George V I Was A Hard Act To Follow, But Her Majesty Passes With Flying Colours I M H O

[Canary42]

Those of us old enough to remember George VI and his passing possibly recall in what high esteem he was held at the time. His courage and solidarity through a most difficult period for the country was magnificent.

So this was an enormous challenge facing the young queen (whom I remember looking so fragile and vulnerable during her crowning), but I think she has proven every bit as good as (if not better than) her father. A pity so many of the Family have let her down in the ensuing years, but if anything that makes her stronger.

Long may you reign Ma'am.

[Canary42]

The young Princess pictured during her Father's reign. Service with a smile.

https://ibb.co/wy5Nq6f

[i] (Pic : Imperial War Museum IWM TR 2832) [i]

[choux]

Canary, I have always thought that HM looked determined and resolute at her coronation. Young, yes, but otherwise fit for the job to follow in her dearly beloved father's footsteps.

[burlyshirley]

I agree long may she reign. I can't imagine the Monarchy without her.

[Bobbisox1]

She was resolute at age 25 she took the crown and told the country she’d do as her father taught her and serve the country and Commonwealth as he did before her, she’s fulfilled that promise even at the age of 96

[Canary42]

///I have always thought that HM looked determined and resolute at her coronation///

I do agree absolutely Choux, but my OP was referring less to her character/expression but more to how she looked so tiny on that enormous throne with the Archbishop looming over her with the massive crown.

But you're right, she faced it with her characteristic determination which has served her so well throughout her reign.

[choux]

There was an interesting bit in the programme concerning the coronation, Canary and the restrictions put upon the BBC filming the service: no close ups and minimal camera position etc. It was because the lens used elongated everything terribly that I suppose HM looked quite small in the vastness of Westminster Abbey. I agree with you that she did look vulnerable in that respect.

HM has been the best monarch this country could have had or hoped for and she should make all of us proud to be British.

[Atheist]

My little worry about having a hereditary head of state, is that we were lucky in having Lilibet, but we could have had a Trump or Farage or Johnson and all their progeny for many years after their demise. Just because we struck lucky with the Queen doesn't mean that it's a good system.

[Atheist]

Talking about royals reminds me of the possibly apocryphal "Across the wires the electric message came; he is no better, he is much the same." Written in 1871 on the illness of the Prince of Wales. Sounds a bit fishy to me. (Attributed to Alfred Austin - later Poet Laureate.)
To me, he definitely rivals William McGonnagghhaeall (or whowever you spells the thing!)

[New Judge]

//HM has been the best monarch this country could have had or hoped for and she should make all of us proud to be British.//

x2

Three of the finest monarchs and one of the greatest Prime Ministers (arguable the greatest, certainly in peace time) were women. I don't know whether this is testament to the quality of women as leaders or the lack of quality in most of the men. Wither way, with our current Queen, the country could not have hoped for a more competent, resolute and dutiful monarch and it will be a sad day when she leaves us.

[New Judge]

//...but we could have had a Trump or Farage or Johnson....doesn't mean that it's a good system.//

Indeed. But citizens of the USA select their Head of State. So long as I can remember each has been worse than his predecessor (despite everybody thinking the next one cannot possibly be as bad as the last). So theirs is perhaps not such a good system either. The added benefit of our Constitutional Monarchy is that, despite being Head of State, the Monarch, in normal circumstances, has no power over the decisions of the elected government.

[Atheist]

NJ; and would you feel so loyal to a King Charles? It's just luck, I think, that we happened to get such a good woman. It's the system that I worry about, not the individuals we happened to get.

[choux]

In last night's spectacular we heard the voice of Her Majesty talk about the achievements of Charles and good work by William and she rounded that off saying she was proud of them both. That was HM telling us we are in good hands for the future.

[New Judge]

But the Monarchy has moved on from the attitudes displayed by Charles II. It has evolved and it learns from its evolution. Unfortunately elected politicians very often do not. Time and again they do the same things expecting different results. It's seems sometimes almost as if they have forgotten to write things down so that their successors can avoid their mistakes.

[Smowball]

I honestly can’t imagine the country without her.

[tiggerblue10]

I can't begin to imagine what Britain would have been like had Edward VIII not abdicated. George VI was well grounded and HM followed suit.

[New Judge]

//I can't begin to imagine what Britain would have been like had Edward VIII not abdicated.//

There is a good possibility that the outcome of WW2 may have been different. But if it had not (or if it had and our Monarchy survived that outcome) then Princess Elizabeth would have ascended the Throne in May 1972 (when she was 46 years old). And we would now have just celebrated her golden jubilee.

[sandyRoe]

ER has served the country well.
Imagine if Andrew was next in the succession. Somebody like him could see the end of monarchy.