There is what we popularly call Queen’s English. It is my favourite version of the English Language. My best speaker of it is Queen Elizabeth II of England. Well, the Queen must be the best speaker of Queen’s English, naturally. Never mind that some Nigerians take pride in not being able to speak their native languages well. As for the Queen, each time she speaks, I pay attention. In April, when she clocked 90, some thoughtful TV stations aired her speech. They did this side by side with her in black and white picture, speaking at the time she ascended the throne at 25 years of age. I prefer the former; there was something silky, gentle, musical, experienced, and so great-grandmotherly in the manner she spoke at 90. For me, all of that sums up something about the Queen. Dignity. She has lived her life with dignity, earning global respect in the process. Against the background of traditional leaders in Nigeria who have earned themselves a few unprintable tags, this is worth noting about a woman that has lived not only for herself, but for her heritage, the United Kingdom, our world.
I have deep respect for royalty. I’m convinced it isn’t just because I have the blood of the line in the defunct Oyo Empire that once controlled much of the Yoruba’s South-West of Nigeria for about 400 years. It’s more than that. It’s about leadership; about the head that carries the burdens of others, and carries it creditably. I’ve seen, close-up, the selfless life one who must enjoy the respect of his people has to live. Leadership at any level demands that much. The leader lives for the followers. Royalties are in these same shoes; they are leaders who happen to be tagged, Monarchs. They were in charge on kingdoms for centuries, until other forms of governments took over. Monarchs had had to live for their kingdoms, never for themselves. The burden of the head that must think up how to best protect his empire and people from enemies within and without is never light.
Yoruba culture, its creative arts especially, had thrived for generations to this day because a monarchy had put together an administration and a military force that guaranteed stability in his territory. I see the same pattern up north in Nigeria: Friends from royal families who happen to be in one leadership position or the other confide in me how they have to keep low profile because of the burdens their heritages confer on them. One member of the royal family mentions how he has to think first of this link when he considers where to live and where not to live. Each time I sit for a discussion with a particular elderly friend and kingmaker in one of the Emirates, he mentions what he must be seen or not be seen to be doing, or saying. This is no mean burden, royalties being ever in the public glare, especially in England where public outrage potentially could tear down even the oldest surviving royalty. This has made members of royal houses across Europe to tread more delicately. Queen Elizabeth walked that delicate line for more than 60 years commendably. For the sake of her heritage, she has sacrificed much; she has lived a selfless life that ensures the House of Windsor is intact. When I see people who live their entire lives for the sake of a higher purpose, I stand still in meditation, then I salute.
The Queen was born Elizabeth Alexandra Mary on April 21 1926. She ascended the throne in 1952 at a time some level of uncertainty had surrounded the royal institution. That was in an age during which happenings in England’s royal household captured imaginations in her colonies. Here is an excerpt from the 1936 report of a British colonial officer serving in Zaria Province of colonial Nigeria, capturing the mood at the time: “The year opened on a sad note with the death of His Revered Majesty King George V on January 20th – an event which was received with expressions of the deepest sorrow on the part of all classes of the community. The accession of His Majesty King Edward VIII had its message for the people of Zaria, who had vivid recollections of his visit to Nigeria as Prince of Wales. News of His Majesty’s (King Edward VIII) abdication during December was received therefore with acute regret, for in this case the King was more than a symbol of empire – he was a living memory.”
King George V was Elizabeth’s grandfather. King Edward VIII was her father’s elder brother, who, if he had not abdicated, Elizabeth’s father would never have become king, and she wouldn’t have had a chance to become the Queen on the death of her father, King George VI in 1952. So, here, we have a queen for whom destiny was at work. At the time Elizabeth’s father was crowned in 1937, the British officer in Zaria recorded thus: “On May 12, Zaria took part in the rejoicing of the Empire at the Coronation of King George VI. Celebrations took place in the form of a Ceremonial Parade and solemn service at the Court House in the morning and sports and feasting in the afternoon. On the next day, sports were held in the town and a firework took place in the evening with the picturesque background of the town wall as a setting”. The good memory of the time wasn’t limited to the north of Nigeria. The same applied in the south where people, especially in rural settings, still remember dates “as the year the Queen visited”. They mean Queen Elizabeth II. In my undergraduate days, a friend had proudly announced to our group during one of our boisterous discussions that his Dad, now a retired police officer, drove the car that took the Queen around in Lagos (I believe in the 1950s).
I’m fairly familiar with the current perception about the monarchy in the United Kingdom. Some say it serves no purpose anymore, so it should be scrapped. I disagree, and for several reasons, including how surprised I am when I see our people in Nigeria who are still attached to their traditional leaders. I notice this across the country, and I’m sure these royal fathers serve a purpose at the grass root that those far from them may not appreciate. Yes, the Queen of England doesn’t have constitutional powers, but she presides over an institution that still provides that sense of stability and projects value to the citizens. These aren’t immediately quantifiable, but they matter in the life of any country. The royal institution was a centre of unity for the British during the WW2. The politicians who time took the decisions, of course, but the citizens at warfronts would remember the throne and had that sense of where they were coming from, what they were fighting for. The Queen has been the walking history, the centre of unity of her country for decades, the same that traditional leaders in our setting should symbolise.
However, how the monarch in England plays her role, and how some of ours play it is of concern to me. For six decades, the Queen was never known to have publicly supported any politician who was seeking an elective office. She simply watched her people make their choices. She realises that all are her subjects, and whoever wins is for the good of the country. This isn’t the same in our clime where many of our traditional leaders have become divisive figures with their involvement in election campaigns. I wonder what a traditional leader whose sons and daughters belong to different parties thinks will be thought of him when he steps out to endorse a party or its candidate. But traditional leaders here do it, thereby reducing the dignity of the institution in the eyes of many. I knew a politician who had not just his political opponent to contend with during an election campaign, but also a traditional leader who had openly canvassed votes for the opponent. I still wait to see if this victorious politician will ever agree to attend a public event that has the said traditional leader in attendance. That’s how low many who are royalties here have brought themselves.
PUNCH
END
Be the first to comment