April 11, 1689: Coronation of William III and Mary II as Joint Sovereigns of England, Scotland and Ireland

Tags

Archbishop of Canterbury, Archbishop of London, coronation, Coronation Chair, James II-VII of England, Mary II of England, Mary of Modena, Stone of Destiny, Stone of Scone, William III of Orange, William Sancroft

During the Glorious Revolution of November 1688 James II-VII, king of England, Scotland and Ireland was deposed and replaced by his daughter Mary II and her husband, stadtholder William III of Orange, the de facto ruler of the Dutch Republic. The Glorious Revolution
can be seen as both the last successful invasion of England and also an internal coup that toppled the reigning monarch.

William III, King of England, Scotland and Ireland, Stadtholder of the Netherlands with his Imperial State Crown

The Revolution ended a century of political dispute and strife between the Crown and Parliament by confirming the primacy of Parliament over the Crown, a principle established in the Bill of Rights 1689.

English coronations were traditionally held at Westminster Abbey, with the monarch seated on the Coronation Chair. Main elements of the coronation service and the earliest form of oath can be traced to the ceremony devised by Saint Dunstan for Edgar’s coronation in 973 AD at Bath Abbey. It drew on ceremonies used by the kings of the Franks and those used in the ordination of bishops.

William III and Mary II are the only co-monarchs in English/British history. They’re still the only two people to have been jointly crowned as sovereign rulers. For example, Felipe II of Spain, claimed to rule England and Ireland via the concept Jure uxoris (a Latin phrase meaning “by right of (his) wife”) which describes that a title of nobility is being used by a man because his wife holds the office or title suo jure (“in her own right”).

Mary II, Queen of England, Scotland and Ireland with her Imperial State Crown

Despite all laws and statutes being issued jointly in Mary I and Felipe II’s name, Felipe II’s tenure on the throne ended with the death of Mary I in 1558 and he is regarded as a King Consort and not a sovereign in his own right.

Because of their joint rule their 1689 coronation posed a unique problem: the nation only had one set of coronation regalia. The original regalia had been destroyed when the monarchy had been abolished by order of Oliver Cromwell. After the restoration of the monarchy in 1661, a new set of regalia had been made for King Charles II by Sir Robert Viner.

The 1661 crown, called St. Edward’s Crown, would be used by the new King William III, but Queen Mary II — who actually had the better claim to the throne — would need a different set to use. William III of Orange was third in succession to the throne behind his wife Mary and her sister Anne. Anne allowed her place in the succession to be changed in favor of William to inherit the throne.

The consort’s regalia, which had been made in 1685 for Mary’s stepmother, Mary of Modena, was thought to be insufficient because Mary II wasn’t being crowned as a consort, she was a monarch in her own right, and she would need a set of regalia equal to that of her husband.

Coronation Crown of Mary II.

William III and Mary II were proclaimed joint sovereigns on February 1689. With the coronation set for April 11, 1689. The men charged with planning the coronation faced a major time crunch. Since William III and Mary II had gained the throne through revolution their supporters wanted them to be crowned as soon as possible to cement their legitimacy as monarchs.

It was an enormous task. An elaborate ceremony was planned which included a massive number of peers, and even a second wooden coronation chair for Mary had to be constructed and carved. Because of the time pressure, parts of Mary’s regalia ultimately were repurposed from Mary of Modena’s set.

During the portions of the coronation ceremony both William III and Mary II had to wear different crowns. William III was crowned with St. Edward’s Crown; Mary II was simultaneously crowned with Mary of Modena’s coronation crown.

William III also wore the Imperial State Crown made for Charles II in 1661, Mary II wore the state crown made in 1685 by Richard de Beauvoir for Mary of Modena.

That state crown is now on display at the Tower of London. While the state crown of 1685 remains today much as it was when it was made (albeit without the same gemstones), the coronation crown has been significantly altered over the centuries. It’s currently in the collection of the Museum of London, where it is displayed with imitation gemstones.

An interesting note, William Sancroft, the Archbishop of Canterbury, who typically presides over the coronation, refused to do so because he continued to support James II-VII. This fact is particularly ironic.

William Sancroft was the 79th Archbishop of Canterbury, and was one of the Seven Bishops imprisoned in 1688 for seditious libel against King James II-VII over his opposition to the king’s Declaration of Indulgence. Despite this fact he still supported James II-VII.

Coronation Regalia of William III. The Crown is the 1661 St. George’s Crown

Although Sancroft refused to officiate the coronation of William III and Mary II he was deprived of the office of Archbishop of Canterbury but not for that reason. He was eventually deprived of his office in 1690 for refusing to swear allegiance to William III and Mary II.

In officiating the ceremony Sanford was replaced by the Bishop of London, Henry Compton.

Being crowned by another bishop is something that happened several times in the Middle Ages, but there would often be a second coronation done with the Archbishop of Canterbury of for sake of continuity and because of fears over the illegitimacy of the ceremony.

King Edward’s Chair (or St. Edward’s Chair or the Coronation Chair) has been used for the coronation of English (and British later on) since Edward II, with the exceptions of Edward V and Edward VIII, both of whom were not crowned. Mary II was not crowned in the chair as well. A second chair was constructed before the coronation for Mary to sit in.

Underneath the Coronation Chair sits the Stone of Scone, also called the Stone of Destiny.

William III and Mary II

Various theories and legends exist about the stone’s history prior to its placement in Scone. One legend place the origins of the Stone in Biblical times and identify it as the Stone of Jacob, taken by Jacob from Bethel while on the way to Haran (Genesis 28:10–22). This very same Stone of Jacob was then supposedly taken to ancient Ireland by the prophet Jeremiah.

Historically, the artefact was kept at the now-ruined Scone Abbey in Scone, near Perth, Scotland, having been brought there from Iona by Kenneth MacAlpin circa 841 AD. After its forced removal from Scone during Edward I’s invasion of Scotland in 1296, it was used in the coronation of the monarchs of England as well as the monarchs of Great Britain and latterly of the United Kingdom following the Treaty of Union.

Orb for William III

Orb created for Mary II

Another orb also had to be created for Mary II to match the orb used by William III.

As joint sovereigns Mary II mostly deferred to William III a renowned military leader and principal opponent of Louis XIV, when he was in England. She did, however, act alone when William was engaged in military campaigns abroad, proving herself to be a powerful, firm, and effective ruler. Mary’s death from smallpox at the age of 32 in 1694 left William III as sole ruler until his death in 1702, when he was succeeded by Mary’s sister, Anne.

Accession of Queen Anne of England, Scotland and Ireland. Part III.

Tags

Ireland, James II-VII of England, King Charles II of England, Marie of Modena, Princess Anne, Privy Council, Roman Catholic Church, Scotland

When Charles II died in 1685, Anne’s father became King James II of England and Ireland and also King James VII of Scotland. To the consternation of the English people, James began to give Catholics military and administrative offices, in contravention of the Test Acts that were designed to prevent such appointments.

Anne shared the general concern, and continued to attend Anglican services. As her sister Mary lived in the Netherlands, Anne and her family were the only members of the royal family attending Protestant religious services in England. When her father tried to get Anne to baptise her youngest daughter into the Catholic faith, Anne burst into tears. “The Church of Rome is wicked and dangerous”, she wrote to her sister, “their ceremonies—most of them—plain downright idolatry.” Anne became estranged from her father and stepmother, as James moved to weaken the Church of England’s power.

In early 1687, within a matter of days, Anne miscarried, her husband caught smallpox, and their two young daughters died of the same infection. Lady Rachel Russell wrote that George and Anne had “taken [the deaths] very heavily … Sometimes they wept, sometimes they mourned in words; then sat silent, hand in hand; he sick in bed, and she the carefullest nurse to him that can be imagined.” Later that year, she suffered another stillbirth.

Public alarm at James’s Catholicism increased when his wife, Mary of Modena, became pregnant for the first time since James’s accession. In letters to her sister Mary, Anne raised suspicions that the Queen was faking her pregnancy in an attempt to introduce a false heir. She wrote, “they will stick at nothing, be it never so wicked, if it will promote their interest … there may be foul play intended.” Anne had another miscarriage in April 1688, and left London to recuperate in the spa town of Bath.

Anne’s stepmother gave birth to a son, Prince James Francis Edward on June 10, 1688, and a Catholic succession became more likely. Anne was still at Bath, so she did not witness the birth, which fed the belief that the child was spurious.

Anne may have left the capital deliberately to avoid being present, or because she was genuinely ill, but it is also possible that James desired the exclusion of all Protestants, including his daughter, from affairs of state. “I shall never now be satisfied”, Anne wrote to her sister Mary, “whether the child be true or false. It may be it is our brother, but God only knows … one cannot help having a thousand fears and melancholy thoughts, but whatever changes may happen you shall ever find me firm to my religion and faithfully yours.”

To dispel rumours of a supposititious child, James had 40 witnesses to the birth attend a Privy Council meeting, but Anne claimed she could not attend because she was pregnant (which she was not) and then declined to read the depositions because it was “not necessary”.

Abdication and what to call former Monarchs? Part I

Tags

Abdication, Deposed, Deposition, Duke of Windsor, Edward VIII, European Monarchy, European Royalty, James II-VII of England, King Edward VIII of the United Kingdom, Mary Queen of Scots, Mary Stuart

On December 11, 1936 King Edward VIII of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland abdicated the throne for the woman he loved. His abdication created something unique within the context of former sovereigns.

HRH The Duke of Windsor, former King Edward VIII

Abdication, although relatively rare, has occurred through the history of the various European monarchies. Abdication is different from when a monarch is deposed although there are times when the differences are are a bit fuzzy.

Deposed vs Abdication

The word abdication is derived from the Latin abdicatio meaning to disown or renounce (from ab, away from, and dicare, to dedicate or relinquish). In its broadest sense abdication is the act of renouncing and resigning from any formal office, but it is applied especially to the supreme office of state.

Deposition by political means concerns the removal of a politician or monarch. It may be done by coup, impeachment, invasion, or forced abdication. The term may also refer to the official removal of a clergyman, especially a bishop, from ecclesiastical office.

It would be easy to differentiate between the two terms if abdication was simply defined as a monarchs willingness to relinquish their thrones and power. However, the terms become somewhat muddied and synonymous when a deposition occurs as a forced abdication. Mary I, Queen of Scots was forced to abdicate in favour of her one-year-old son James. For myself, in the name of simplicity, I view abdication as a willing or unwilling relinquishment of power through official and legal means by signing a document that is acknowledged by the government.

Edward VIII is a classic example of that. Mary I, Queen of Scots is an example of a forced abdication and yet at the same also meets the definition of a deposition. James II-VII of England, Scotland and Ireland is a prime example of being deposed. Troops were at his door and he fled the country. Of course being assassinated or murdered in a coup fits the definition of a deposition.

Haven gotten that out of the way, the real topic is what to call or title a monarch that has abdicated and/or been deposed? This is where the uniqueness of Edward VIII comes into play. When Edward VIII abdicated he lost his Royal style and title and was downgraded. This was an unusual occurrence for prior to his abdication the majority of former monarchs retained their titles.

Over the next few postings we will examine the abdication of several monarchs and what they were called after their reign was over. We will start with Edward VIII with the next post.