Comment & Debate
William Byrne. “Republic Versus Monarchy”. December, 1995 – “Connected to the people? Foreign connections
Due to the isolating nature of the Monarch’s high public office, and the accompanying rich lifestyle, it is understandable that Monarchs can be accused of being unable to relate to “the common people”. But there can be other reasons as to why Monarchs can be considered to be “not part of the people”.
From 1688 until 1952 England was ruled by German Royalty, except during Queen Anne’s reign of 1702 to 1714. Between 1714 and 1837 the Monarchs of Great Britain, like many British sovereigns before them, were also the rulers of a foreign state. Queen Elizabeth II was the first wholly British Prince or Princess to be enthroned since Queen Anne.(16)
During World War One the British Royal Family were not only Princes and Princesses over British soil, but were also Princes and Princesses over German soil. This situation did not change until 1917 when George V relinquished the Royal Family’s German styles and titles.(17)
The ranks of the British Monarchy have included a number who weren’t even born in Britain, who were simultaneously “rulers” of foreign lands, and whose level of attachment to Britain itself was questionable. For example: William III (of Orange), and George I (from Hanover).(18) Indeed, it was said of Richard I that “his continental possessions had always meant more to him than England which he looked upon as a source of men and money for his wars” (although born in England, he had been raised in Aquitaine; and, of his ten years reign, he spent only six months in England).(19)
Richard I had “never learned to speak the English tongue”(20); and the ability of George I and George II to speak English was so poor that, when they attempted it, it “was a matter of ridicule to their subjects”.(21)
That famous British matriarch Queen Victoria, although born in London and having ruled Britain for 64 years, had a mother, the daughter of a German Duke, who only spoke German in the home; as well as having a German-born governess – thus Queen Victoria was never able to speak English perfectly herself.(22) References to people speaking the “Queen’s English” (or the “King’s English”) take on a whole new meaning, in the light of Queen Victoria and the foreign born British Monarchs.
It is in the realms of possibility that a future British Monarch may marry a Jamaican, a Red Indian, or an Eskimo. Unless, by that time, the population of Britain is largely Jamaican, it would be a fair guess to say that the British public would be surprised by the advent of a Jamaican dynasty as their “ruling” Monarchy. Such a scenario may appear ridiculous, but then so is the scenario of a Monarchical Australia.”
Senator Alan Eggleston. “The Republic: an idea that has reached its time”. Address to the John Stuart Mill Society. September 22nd, 1997 – “Finally, to me the question of the Republic is a question of national maturity and national identity.
It is hard for me to comprehend the relevance of a foreign monarch to Australians of the 1990’s let alone understand how migrants and the youth of Australia comprehend the relevance of the British monarchy in their day to day experience of being ‘Australian’, or how our regional neighbours work through the implications of the Australian Head of State being the monarch of a former European imperial power who lives on the far side of the globe.
Contemporary Australia has carved out its own role in the world and just as in the mid eighties we took charge of our legal affairs by ending Australian appeals to the Privy Council in London, it is now appropriate for us to take charge of the political affairs by creating an Australian institution for our national Head of State and in so doing converting the Commonwealth of Australia to a Republic.
I would suggest that the only real question which remains is that of ‘when’ will the change occur.”