The Place of Monarchy in Society

Opinion

The recent coronation of our King was a matter of great pomp and ceremony. But his investment with symbols of a power that he does not actually hold has led many to wonder about the point of this system, and has called into question monarchy’s place in society.

For the overwhelming majority of civilisations throughout history, the answer to this question has been that monarchy is the best way for a nation to be ruled. After the rise of republicanism and democracy since the Enlightenment, however, it is now often dismissed as a ridiculous and unrepresentative system.

By our records, the first people to see this were the Athenians, who, around 1068 BC, abolished the monarchy, which was eventually reformed into a more democratic system. The system of monarchy was also abolished in antiquity in Rome, where in 509 BC the king Tarquin the Proud was overthrown and the Roman Republic was born.

However, these two nations were by far a part of the minority, as they remained until only the last century. There has historically always been a large amount of support for monarchy, and this is reflected through the writings of countless individuals.

In Plato’s Republic, for example, he argued against democracy, on the basis that experts and incompetents are given equal say. Plato instead advocated for a philosopher, whose role it is to be wise, and to think carefully about everything, to be given monarchical power. He believed that such a wise and just ruler would provide the best judgements and create the most socially cohesive society possible.

It is easy to dismiss Plato as idealistic and disconnected from the reality of modern society, but he highlights the underlying debate surrounding monarchy’s place in the modern world: Can an hereditary monarch possess the wisdom, judgement, and moral character necessary to govern a nation effectively?

It is crucial to acknowledge that modern constitutional monarchies have adapted to address such concerns. They have, for the most part, evolved into symbolic figures, acting as a unifying force rather than holding substantial political power. Constitutional monarchies operate within democratic systems, where elected representatives handle day-to-day governance and policy-making. The monarch’s role is primarily ceremonial, representing the nation, fostering national pride, and serving as a symbol of continuity.

In countries like the Netherlands, Norway, and Denmark, where constitutional monarchies thrive, the monarch’s role is largely non-political, with limited influence over the legislative process. Instead, they engage in diplomatic activities, support charitable causes, and act as a symbol of national unity. This modified form of monarchy allows the institution to coexist with democratic values, fostering stability and a sense of tradition without compromising the principles of meritocracy and equal opportunity.

Furthermore, this sense of tradition, and the historical and cultural significance of monarchies, cannot be overlooked. Monarchies often represent a nation’s identity, heritage, and traditions. They preserve historical narratives, providing a sense of connection to the past. This cultural aspect is particularly relevant for countries with rich historical backgrounds, as it helps maintain a collective national memory and contributes to tourism and cultural industries.

Monarchs also often act as ambassadors and promote their country’s interests abroad. Their position as non-partisan and neutral figureheads allows them to engage in diplomatic efforts to foster international relationships.

However, it is not only figurehead monarchs that can be good for a country. The principal benefit of an hereditary monarch with actual power is that they are raised to do their job. Monarchs are brought up with