesty's representatives, the Governors General of the Commonwealth realms likewise perform the openings of their respective Parliaments in similar style, minus the diamonds! Since the Sovereign is always part of the Parliaments of all of his realms, he could perform the opening himself, as did the late Queen.
Very well done. Thank you for educating this American history buff!!
Wonderful! I was reading about this in the newspaper yesterday and thought 'I bet Allan would explain this better' and here you are! And you DID explain it better-of course. Thanks once again for a delightful insight to our history.
Thank you very much, glad it was helpful!
I have always been fascinated by this event and the history connected with it. Thank you. Also, i was wondering in the photo of Edward VII and Queen Alexandra is she wearing Queen Victoria's small Crown? Just curious.
Another great video. Thank you
Wonderful, fascinating
Great video. I especially liked the floorplan. Can see more clearly features in our Canadian parliament have a clear descent from the British one.
This has has reminded me of an etching I came across on the British Museum site depicting a burial in Fawkes (Fauxs) cellar in the pre 19th century palace, sadly I was unable to find any further information to satiate my curiosity.
Charles Barry is a wonderful architect. In Brighton I live yards away from St Peter's church, which is one of his productions - a most elegant church. It's so lucky to be able to enjoy it when i pop over to the shops.
Thank you again Dr. ❤❤❤
A pleasure Jill.
Another fascinating video Allan.
Glad you enjoyed it!
Great vídeo, Allan thank you
Glad you enjoyed it!
Thank you for such a well-researched and beautifully presented video.
My pleasure! Very glad you enjoyed it!
Thanks for another educational and interesting video, Allan!!💞💖👍❤
My pleasure! Glad you enjoyed it 😊.
Great video as always, you always make what may initially seem like dull topics really interesting.
And what a year its been for the King - I was just thinking that I started following your channel when the late Queen passed away - and the state opening of parliament is the final "first" royal tradition Charles carries out as King? 😀
Awesome as always Allan. I found it interesting that the late Duke of Edinburgh nearly always wore the collar of the Garter and the sash of the Thistle at the State Opening. Neat to see the King with the Victorian sash.
18:01. That is interesting. I think in Canada the PM is allowed to sit near the Sovereign. They have sat on the right hand side of the throne in the Senate for the handful of times the Queen opened Parliament, or more usually beside the Governor General. It would be interesting to see all the similarities and differences between in Commonwealth realm Parliaments and the UK Parliament.
Hi Allan! As if the State Opening were not enough of an interesting topic, there are plenty of related branches that welcome exploration as well. Bridewell, Whitehall, and the Civil War are but a few examples. I know I say it all the time, but your channel is truly fantastic. Blessings to you and yours.
I was surprised that the King and Queen entered the Lords Chamber by the 2 separate doors, as Prince Philip and the late Queen used to come in through one door only - maybe it's easier to manoeuvre the weighty robes of state both wore yesterday by using the 2 doors; I don't think Prince Philip used to be robed for the ceremony? I thought also that Camilla would have worn her Crown. I guess the next time we see the Queen Consort's Crown being worn will be at the next Coronation when Queen Catherine will wear it
In this latest occasion, they seem to have omitted broadcasting the procession through the Royal Gallery? It did happen: at one point you could see it in a closed-circuit monitor while the camera bloviated through the lobby. Meanwhile there was an endless panning through the chattering peers for what felt like hours.
I watched the BBC live coverage and the procession was broadcast in that - even in the princes' chamber, which was interesting to see. If you have access I am sure that's still on the BBC iplayer.
@@allanbartonI was finally able to see it. Novelty: neither monarch was wearing gloves.
As an outside observer, it seems a shame that Dennis Skinner's usual heckling of Black Rod has apparently not been made part of the tradition.
Why has the video of the procession through the royal gallery been removed? Any idea???
Wonderful job Mr Barton, another in-depth, incredibly interesting video. The state opening is really a fascinating constitutional event. Do you know when the King's speech became something solely written by the government? Was there an exact date? Or did it gradually include less and less influence from the monarch?
I actually prefer the more modern, less fussy, but still regally dignified Dutch equivalent: the Troonrede. All the jewels and ermine is just….eye-roll inducing.
I usually like to watch the opening but I missed it this year. Thanks
I cant watch it as the Government policies in the speech send my blood pressure through the roof
As an American I am not as bothered by the Govenment policies, I enjoy the ritual knowing it is a very old tradition. Cheers@@ludovica8221
Glad you appreciated it! 😊
As an aside I am curious as to why they never raised the arches on the State Crown. As I understand it, they were lowered for the late Queen so as to make the crown appear more feminine. It just looks a little odd - flat - as it is on Charles' head.
Agreed, it does look silly and not very dignified. It is strange they didn't, as I think they must have altered the size of the circlet as he has a bigger head than his mother.
I think it looks much weirder on George 5 and 6's heads .
We have become accustomed to the aesthetically prettier look of the crown as per Elizabeth and I was glad to see it not changed to the towering look of before. I'm sure it must be easier to wear low and although its maybe not as dignified as it once was I think the tone of the modern monarchy is to appear a little more humble in the modern world and maybe raising the arches would invite criticism of being grandiose, and wasting money. It may be thought it would be better to have a fresh start for William when his turn comes around
@@ludovica8221Yes, there are good reasons for continuing with the State Crown in its current form.
I agree, it doesn't sit right on Charles's head
@@ludovica8221I think it's also god for the new succession law. In with broders and sisters are equal.
Although King Charles recently opened a new session of Parliament, it seems that the ceremony itself has become a more rare event as the Speech from the Throne itself is usually pretty insubstantial beyond the one delivered at the opening of a new Parliament following a general election (i.e. more platitudes and minor legislative tweaking and fewer major concrete proposals). This, combined with the controversy over prorogation itself and the fact that the Government has to submit itself to the vote of the House in the Address in Reply (equivalent to a confidence vote), means that Governments will try to avoid ending a session for as long as possible, and what was once an annual ceremony has become at best a triennial one.
While the Speech contains the Sovereign's words...formerly, the Sovereign's own creation, but since the Georgian period entirely the Government's creation...the Sovereign himself did not speak it in medieval times. This was done by the Lord Chancellor as the Sovereign's mouthpiece; James I apparently began the practice of delivering the speech from his own lips; and while his son Charles I at first reverted to the former practice he too eventually went with his father's innovation which became the standard practice to this day.
If one examines the Tudor depictions of Parliament, you will note that only the Sovereign sits on a chair with a back and armrests; everyone other than a queen or a "guest" king would sit on backless benches and the Chancellor of course would be on the Woolsack. In theory this bit of royal etiquette still exists in the designated throne rooms at Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle (yes, there are several special armchairs in the Garter Throne Room, but these are intended for use by the Companion Knights of the Garter in Chapter, forming a council to advise their Sovereign, and thus are outside the bounds of strict royal etiquette). Once the Sovereign ceased to attend the ordinary meetings of the Lords, it was no longer necessary to keep up the strict royal etiquette and so the Lords enjoy their plush leather-covered benches with backs to lean back on.
The Royal Gallery was originally a form of covered box where the Sovereign could secretly attend Parliament and keep an ear on Lords proceedings without having to appear in State (and when Lords might be expected to guard their tongues in the Royal Presence). The last Sovereign to do so was Queen Anne, and after her reign the Sovereign came to Parliament only to open or prorogue it (and Queen Victoria in 1854 was the last Sovereign to prorogue Parliament/give Royal Assent in person).
If the Sovereign ever did refuse to give Royal Assent to a bill, the words used are "Le Roi/La Reine s'avisera" ("The King/Queen shall take it under advisement").
Is that Paul Whybrow on mace bearing duties?
that architect is dmn great
It's a small detail but I think it's a pity that the Imperial State Crown was not restored to its original form, as worn by earlier kings. The current shape was intended to make it appear more feminine for the late queen and I don't imagine it would have cost much to raise the flattened arches to their former height.
Was it The Grenadines out front of Buck House? They're in their grey greatcoats, so can't tell but for the white plume in the bearskins.
The House of Lords is not strictly a revising legislative chamber, bills of relatively non-controversial nature (particularly if they are very technical) are still introduced in the Lords to keep from clogging up the Commons' machinery dealing with more "important" bills.
Thank you, Allan. Question: has the meaning of "prorogue" changed? I thought it was when the King dismissed Parliament without dissolving it. But maybe that was only during the Middle Ages and Tudor era?
It has changed in many respects, primarily as Parliament sits all the time. In the past there was rarely a formal dissolution of Parliament, Parliament was often simply prorogued at the king's pleasure and then was considered dissolved after a period of time after not meeting. That length of time was open for debate! Now we have fixed terms Parliaments, the proroguing is used as a formal break between sessions, primarily to allow the state opening to happen. Parliament is of course formally dissolved now for a general election, but only after it has first been prorogued.
@@allanbarton Thank you so much for the explanation!
I didn't spot Princess Anne on the TV coverage. Some of the media were saying it was the first time she'd attended since 1985. This was clearly incorrect as there are photos of her attending the late Queen as Gold Stick In Waiting at State Openings in the 2010s
Although they are indeed the UK's oldest military corps the Yeomen of the Guard are not part of the British Army (correct me if I am wrong but I think they are considered part of the Royal Household) although one must first have served in HM Armed Forces as a senior non commissioned or warrant officer in order to join the Yeomen of the Guard.
You said that the Lords and Commons chambers were on an east-west axis. I think you must have mispoken in this otherwise typically excellent video because they are surely on a south-north axis, running parallel with the Thames which flows in that direction at this point, with the Lords at the southern end?
Yes I did mean north-south.
To be honest it looked better than the coronation
Something of a pity that His Majesty looked so glum throughout. One is not asking for raucous laughter - or the ghastly “recognising” finger pointing of American Presidents - but a dignified smile on the lips would have been welcome. Anyway, thank you for another fascinating and illuminating video.
I suspect he was probably a bit nervous, he is quite a reserved man and he does look rather glum on state occasions. His late mother was just the same.
I'd be sad too if I was English
@@allanbartonI expect you are right about nerves being behind The King’s somewhat blank expression. The late Queen - as matriarch of the nation - carried this off, but I wonder if the new King, launching his reign in a different era when the visible is of ever increasing importance, might have been better advised to smile and show a tad more animation.
ah, ok @@sweetiesquad8284
@@Floortile perhaps, I suppose he is who he is. Having been in a demanding public role myself, and been very nervous in it and having been told to smile more, I have quite a lot of sympathy with him.
who are the 2 ladies behind the queen? is one of them her sister?? a very solemn and dignafied royal couple.❤
The Queen's Companions were the Marchioness of Lansdowne (wearing the Lansdowne Tiara) and Lady Sarah Keswick, daughter of the Earl of Dalhousie.
Still wondering who were in the open carriages, please.
Why id the Queen not wear the sash of the order of the Garter. Queens Alexandra, Mary and Elizabeth did
No idea.
Why the Queen didn't wear her own crown?
Consorts have chopped and changed. Queen Mary for example, wore her crown without arches, but also a tiara.
@@allanbarton In the photo of Edward VII and Queen Alexandra, was she wearing Queen Victoria's small diamond crown? Wouldn't it be fun to see that worn again? Fantastic video as always.
I say she went with the diadem as it was lighter than the crown and so less likely to cause back pain.
@@allanbarton I had always thought that the reason behind Queen Mary using tiaras and diadems while dressed in state had a lot to do with the height of Queen Mary, who was taller than King George V. If she used a crown, she would have looked taller than her husband and that could have suggested that the consort was more important than the monarch. But that isn't the case with the current royal couple.
The Crown should have more power.
@@EF5Winds with a Monarchy we can have two branches of power. One chosen by the demos, the people. The other branch has been chosen by birth, by history, by fate, by God. The elected branch can become infected by corruption and psychopaths seeking power. The hereditary branch provides some resistance to corruption they are also bread and Socialised to understand power and any signs of mental instability would be noticed in the monarch from an early age.
The the hereditary branch will a life time of experiences of meeting countless transient leaders and will aquire invaluable knowledge for the elected branch who will have little knowledge of experience power and how to project it on the world stage.
I think it is a excellent balance.
Imagine if both were elected.
We would be in a right mess.
You know, I just don’t think the king needs to wear the crown… He’s just way fancy enough without one… It just seems like a little overkill
Hi Allan. Do you think the monarchy( British ) is in a Decline and is it relevant in todays society?
Thanks
No, I actually think it is pretty stable at the moment and I am hopeful for the future. Things were much worse for it in the 1990s.
@@allanbarton Mabye when Cromwell was around it was iffy 😂
Oh very iffy then, but they very nearly made Cromwell king and people were glad to have the king back after the years of Puritan misery!
@@allanbarton very true! The Cromwellian commonwealth was a disaster on so many levels
Not to be perverse, but What the state opening of parliament is, is to set out out the forthcoming disasters, lies and hopeless scheming of politicians as shown in the latest covid report scandal. One despairs.
Well that is bad look
I preferred the State closing of Parliament, a tradition now no longer followed, started by a certain future Lord Protector.
When there is a Queen there is no "King" as the title of "King" is deemed higher than that of "Queen" as Kings used to actually defend the realm themselves. Nowadays, if there is a King then the consort should be called "Queen Consort". If there is a Queen then the consort should be called "King Consort". Why are men treated as second class in modernity when there is a Queen? IF you want a modern Monarchy then all rules need not be sexist!
But all queens regardless of whether they are the reigning queen or queen consorts are crowned. A prince concert not.
@@EF5Winds Yes, but that was for 200 years. And the present King and the present Prince of Wales love their wives.
It is sexist, but not for the reason you state. A male title is always higher than the female version. If the husband of a queen was given the title of King (regardless of it being consort or not) you have the situation that the monarch doesn’t have the senior title. The husband would outrank the monarch. That is why there was so much push back during Victoria’s rein as she wanted Albert to be called King. Parliament was concerned that meant he would be the most senior person in the kingdom.
I do agree it’s very sexist that the female version of titles are automatically lesser, and that in this day and age we should look to equality
@@Vonononie In the new succession law from 2013 are Brothers and sisters equal. Charlotte is ahead of Louis.
@@tobiasg.7438 yes but that’s only the succession law. Titles and their ranking haven’t changed. It will take an act of parliament for Princess Beatrice to inherit the dukedom of York as females aren’t allowed to inherit. The Duke of Edinburgh’s son has a title in his own right (Earl of Wessex) but the older daughter has a courtesy title of Lady, which she will probably lose if she marries.
Courtesy titles are there to show respect to the holder of the title. When a female is born she would take her father’s name and be given an appropriate title to acknowledge she was part of his household. When her father gave her away she would then take the husbands name and be given a courtesy title (she doesn’t hold the rank, the husband does).
That means for common folk, men would keep their name and title (of Mr) all their adulthood, and women would change. Many women would take both the first and last name of their husband and be called Mrs John Smith.
For Royals, aristocracy, and nobility it’s the same. Diana went from Lady Diana (she had a courtesy title as her father was an Earl), to Diana, Princess of Wales. At no point did she hold the title ‘Princess Diana’, she could have styled herself Princess Charles of Wales (taking her husband’s full name).
The reason Camilla is queen is a courtesy to the King, to acknowledge she is in his family, that she is essentially his property, that’s why she’s taken his family name, and his rank.
But times have moved on. All the other titles should now go to first born, not first male. Titles shouldn’t be ranked on gender.
Queen Camilla’s crown here suits her far better than the huge one she wore for the coronation. She looks nice here.
The House of Commons gives the monarch an agenda to then give back to the Commons. This is therefore the origin point of British trickle-down redundancy.
This is another ceremony i hope they change, leave sinple with the robes and his military cap and the crown on a that small pillow thing. He just looks ridiculous wearing it
Oh I do hope not - how dreadfully dull. I do wish they had heightened the crown again to its original form, it does look a little squashed.
How does he look ridiculous? He is an anointed and rightful Sovereign, just as Elizabeth was. It would look silly for him to roam about wearing the crown everyday, but for a once a year event I think it looks beautiful.
CAN ANYONE IMAGINE WHAT THE KING AND THE QUEEN HAVE IN MIND IN LOCKING AWAY THEIR SON BORN IN 1965
AND IMMEDIATELY GIVEN AWAY FOR ADOPTION TO A FAMILY IN AUSTRIA ?! HOW CAN THEY LIVE LIKE THAT ALWAYS HAVING THIS SIN IN MIND ?!
What a load of codswollop - you mean that crazy Australian man who believes he is their teenage love child, even though he was born before they met?
How ridiculous your comments in capital letters.
Firstly they hadn't met when this mad man said he was conceived.
Also DNA.Why hasn't he shown his connection.
A repeat of Anastasia of Russia story.
@@allanbarton That just shows how powerful their connections are!
Frankly, your comments, which have no basis in fact, have no place on a channel devoted to the factual examination and explanation of history.
@@EdMcF1 indeed 😂😂😂