and millions poured out their grief when Diana died in 1997. However, critics dismiss such things and go on to point out that: the Queen’s personal staff are drawn from the topmost drawer of the aristocratically connected and Eton educated; while her garden parties annually involve a total of 35,000 people, the Queen takes her tea in a tent separate from her guests; and the Diana outpourings were in some measure critical of the RoyalFamily, which was seen as dysfunctional and unable to empathise with the woman married to the heir to the throne, let alone understand
Walter Bagehot, the most famous authority on the British constitution, made a distinction in the nineteenth century between those aspects which were ‘dignified’ – those that had a mostly ceremonial function, like the monarchy, Privy Council and, to a degree, the House of Lords – and the ‘efficient’ or ‘working’ aspects – like the Commons, departments of state and the law courts. (Moran, 2005, p. 71, points out that ‘dignified’ is not precisely the correct word to describe some of the behaviour of the RoyalFamily in recent decades.)
carefully holding one’s glass over a bowl of water (i.e. drinking the health of the king over the water – a.k.a. King James) only looks quaint to modern eyes. Likewise the wearing of tartan waistcoats in the late 1740s, hanging unlabelled portraits of the exiled Stuart royalfamily in their country houses, and penning and reading poetry evoking the good old days of lost (Stuart) innocence.
Thus when rebellious angels fell,
The very heav’n, where good ones dwell,
Became th’apostate spirits’ hell.
Seeking against eternal right
of everyone to set up their own organisations representing common interests, like political parties or trade unions, and to vote in choosing the government in regular elections.
Some aspects of the constitution are more controversial. Some of these are ancient and regarded as possibly past their utility:
The House of Lords has been mostly stripped of its hereditary peers but still (in 2009) awaits comprehensive reform.
The role of the monarchy is disputed by some who feel an elected head of state might be preferable. Since the lives of the royalfamily have
Joseph Enzer and Thomas Clayton in a style and with motifs that contemporaries well understood to be thoroughly Jacobite. Architects and designers like Enzer, Clayton and James Gibb accordingly developed a special style for a select market of Jacobite clients. 58 More discreet, or less wealthy, patrician Jacobites made do with having pictures of Jacobite and Cavalier martyrs hanging on the walls of their homes and keeping medallions celebrating the exiled royalfamily. Accordingly a pool of Jacobite limners, engravers and medal manufacturers developed. 59 Jacobites
more fashionable styles. Manufacturers strive to develop new fabrics, stitching techniques, and textiles, and kimono fashion is very different from fashion in the West.
At the time of the Meiji Restoration in 1868, however, Japan started to turn its back on the kimono as part of a general movement towards Westernization. The nation began to emulate Western practices in education, land tax systems, and conscription. In 1872, the Japanese government announced that the royalfamily and government officers should wear Western-style, formal regal attire at ceremonies
party’s hard-won victory therefore had huge consequences for the Jacobite cause. In essence it committed the Jacobites to a constitutional settlement in the event of a restoration that would, de facto , have been as emphatically Protestant as the developing Revolution Settlement in England ( see document 3 ). Naturally enough, James II and VII’s Catholic co-religionists bitterly opposed his making commitments that threatened to leave them little better off after a Jacobite restoration than they were under William III and II. And the royalfamily, mindful of the
police in the ‘cash for honours’ scandal in 2006–7.
This is a new role which the media spotlight has bestowed upon Prime Ministers when their behaviour or that of their families is judged appropriate or not.
To some extent the RoyalFamily used to fulfil this role but as their salience as national figures declined, the role of Prime Ministers and their families has strengthened. Some anticipation of it was discernible in Thatcher’s period in power when her personal behaviour – thrifty, energetic, litter-clearing – won attention. Her family also won
Jacobite experience has only begun to be explored by scholars such as John Toffee, Kathryn King and Claire Walker; there is a great deal more to do and it will without doubt transform our understanding of Jacobitism as a whole. 31
By contrast, since the heyday of the Jacobite movement there has always been a good deal of interest in its material culture. Commemorative Jacobite medals, pictures of the royalfamily and various Jacobite heroes, locks of Charles Edward’s hair and memorabilia associated with the Jacobite risings were just a few of the
the Hanoverian royalfamily and whisking them off to confinement in France, or else holding them hostage until reinforcements arrived. Alexander Murray of Elibank, 115 the main liaison between Charles and the plotters (from which the conspiracy derived the name by which it is usually known: the ‘Elibank plot’), finally killed it at the English end when he realised that there was no hope of Prussian or French aid and that the English Jacobites were being manoeuvred into going it alone. 116 By then, however, Charles had already sent two trusted agents from the