Ben Wilson

Brothers and sisters in revolt

issue 18 February 2006

After a family quarrel in 1717, George I ordered his son and heir’s imprisonment in the Tower. His ministers had to explain that in England not even a king could dispense with habeas corpus. The King considered bundling the future George II on to a man-of-war bound for the West Indian plantations, but reluctantly conceded to English niceties. Obedience to the law and public opinion did not suit a man who had dedicated his first 54 years to the interests of Hanover before inheriting the British throne in 1714. In his small and happy German kingdom, George had personal power and was treated with honour by his deferential subjects; the British, by contrast, revelled in the tittle-tattle of royal scandal and subjected monarchs to strict conditions. Managing the royal family was an irksome business in his new realm.

In the years before he became king, George’s great-grandson was made to confront the duties of a British monarch.

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in