Charles’ popularity took a major stumble in the 1980s during his marital problems with Princess Diana, especially when it emerged he had been having a longtime affair with his now wife, the soon-to-be Queen Camilla. This opprobrium only grew after the 1997 death of Diana, an icon whose popularity still exceeds that of Charles and the family itself, according to YouGov.
Scandal has plagued the royals again in recent years. The messy departure of Prince Harry and Meghan came amid a flurry of racism allegations. And last year Charles’ brother, Prince Andrew, reached a legal settlement with a woman who accused him of abusing her as a minor.
Charles and his retinue will be keenly aware of these existential threats to his tenure. And so they have vowed to modernize both ceremony and family — as much as is possible for an unelected head of state who is billed as God’s representative on Earth.
The slimmed down event (2,000 guests) will feature religious leaders from Jewish, Hindu, Sikh, Muslim and Buddhist communities — an “unprecedented gesture,” according to the Church of England, and something unthinkable in 1953.
The coronation ceremony will also avoid using the Queen Mother’s Crown featuring the Kohinoor, one of the world’s largest cut diamonds, which was obtained by the British Empire. However, the crown that Camilla will use features parts of the Cullinan diamond, which was discovered in South Africa. For many there, it also represents the empire’s penchant for mineral plunder.
“Whatever the royal family do, they can’t escape the controversies of empire,” said Sathnam Sanghera, author of “EmpireLand: How Imperialism Has Shaped Modern Britain.”
Last year Charles went further, telling an audience in Rwanda about “the depths of my personal sorrow” for the hurt caused by slavery and its legacy. But he stopped short of a full apology, a thorny issue as it would likely lead to increased calls for reparations from the British government.
Charles is, if anything, seen as more modern and progressive than his taciturn mother ever was. He has for decades been a champion for environmental issues, long before these became mainstream. His slimmed-down vision for his household includes giving far more responsibility to his eldest son and heir, the popular Prince William.
“In many ways, Charles is a better fit for a modern Britain than he was 30 or 40 years ago” when public opinion had not yet caught up with the king, NBC royal commentator Daisy McAndrew said.
This is uncharted territory for Britain, and the coming decades are unknowable.
There are those, such as the anti-royalist pressure group Republic, who believe Charles’ contradictions and complexities will eventually herald the end of this millennia-old institution.
However, most mainstream royal experts believe that the monarchy is so deeply interwoven into British society that, even in a reduced capacity, it will endure long after Charles’ reign.
“To get rid of the monarch and the monarchy, we’d have to have a referendum,” said Anna Whitelock, professor of the history of the monarchy at University of London. “And there’s no government and no political party at the moment who are anywhere close to suggesting that.”
