Tuesday 24th June 2025
Blog Page 236

Why We Are Not All Elizabethans

0

Queen Elizabeth II’s funeral on Monday was packed with highly choreographed, magnificent and impressive ceremony. It was undeniably moving to see so many world leaders come together in Westminster Abbey to celebrate the life and mourn the death of such a historically significant woman. But, tainting the pomp and circumstance, delicately placed on top of the coffin, embellishing her crown and sceptre, the looted Koh-i-Noor diamond and ‘Great Star of Africa’, estimated at an unbelievable £350 million each, served as stinging reminders that the monarchy is more than just a harmless opportunity to indulge in the grandeur and glory of our shared national traditions. The monarchy has proven to be a uniting force for many, but it is also a harmful engine of division.

Naturally, then, Queen Elizabeth II’s legacy is a thorny, kaleidoscopic, and divisive one. For some, she was the shining embodiment of this nation, a paragon of dignified self-control and service, and the ultimate symbol of constant endurance. For others, she, and the monarchy, represented and continue to represent something starkly different. It is precisely for this reason that it is unfair and unreasonable to assume that we are all Elizabethans.

This is not, by any means, a cynical attempt to poison the national mood, nor is it a violent call for the guillotine. It is simply recognising that the Queen’s death, as a cosmic and consequential national turning point, seems to be an appropriate time and unparalleled opportunity to ask difficult yet fair questions about the nature of this country now and the role of the monarchy in it.

In light of this, it has been interesting to see what the monarchy looks like now, with Elizabeth gone. With the cost of the funeral, the security and the national reorganisation, it looks expensive. With the shocking arrests of republican protesters in the streets, it looks anti-democratic. With the spontaneous sacking of one hundred Clarence House staff during the church service to the queen, it looks ruthless. And with Prince Andrew, the new counsellor of state, allowed to wear military medals, it looks unlawful and no longer fit for purpose. What has become clear, amongst the divergence of public opinion, is that the monarchy always has, and always will, come first.

Nothing has made me more uncomfortable during this morning period, however, than the painful attention being drawn to the deep, deep inequalities choking this country to death. Throughout the funeral, which was the most expensive single-day operation in this country’s history, I found the excessive displays of obscene wealth and grandeur to be disturbingly tone-deaf. When we remember that bills will be up by 97% this year, or that the highest inflation in forty years is crippling families who are already facing the sharpest fall in pay in more than twenty years, all while King Charles III will not be paying inheritance tax on his mother’s £750 million estate, these grand displays of unimaginable royal wealth become, at best, distasteful, and, at worst, an insult.

And amidst all of this injustice, I have felt pressure and expectation to not only mourn the death of the late Queen but to celebrate her legacy. But, if her legacy requires cancelling hospital appointments, including cancer treatments, when 6.8 million people sit on NHS waiting lists, or closing Food Banks when 6.7 million people live in food poverty, then it is not something I want to celebrate. I will never understand why the obscenely wealthy are continually venerated while the obscenely poor starve to death. Paradoxically, this is social inequality in its rawest and yet its most accepted form. If this makes you angry, good. If it does not, then you need to pay more attention.

If you are an Elizabethan, feel free to mourn. But make sure to remember, that she was, and indeed still is, as much a symbol of constancy, security and endurance as she was of gross social inequality, unapologetic imperial brutality, and the flimsiness of our democracy. It is possible, and important, to remember that we can both celebrate, mourn and hope, while also recognising that no one deserves total exemption from accountability. Her legacy is a complex one, and this is something that both loyal monarchists and robust republicans must remember. So, please, weep for the Queen, but also weep for the other 12,000 people that are expected to die this winter. Weep because, in a fairer world, the money spent on the Queen’s funeral could have saved their lives. Weep because this country can, but will still fail to, protect the poorest and most vulnerable of us. There is no greater national tragedy than that.

Image credit: By Peter Trimming, CC BY-SA 2.0,

“Broad Meadow” returns as city centre road goes car-free

0

Work has begun to turn busy Oxford thoroughfare Broad Street into a car-free pedestrian park complete with trees, lawns, and outdoor seating for 18 months following the enormous success of a similar scheme last year.

Preliminary designs have been shared on Oxfordshire County Council’s website, which said that the project was intended to “promote wellbeing, and a greener cityscape while encouraging less reliance on motor vehicles for local trips”. Broad Street is home to Balliol, Exeter, and Trinity, as well as a variety of student favourite businesses like Café Italiamo, the White Horse, Blackwells, and Café Crème.

Last year, To encourage outdoor socialising during the COVID-19 pandemic, cars were banned on the road between July and October, with the western end of the street – where it joins Cornmarket – turned into a pedestrian-friendly area which was enjoyed by 100,000 visitors.

“Broad Meadow” as seen last year. Image credit: Oxford City Council

This was hugely popular, with an Oxford City Council consultation finding that 87% of residents believed it had had a positive effect on the city, and notably that a further 80% supported Broad Street’s permanent pedestrianisation.

The council also liaised with over 150 interest groups, including colleges, local businesses, Cyclox, emergency services, and many more.

Hakim, owner of Café Crème, said: “We are very happy to see how Broad Meadow turned out. During the project, the number of people coming to Broad Street and staying was a big change – you could definitely see a noticeable difference. Broad Meadow had a clear impact on our business. This new public area was particularly important when we had no students or tourists and really helped our business.”

Councillor Liz Leffman, Leader of Oxfordshire County Council, said: “We are really excited that we are delivering the return of this hugely popular space right in the heart of our historic city for everyone to enjoy.

“The new Broad Street project will again be one of the city centre’s largest outdoor inclusive public spaces inviting people to meet and relax between shopping, grabbing a light meal, taking in the sights, or enjoying events that can be staged in the vibrant arts space it provides.

She emphasised the Council’s commitment to long-term pedestrianisation, saying: “This year, we are proud to be keeping the project open for a longer time. This is in line with our ambition for Oxford to be a city where everyone can walk and cycle safely, and we are hoping that this will become a permanent feature of the city centre.”

Image credit: Oxford City Council

Oxford tops Times’ university rankings for first time in twelve years

0

The Good University Guide 2023 has placed the University of Oxford first on the league tables, beating Cambridge and St Andrews for the first time in twelve years.

This review of UK universities is jointly published annually by the Times and the Sunday Times. The ranking is based on factors including teaching quality, services and facilities, student satisfaction, entrance qualifications by new students, graduate prospects and completion rate. Oxford scored high across the board. The student to staff ratio was the lowest in the UK (10.5 to 1) and the university also ranks among the best for graduate prospects.

Due to Oxford Student Union’s successful boycott of the Department of Education’s National Student Survey, which assesses aspects of student satisfaction, some categories had no applicable data. To determine Oxford’s overall ranking, the creators of the Good University Guide took their 2016 scores for teaching quality and student experience and adjusted them by the overall percentage point change between 2016 and 2022 observed in the other universities in this league table. The University of Cambridge also boycotted the NSS and was measured by the Good University Guide in the same way. It placed third overall. 

Oxford has placed first in various university rankings including the Times Higher Education World University Rankings for six years in a row and The 2022 Guardian University Guide. It also places second in the QS World University Rankings.

Outgoing Vice-Chancellor Prof Dame Louise Richardson expressed her delight at Oxford taking the top spot in the Good University Guide tables. She called the achievement a “testament to the talent and commitment of staff all across the collegiate University”.  


The official Good University Guide 2023 will be published in the Sunday Times on September 18.

Image Credit: Kaymar Adl/CC by 2.0 via Wikimedia Commons

Oriental Studies Faculty to change name

0

The former Faculty of Oriental Studies has changed its name to the Faculty of Asian and Middle Eastern Studies. 

The change comes after demands for a more culturally sensitive name and concludes two years of faculty and student consultation on the issue, as well a review process from the Humanities Division and the University Council.

Professor David Rechter, Faculty Board Chair, wrote in a press release last month that the term ‘oriental’ was viewed as inappropriate by many. The term is tied to negative stereotypes and portrayals of Asian people, often through a colonialist lens. Rechter said that name change would better reflect the faculty’s ‘diversity of academic activity’ and is the ‘right decision’. The Oriental Institute on Pusey Street, which houses the Faculty, will be renamed as well. 

The Faculty’s history dates back to the sixteenth century, when the first professorship in Hebrew was created. Throughout much of its existence it was heavily tied to colonialism and the British Empire, growing in size in the mid nineteenth century when interest and a need for speakers of South and East Asian languages became more important due to the expansion of British imperialism and trade. During this era, posts in Sanskrit, Chinese, Persian, Burmese and in various other Asian languages were created. Following the end of the colonial era, the Oriental Institute opened in 1961. Over the next fifty years expanded to other buildings across Oxford including the Griffith Institute, the Nissan Institute at St Anthony’s and the China Centre at St Hugh’s. 

The name change also echoes the Faculty’s contemporary vision as stated in the introductory page on their website. The Faculty denounces the study of Asia and the Middle East as ‘exotic’ or marginal to the modern world. Rather, they hope to explore, examine and teach about these important cultures that are ‘at the heart of the modern globalised world’. Prof Retcher celebrated the breadth of the current Faculty’s research in his statement and pointed out that the name change will not change the Faculty’s teaching or research.

The Faculty currently offers instruction in twenty-five languages to and grants degrees related to Asian and Middle Eastern history and culture.

Image credit: Kyle Bushnell

The gift of giving room to grow: Why we can all be kinder to others and ourselves

0

Speaking entirely for myself, I have never thought it was a good idea for people to be “careful” in how they speak; the word “careful” implies an extent of inauthenticity and a – now necessary – caution which I never used to feel when speaking to people. People – now that’s a concept worth mentioning anew. The way I see it, people used to be no more than that primarily, especially at first glance – people. We have all always had individual identities, sexualities, politics, and races et cetera; however it seems as if now, more intensely than ever, we are being asked to be representatives of the communities which share our identities, at times putting them above our common ground of all being people. As variously different people, we all, in my opinion, share key characteristics which can help us to understand one another. We are, for the most part,  all well intentioned, albeit flawed creatures, influenced by our backgrounds as much as our surroundings, imbibing media and rhetoric from our peers constantly, regardless of whether or not we seek it, which tells us of different ways to view the world and each other. We are continually being offered new perspectives, justifications, arguments, and truths, all of which we are expected to weigh up justly and measuredly and reach the same conclusions as our respected peers. There is no way to predict how tides will change and how the way we are expected to converse will. Despite this, kindness, honesty, and respect are timeless, and they should be the standards we expect, regardless of whether we are offended by ignorance. This creates difficulty, because it requires nuance to tell if someone means to be offensive, or if they, like all of us, are learning and adapting our views on the world, sometimes getting it (as we perceive) wrong.

Learning can only occur authentically and effectively when people are given a chance to fail. Without rooting around in the darkness, occasionally bumping our heads, and allowing others to do the same, we risk creating a synthetic culture in which nobody says what they mean, and nobody means what they say; they say it out of conformity, lest they be challenged, without understanding how they got there, or why they ought to say one thing over another. Without giving our friends the freedom to express themselves in ways we may not agree with or find prejudicial, we put ourselves and our pals into a verbal minefield, in which any step can be fatal. Fatal to our social reputations, our friendships, or our future prospects. Sometimes this means our conversations freeze into superficiality out of fear, and never reach higher ground.

So if I had a wish for our future interactions with one another, a gift I could give myself and others, it would be to act and speak freely with good intentions, unafraid of offending (as long as this is without malice) and always ready to learn something from those we offend.  And when we recognise such people who we perceive as fumbling or falling short of what we hope their attitudes might be, to have mercy in challenging them – we ourselves may need it from others someday.

(Women’s) football: the past, the present and hopes for the future

0

It’s come home! But maybe not in the way Baddiel, Skinner or the Lightning Seeds initially imagined when they released their 1996 single ‘Three Lions’. The line “thirty years of hurt” of course refers to the iconic England men’s win in the 1966 World Cup Final at Wembley Stadium against Germany. However, in 1966, when this game was won, the men  were just considered The England Team, as there was no other team: the English Football Association had banned women from playing on Football League grounds.

In a story I’m sure rings familiar for many women, despite record-breaking crowds for women’s football matches during and after World War I (53,000 people watched a Boxing Day match in 1920), to accommodate returning male players, the FA banned women playing, ruling the game “unsuitable for females”. It was not until 1971 (5 years after it first came home…or I suppose the home location of football was officially established?) that the FA lifted the ban on women playing and 1972 that the first official international match was played by England women.

Since then, it has been a tumultuous journey for women’s football and professional female footballers. The first national women’s league is established at the beginning of the 1990s and across this decade funding and investment began to be made in earnest into grassroots and elite performance in the game. The WSL (Women’s Super League) begins in 2011 and by the 2010s interest and skill levels in women’s football is improving at a rapid rate. Reaching the quarter finals of the World Cup and the London 2012 Olympics, the general popularity of women’s football begins to grow. In 2017, the team reach the semi-finals of the Euros as well as in 2019, where their defeat by the USA (the winners of the tournament) was watched by 11.7 million viewers on BBC One – a record.

Despite these changes, interest in women’s football has still historically been quite low. Unlike in other sports, women’s football has previously struggled to capture widespread public interest or imagination.

And with that brief but hectic timeline (missing, as I’m sure you will know, many interesting and possibly frustrating events in British women’s football history), this brings me to this year. Winning their first group match against Austria in the 2022 UEFA Euros at Old Trafford on the 6th of July 1-0 with a beautiful goal from Beth Mead, England women’s team were already breaking tournament records by playing in front of a crowd of 68,871. And it all seemed to grow from there.

Winning the quarter finals in an absolute nail biter against Spain and despite a tense start against Sweden, the 4-0 victory in the semi-finals confirmed that it might in fact be on its way home. This excitement seemed to generate a social energy that had not been seen before in women’s football. Wembley was sold out and the jaw dropping total of 87,192 spectators smashed the record of largest crowd ever in Euros history – with 17.4 million additional viewers confirmed by the BBC.

This interest and passion for the women’s game has never been seen before and Leah Williamson, captain of the winning Lionesses stated, “women’s football and society has changed”. Well…that is definitely the hope! But what does this actually look like?

First, for football. Women’s football is underfunded, under-appreciated and under respected as a discipline. Football finance expert Kieran Maguire estimates that the earnings in women’s football is on par to the winnings for the champions of the 1966 World Cup. The salary differential is only compounded by the discrepancy of sponsorship deals. In 2015, only 0.4% of all corporate investment spent on sport went into women’s teams.

Putting money aside, there are other difficulties and differences with the women’s game. Only four premier League grounds accepted the opportunity to host Euro 2022 matches in their stadiums: Manchester United’s Old Trafford, Southampton’s St Mary’s Stadium, Brighton’s Famer Stadium and Brentford’s Community Stadium. Manchester City generously offered their 7,000 capacity Academy Station training stadium.

What about wider change? This is harder to quantify of course. After Emma Radacanu’s win in the US Open, it is estimated that 100,000 British people took up tennis in the two months following. So, what could this win do? Hopefully, it changes the face of football, as I’ve explored above. Players should be better funded and supported to bring them on par with the men’s teams. Additionally, grassroots funding should be prioritised as the hope of inspiring young girls to love the game seems to have become a reality.

In terms of wider impact, football is the national sport of England but is still overwhelmingly seen as a boy’s sport. The overwhelming evidence that women can in fact play football – and that it is in no way a less interesting or less skilful version of the game – should not be news! The crowd composition at a football game is still overwhelmingly male (as I can confirm watching Man U vs Brighton the other week and the guys sitting next to me said they ‘wouldn’t cuss because there was a lady there’…thanks I guess) and some of the culture surrounding the games is  still quite uncomfortable. The interest women are taking in the game will hopefully go some way to shifting this.

Casual watchers of this year’s Euros may be thinking ‘this has come out of nowhere’. I get that. Interest, support, strong passionate sentiments of support from prominent individuals – that is recent. But the level of success, professionalism, grit, and determination that has been displayed by the Lionesses is certainly not. This has come out of decades of women playing without financial support, without sponsorship, with poor injury recovery support, poor management, pitches, and facilities  – and keeping going anyway! As Alex Scott tearfully said after the victory match: “I’m not standing up at corporate events in front of sponsors anymore begging for them to get involved in the women’s game because you know what? If you’re not involved, you’ve missed the boat, you’ve missed the train. Because look at this… it has finally left the station and it is gathering speed.”

Image credit: CC-BY-SA-4.0

The scene at Buckingham Palace: an intersection of modernity and history

0

There was an odd mood at the palace. Odd because it was unexpected. The news had led me to believe that I would be confronted with an overwhelming atmosphere of grief and sadness — sobbing monarchists and generally sad people all round. Yet it was not like this. While there were those paying their respects and having a quiet moment of reflection, most people were in fact far more interested in taking photos for Instagram. I had expected a sea of flowers and was instead presented with an obnoxious sea of smartphones vying for the highest vantage point and best photo. It seemed rather fitting that potentially the most significant technological and social shift in Queen Elizabeth II’s reign — the advent of smartphones and social media — was the most dominant at her memorial. 

On my way to the palace I walked up The Mall — teeming with people carrying bouquets, snapping photos, and weaving their way around security vans and media crews. Now I must admit I have previously written a scathing article on the monarchy and so I’m probably not the one you would expect to talk about respecting the monarch; however I soon had a revelation that presented me with a new perspective. Coming up to the palace, I was approached by a reporter who asked me to answer some questions on film and I agreed — unsure but excited nonetheless. He asked me what the general mood of the country was and how I felt. It made me think. Regardless of your position on the monarchy, everyone was shocked. And that’s what I said. There’s no denying she was a figurehead that was ever-present while the country underwent seismic change. The reporter then asked my opinion on Charles as King — would the institution still be as respected? No. I answered that many people don’t like Charles, nor Camilla and he doesn’t have the length of time behind him that the Queen did to earn her status. Across the Commonwealth many realms are moving towards becoming republics, but most have waited for the Queen to pass out of respect. Without her the monarchy is much weaker. Yet Charles has been the longest ever heir apparent and so should have all the experience he needs if he is going to succeed. Time will tell where the country stands with him. 

But this was about his predecessor and mother. And as I wove my way around the crowd that had gathered in front of the palace I walked up to the railing and read some of the messages placed amongst the flowers. She clearly meant a lot to people — she was a significant figure even in my life where the Jubilee street parties were highlights of my childhood summers. The overwhelming scent from the thousands of bouquets placed there was impressive — even more so as the sign announced they were removed to another park every 12 hours. I could not help but be overcome by the profound sense of respect and outpouring of respect that was on full display here. 

Flowers at Buckingham Palace. Image credit: Jack Twyman

I sat down on the Victoria monument opposite the Palace and looked down on the scene below. The number of people was astounding. The Mall was full. There were seemingly limitless bouquets. But somehow it felt slightly underwhelming — I had seen it all before on the archive films from Diana’s time. Nearly as many TV crews dotted the mall as people walking it, and the media crews and their bright lights seemed to overshadow the actual scene. Still, when it started pouring with rain nobody left and the respect that showed was legitimate. I was there for three hours and still people came, the number ever increasing as the evening drew in. 

Eventually I found myself penned in by railings as I entered the queue to the main flower laying area. It was all heavily managed by uniformed staff and barriers were plentiful. Suffocating was an understatement and between the onsetting claustrophobia I noticed an old car with a flag on top. It was Charles. Standing on my tiptoes to see through the sea of phones in front of me, I managed to catch a glimpse of him waving. Cheering ensued and some next to me shouted “God Save The King”. It was echoed by many others. But it was when some people burst into the song of Rule Britannia that I laughed to myself a little. For those that say the monarchy has entered the modern age, its supporters certainly haven’t.

Image credit: Jack Twyman

I wasn’t there because I adamantly follow the Royal Family in the tabloids. I was there because it was an historical occasion. It still feels like a parallel universe when King Charles III appears in the news. But with time it will settle in. The next week will evidently show the respect the country had for its greatest servant. And despite my reservations of the monarchy, it is a hugely symbolic period for the country. She was responsible for many moves that defined a near century: shaking hands with Martin McGuiness for example. 

The reality facing the country now is a new PM and monarch in the same week amongst an economic and social crisis. The one person many looked to as a bulwark of stability for a lifetime is gone. And for the country at this time that will be a challenge. My condolences are with the rest of the Royal Family at this difficult time.

Image credit: Jack Twyman

Radcliffe Department of Medicine DPhil Scholars Programme

Sponsored content

The Radcliffe Department of Medicine at the University of Oxford is a large, multi-disciplinary department, which aims to tackle some of the world’s biggest health challenges by integrating innovative basic biology with cutting edge clinical research.

The department has internationally renowned programmes in a broad spectrum of sciences related to medicine, including:

  • Cancer Biology
  • Cardiovascular Science
  • Cellular and Clinical Imaging
  • Computational Biology
  • Diabetes, Metabolism and Endocrinology
  • Genetics and Genomics
  • Haematology and Pathology
  • Immunology
  • Stem Cells and Developmental Biology

Our research spans the translational research spectrum, from basic biological research through to clinical application. A full list of supervisor profiles can be found on our website.

Our PhD Scholars Programme is open to outstanding candidates of any nationality. It provides fully funded awards for students wishing to undertake a four-year PhD in Medical Sciences.

Further details on the projects available and the application process are available on the RDM website.

Before you apply, you should identify an academic member of staff who is willing to supervise you and has the resources to support the proposed research project. Although not part of the final selection process, contact with the prospective supervisor is a key part of the admissions process to ensure there is a good fit between the student and the lab.

The closing date for applications is 12 noon (UK time) on Friday 9 December 2022.

Interviews will take place during the week commencing 16 January 2022.

Offers will be made in February 2023 for an October 2023 start.

The Radcliffe Department of Medicine actively promotes a family friendly working environment.

Why we were all Elizabethans

0

At seven o’clock on the evening of the Eighth of September 2022, the half-muffled peel of Great Tom sounded through the streets of Oxford, tolling for the death of Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II. As the rain thundered down on the realm as if in some great diluvial act of mourning, the end of the reign of Britain’s oldest and longest-serving monarch was pronounced. The Queen is dead. Long live the King.

It was an occasion we all knew was coming. Sadly, no one can live forever. And yet from the perspective of our everyday lives, it was as if she did; as if she would. For more than 70 years, Her Late Majesty has been a constant in the lives of hundreds of millions of people across the United Kingdom and the Commonwealth. Every letter sent, every transaction made, every military oath sworn, and every legal case concluded from Canterbury to Calgary and Canberra, all marked with the Crown, the world’s most famous profile, or even the immortal scribble of ‘Elizabeth R’. The world has changed beyond reckoning since 1952 but those facts of our daily lives, institutions, and society have remained constant. Unchanging. Permanent.

Many people I have spoken to since the death of the sovereign, regardless of their thoughts on monarchism, have been surprised by how upset they have felt. I think this has a relatively simple explanation: Her Late Majesty’s death reminds us all of the impermanence of society and the uncertainty of our lives. We all need things to keep us grounded as our lives change and the world around us shifts. For everyone, from nine-year-olds to nonagenarians, The Queen’s life and service has been the one constant that unites our experiences and our memories.

The last few days have made me very aware of the fact that I have been alive for less than a third of Her Late Majesty’s reign; yet across my two decades, the constant presence and service of The Queen has been so clearly apparent. From listening to The Queen’s Christmas Address every year with my grandparents to watching that iconic scene with Daniel Craig at the London 2012 Opening Ceremony, I can chart my life through encounters with the Crown. It is an unconsidered, uncontroversial, dependable, and secure thread throughout all of our lives. A thread that has now been cut. 

This is not meant as a paean to the merits of constitutional monarchy, however, but instead as an observation on the almost universal nature of Britain’s distress. I have been very moved by the depth of feeling I have witnessed over Her Late Majesty’s death. From tears in the streets to flowers laid at Buckingham Palace gates, it really does seem to have affected everyone. Whilst our country has long been a melting pot, the Crown is the one thing which transcends England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and unites us regardless of religion, creed, town, county or culture. We are all subjects and we all unconsciously expect our national identity to provide stability and meaning. Regardless of one’s view of monarchy, for us all she has incarnated that identity and provided that stability for more than 70 years. 

The turbulence of the times through which that stability has endured cannot be overstated. Many have already noted that the kingdom she has left behind is radically different from that which she inherited in 1952. Politicians and activists have come and gone, wars have been waged and countries born, and we have witnessed the total transformation of a Western world with government run by paper and telegram, to a globalised, digital age. Only once before has the nation grieved its monarch after a reign of such dazzling change. The Late Queen’s great-great-grandmother, Her Majesty Queen Victoria, died in a world of steam trains and electricity, after a reign begun with horsepower and wooden warships. It is no surprise, perhaps, that the outpouring of grief now has touched all parts of society, as it did over a century ago.

It is this which gives her death and the international reaction of the last few days a special poignance. As the world is brought together in collective grief at the loss of one of its most universal figures, Queen Elizabeth II continues to fulfil a duty she took on as her father’s heir, as a young girl: uniting people. In death as in life, Her Late Majesty has succeeded in bringing people together from all corners of the earth and all political persuasions. She may not have been your Commander in Chief. She may not have been the Defender of your faith. She may not even have been your sovereign. But she has been one of the few global constants in all of our lives. She is a reminder of all we have been through and all we have in common in the United Kingdom, in the Commonwealth and Anglican Communion, and across the world. Her death and our collective response to it reminds us of our shared humanity.

Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II was everything to many and something to all. She was the Crown incarnate and the nation personified and so it should be no surprise that without her we feel rudderless; we knew who we were before and now we are questioning that. Regardless of your constitutional views, be they fervent idealist, ardent antimonarchist, or entirely agnostic, the one assumed certainty of our country has vanished. She was the golden thread running through the State and the confusion that the loss of that thread has wrought is the essence of the grief we are living through now. But therein lies the magic of monarchy; the thread does not end. At the moment The Late Queen breathed her last—at that very same instant—the Crown passed. A new reign began. And so whilst this is undoubtedly a week of uncertainty, a week where our national identity seems unsure, we can have confidence that stability will return. In our new King we will find that same unity and constancy and dignity, and we will know who we are as a nation again. Underlying monarchy is relationship; we mourn because the old has passed away, we celebrate because of how much it meant, and we hope because the new is already at work.

Mourn, celebrate, and hope. 

God Save the King.

Image Credit: University College Oxford

King Charles becomes Visitor of three Oxford colleges

0

King Charles III has become the official Visitor of Christ Church, Oriel College and University College, following his formal accession to the throne on 10th September 2022. Until her death on 8th September, these roles were held by Queen Elizabeth II.

At Oxford University, the Visitor of a college is a role traditionally appointed by parliament to oversee statues and reforms in the constituent colleges. Today, colleges which still have Visitors receive occasional visits, typically for ceremonial purposes.

Christ Church, Oriel and Univ are the only Oxford colleges to have a royal Visitor, with Christ Church being the only cathedral in England which is visited by the reigning monarch instead of its own Bishop.

After the death of Queen Elizabeth II, Christ Church stated that a book of condolence has been opened in the Cathedral and the public is welcome to attend services with prayers in her memory, adding: “Her death marks the end of a lifetime of faithful service and she will be greatly missed by the people of this country and beyond.”

Oriel and Univ have also issued statements in memory of Queen Elizabeth, recalling her special role as Visitor. 

The Queen visited Oriel on several occasions throughout her 70-year reign, most recently in November 2000 to mark the opening of  new student accommodation at Rectory Road.

Queen Elizabeth in attendance at Oriel’s tortoise race. Image credit: Oriel JCR

Univ has also remembered her visit to the college with Prince Philip in 1999, and another visit during her time as Princess in 1948.

Such visits and duties at Christ Church, Oriel and Univ will now be carried out by King Charles, the new British sovereign, whose accession at 11am today has been marked across Oxford by the raising of flags from half-mast.

Flags will remain raised until just after 1pm on Sunday 11th September, when the City of Oxford’s own proclamation of Charles’ ascendency is read out under the Carfax Tower.

In addition to Christ Church’s book of condolence for Queen Elizabeth, Oxford City Council has also opened a book in the Long Room of Oxford Town Hall, so that members of the public and students alike can remember the service of Britain’s longest-reigning monarch.