Pomp and circumstance

The last time a Royal Court went through the tragedy of arms was as a result of the February Revolution of 1917 in Russia; as a result of Bolshevik rage, the imperial family of the Romanovs was assassinated on the night of 16-17 July 1918. They did not have their heads chopped off as King Louis XVI and his wife Marie Antoinette in 1793 as part of the events of the French Revolution.

With the recent death of the long-lived monarch Elizabeth II, I was interested to know how many monarchies exist in the 21st century, and of the 193 countries that make up this world, 23% are ruled by monarchies. There are 44 sovereign states with different types of monarchies.

While Spain and the United Kingdom are parliamentary monarchies, Saudi Arabia and Brunei are absolute monarchies. Also the Vatican is a kind of monarchy. 

When I think of a monarchy, my mind wanders back to what is now the Place de la Concorde and I imagine a crowd chanting the death of their monarchs of whom so many rivers of ink have flowed for their excesses. It is as if that word leads me to that: to think of excesses.

These days of long travel at the funeral of Elizabeth Alexandra Mary Windsor I witness all that pomp and circumstance so alien to my way of thinking that I am not surprised that among the millennial generation her unpopularity is growing and that every day there are more voices, among the youngest, speaking in favour of the Republic. Whoever does not pass through the sieve of the ballot box simply cannot govern. 

Let only the grace of the voter decide, and not a stale tradition that speaks of God's power to anoint families that pass on power from generation to generation.

The images of the now King Charles III unable to move an inkwell, to make room at a desk, not knowing what to do with the leaves of the speech... with his bared teeth, his long face, his gestures of disgust that a few drops of ink have stained his fingers make me wonder if, in truth, the British feel represented, reflected and honoured by their Royalty.

The British monarchy has been cutting corners with certain singular figures for decades. No one has made more front-page news than Lady Di, and the "there are three of us in this marriage" soap opera gave the BBC, in 1995, the golden minute of television.

The press has exploited the gossip, the rumours, the celebrity gossip of its princes, princesses, consorts, and their entourages. The Court has been plagued by adultery and even paedophilia.

What has Elizabeth II left the United Kingdom, Britain, Northern Ireland and the Commonwealth? She has left them the way out of the British Empire because more than a few countries will hold referendums to leave the Commonwealth and Scotland is not taking its finger out of its mouth to hold its secessionist referendum in 2023.

There will be many changes in the coming years that will end up leaving the island nation in what the writer Mario Vargas Llosa himself wrote at the time of Brexit: "It will be a small country"

Elizabeth II was respected because she was very old and was given a certain condescension, like a grandmother whose cracked body makes her tender, but with King Charles III the tables are turning and it looks as if they will be less benevolent.

The popularity of the monarchy has been falling over the last three decades and the polls showed the figure of the sovereign Isabel II as well accepted and popular while the figure of the monarchy was losing followers. With her death, Charles and Camilla's popularity is far from reaching, let alone surpassing, that of his late mother. A further fall in the popularity of the sovereign and of the monarchy's supporters is anticipated. 

I don't think Elizabeth II will bury the monarchy in the UK with her because the monarchy is a money-making machine. Much has been said of the Windsor family as The Firm and I would add that it functions as a portentous industry, a kind of Crown corporation with enormous wealth in land, art, horses, vineyards, cars, castles, gold coins and art collections; it is the most economically powerful monarchy on earth.

Parliamentary monarchy under Elizabeth II and now Charles III means they are the head of state, but they do not rule. Although they are a power in the shadows, they do not suffer the electoral wear and tear, nor do they work as hard as a president, but without their signature on official documents, decrees, laws, appointments, awards, orders of various kinds, without that signature they simply cannot be executed or enter into force. In other words, they have more power than the president and parliamentarians... they do not govern, but their signature is worth the weight of the state.