Elizabeth II (b. 1926), queen of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (1952– ). When Princess Elizabeth was born to the duke and duchess of York in 1926 there was little reason to expect that she would succeed to the throne. Her uncle, the prince of Wales, was only 31 and was being urged to marry: it was also quite possible that her parents would have a son who would take precedence. But the abdication of her uncle in 1936 brought her father to the throne as George VI.
Princess Elizabeth grew up pretty, cheerful, and obedient. Her strong sense of duty called to mind her grandfather George V and Queen Victoria. Most of the war was spent at Windsor castle. At the age of 18, and with the war coming to a close, Elizabeth was allowed to join the ATS and went each day to Aldershot to take a driving and vehicle maintenance course. She was already devoted to her cousin Philip Mountbatten, a naval officer. They were married in November 1947. Their first child, Prince Charles, was born a year later. In 1952 she succeeded her father on the throne at the age of 25.
The coronation of 1953 was a great success, a splash of colour and ceremony in a still austere post‐war Britain. Excitable journalists wrote of a New Elizabethan Age to come. In fact criticism developed rather quickly. Though not shy, the queen had reserve. In 1957 when Lord Altrincham complained that she sounded like a ‘priggish schoolgirl’, he was predictably threatened with horsewhipping. Political clouds also rolled in quickly. Britain found it extremely hard to shake off recurrent financial and economic crises and the
Suez fiasco of 1956 was a reminder that the country had neither its former strength nor its confidence.
The early years of her reign were dominated by the painful process of economic recovery and withdrawal from empire. By 1953 the crippled economies of Europe were beginning to recover and Germany, in particular, proved a formidable competitor. This was followed by the rise of the Far Eastern economies, Japan, Hong Kong, and Korea.Several of her governments ran onto the rocks of balance of payments difficulties, inflation, unemployment, and runs on the pound: traditional industries declined and their replacements were slow to emerge.
The Suez crisis was only one of the more dramatic episodes in the retreat from empire. The withdrawal from India had taken place in 1948 before Elizabeth came to the throne. It was followed into independence by Malaya (1957), Ghana (1957), Nigeria (1960), Sierra Leone (1961), Tanganyika (1961), Uganda (1962), Jamaica (1962), Trinidad (1962), Zambia (1964), and Aden (1967). The withdrawals were effected with relatively little rancour, though there was fighting in Malaya (1948–60), in Aden (1963–73), a protracted crisis over Southern Rhodesia (1965–80), and an unpleasant and tedious campaign in Kenya against
Mau Mau from 1952 to 1955. The queen and the royal family played an active role in efforts to transform the empire into a commonwealth of equal states. But most of the newly independent countries opted to become republics and although the queen remained head of the Commonwealth, her role was largely social.
The later years of her reign have seen considerable economic progress. Macmillan's remark of 1957—‘most of our people have never had it so good’—was premature, but the gross national product continued to grow. This was partly because the sharp rise in world oil prices was offset by North Sea oil from 1975 onwards.
As the empire shrank and economic performance faltered, Britain's relationship with Europe emerged as a major issue. It had implications for the monarchy since the more advanced schemes for a federal Europe would affect sovereignty. Britain's first two applications to join the
European Economic Community were vetoed by de Gaulle in 1963 and 1967, before Edward
Heath's government gained acceptance in 1972. In the 1980s, as what was at first envisaged as a trading community moved towards political integration, the question of ‘Europe’ moved steadily to the front of the political agenda.
Of more immediate concern to the queen was probably the role of the monarchy itself and the vicissitudes of the royal family. The first indications that the royal road might be bumpy came in 1953 when the queen's sister wished to marry a distinguished airman, Group Captain Peter Townsend, who was in the process of divorcing his wife. The princess was persuaded not to marry him. When she did marry Anthony Armstrong Jones in 1960, it ended in divorce. These were no more than the drops of rain that preceded the deluge. The marriages of three of the royal children who embarked on matrimony ended in divorce. In November 1992 at the Guildhall, the queen referred ruefully to a year which had seen one divorce, two marital breakdowns, and a devastating fire at Windsor castle as ‘not a year on which I shall look back with undiluted pleasure … an
annus horribilis’.
It is too soon for any informed assessment of the queen's constitutional role. Though her prime ministers have enthusiastically published their memoirs, they have been bland in their references to the sovereign. There was some criticism of the procedure in 1957 when
Eden was forced by ill‐health to resign and was succeeded by Macmillan rather than
Butler. But the lord chancellor and the lord president of the council ( Kilmuir and
Salisbury) were asked to sound the cabinet, and its strong preference for Macmillan was confirmed by the chief whip, the chairman of the 1922 committee, the chairman of the Conservative Party, and Sir Winston
Churchill. The queen certainly did not act against advice. Nor did she in 1963 when the choice of Lord
Home to succeed Macmillan caused surprise. She acted on the advice of Macmillan himself, whom she visited in hospital. Changed arrangements in the Conservative Party in 1965 for electing its leader make it unlikely that this royal prerogative will cause awkwardness in future.
There is no doubt that, from the 1980s onwards, there has been increased criticism of the royal family, though not of Elizabeth herself. The decline in respect is a general phenomenon and applies to many other institutions—to the church, the law, Parliament, and, not least, to the press itself. A policy of openness, inaugurated by the film
Royal Family (1966), has evident dangers. Satire, which in the 1960s was refreshing and witty, may become coarse and spiteful. ‘The Palace’ has often had to ponder the balance between over‐ and under‐exposure. That the latter has its risks is demonstrated by the example of Queen Victoria's unpopularity during her seclusion after Albert's death. But the problems caused by under‐exposure are more easily remedied.
