The natural reaction to this week’s news that King Charles III is suffering from cancer has been one of concern and compassion. As the Prime Minister said, consolation can be drawn from the fact that the illness has been caught early and that Charles is continuing with his duties – albeit stepping aside from public-facing engagements for the time being. But it hasn’t taken long for conversation to stray on to other questions: might it be better for him to step back from all duties? And perhaps at some point he should give way to Prince William?
Such an idea is to be resisted. Charles III is the oldest monarch to take the throne in British history, and there are obvious health implications. But the King has long been an advocate of the British tradition of monarchy: that it is not a job from which one retires. The crown comes before the person.
Some of the happiest, most settled times for Britain have been towards the end of long reigns
Abdication has become a common feature in other European monarchies.
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.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in