Elizabeth II (2020): Petrified in Silence
Photo:
Ben Stansall / dpa
The pomp is bewitching, the day-long ceremony is meticulously chiselled.
It is a solemn dignity of state;
where else does it exist, at least not in Germany.
The secular visualization of death and the religious symbolism bring the sheer Middle Ages back to life in the middle of one of the most modern metropolises in the world.
But it doesn't seem out of date.
It's like the Catholic Church: you can call it completely misguided or superfluous if you want to, but it's been doing really well with the incense for centuries.
I say that as a Protestant.
I'm not that professionally familiar with the British royal family, but it's clear to see how the pomp at the Queen's funeral gives the new government in Britain a respite and the whole country a moment of unanimity ahead of winter of dissatisfaction, where the inflation rate could be much higher than in Germany.
The Queen is doing her country one last service, and most of the world is paying her last respects today.
She has done her duty all her life, but once she broke it.
And your country will not recover from this for a long time.
De mortuis nihil nisi bene, says the educated middle-class, you don't say anything bad about the dead.
But one thing has to be said: The Queen could have prevented Brexit.
But she didn't do it.
more on the subject
»Never complain, never explain«: The ServantThe SPIEGEL cover story by Jörg Schindler
Elizabeth II has stacked record upon record: she reigned 70 years and 214 days;
no one has sat on the British throne longer.
She was there when the British Empire was being decolonised, when the Cuban Missile Crisis was taking the world apart, when there was shooting and peace was being made in Northern Ireland.
She saw Britain join the EU, the fall of the Wall and finally Brexit.
Queen Elizabeth II has held talks with 15 prime ministers once a week for 70 years. As far as we know, she was not apolitical.
As well as: Every gesture, every word was politically examined and evaluated, which alone made her politically incessant.
Their very existence was the ongoing interference in the island's res publica.
How anyone could define her role as apolitical has always puzzled me.
The Queen began with Winston Churchill, the character of the century, and ended with Boris Johnson, the lying joker.
If she had prevented Brexit, she would have been spared at least this punishment.
And I bet she could have secured a majority for "remain."
In perhaps the most important moment of her tenure, she could have made the difference.
But she didn't want to.
She did not reach for the cloak of history, but remained petrified in silence.
The Queen missed that great political "King's Speech" her father gave when the island was being dealt with in a very different way.
What might have prevailed in her: The concern of turning the pro-Brexit half of the country against her?
The idea that a monarch should not take any profane political risks?
Or was she for Brexit and not a convinced European herself – but didn't want to show that publicly?
She takes the answers to these questions with her to her grave.
A historical personality who nevertheless refused to write history: I still don't understand it to this day.
more on the subject
Queen Elizabeth II: The SilenceBy Patricia Dreyer
It became almost grotesque, excuse me, when the Queen opened the British Parliament in June 2017, dressed like “a human EU flag” (wrote the “star”), namely with a blue hat with “golden yellow flower buttons”. .
If that was a statement, then it came too late.
Today it is said that the country's youth, who have to pay for Brexit, are turning their backs on the crown.
According to a survey, only 33 percent of 18- to 24-year-olds support the monarchy.
Does that surprise anyone?
And is that also an inheritance of Elizabeth?
It may be irreverent to ask this question at the open grave, but that doesn't make it go away.
In any case, the breakup of the UK is more likely after Brexit than before, and the Queen has been the guardian of unity.
It is possible that the Scots were just waiting for their deaths in order to secede as soon as possible.
Charles, the underestimated and ridiculed by all, might have dared to grab into the web of lies that weaved around the Brexit campaign.
He's late.
I am not an anti-monarchist.
But what good is a crown if it doesn't save the country when it needs saving?