Royal Legs

In the Coronation photograph of the current king, Charles III, he is holding the orb and sceptre of office.

And, though it is not the easiest to see in this photo because his trousers are black, he is sitting legs apart.

When I saw the portrait I thought it was a bit odd of him to be sitting like that. Were he a woman I would say it was not very demure. And in a man it is something else. Is it relaxed, rebellious, manspreading, assertive, planted?

What does it communicate?

It is not accidental, that’s for sure, because this is not a portrait of Charles.

It is portrait of the person who occupies the position of being “by the Grace of God of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of His other Realms and Territories, King, Head of the Commonwealth, Defender of the Faith.”

At The National Portrait Gallery

Now fast forward to when Tamara and I visited the National Portrait Gallery a couple of days ago and saw this portrait of Charles II.

Then I appreciated that Charles III is following a very particular tradition, as in this painting of Charles II, his predecessor in name.

This was painted in about 1680, twenty years after Charles II came to the throne and five years before he died.

But he is holding the sceptre, so it is not a casual portrait.

The painting is attributed to Thomas Hawker and I wonder what Charles thought of it.

Some Background

Charles II was the eldest son of Charles I, who was executed for treason in 1649.

The monarchy was already ended by the Civil War, and it was a Republican country that sentenced Charles I to death for the treasonable act of trying to restore the monarchy after he was defeated.

But then, after the death of Cromwell, the Republic fell apart.

Charles II fled to France at the end of the Civil War and then invaded with an army in 1651 to regain the throne.

That didn’t work and he escaped back to France until 1660 when he was invited to return to England to take the throne.

From the great distance of the 21st century, viewing the cause of the fall of the Republic, I’d go for people being fed up that they couldn’t have fun.

Those republicans were just too dour and restrictive for people to like them for long.

As evidence – Charles II opened the public theatres after nearly 20 years of shutdown.

He also fathered 14 illegitimate children.

I keep thinking that in the back of his mind was probably the constant thought that his father, his dad, had had his head chopped off because some people didn’t like him.

It’s enough to make a person feel a little guarded.


Discover more from Photograph Works

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Comments

6 responses to “Royal Legs”

  1. Cheeky, fun, informative article, David! Interesting to read after our visit there this past weekend.

    I wonder about something which you pointed out: In looking closer at the current King Charles’s formal photo, his legs are not that far parted. Nothing like his ancestor centuries before.

    Could be that what he is wearing – requisite crown and fur coat for the Coronation, that is — was too heavy and so he needed to pose that way.

    Could be that he is also more informal, however. When I shook his hand when I met him for moment at the cathedral in Chichester many years ago, he did strike me as more down to earth than I imagined he would be.

    It is probably challenging to meet so many people in one’s lifetime!

    Like

    1. Yes, it could be that he was sagging under the weight of the crown, but then it is a photograph and not a painting and so he didn’t have to sit for long. I’ll give you that he is not sitting as spread-legged as Charles II, but his pose hit me as soon as I saw it, so I don’t think it is unintentional. We can leave it in the ‘maybe’ section.

      Like

  2. And feet! Where are his feet? First thing they taught us in Photo101 is where to cut off appendages.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. Yes, so they are.

      I didn’t know you went to Photo school.

      Liked by 1 person

      1. Oh, so many years ago. I hope this portrait isn’t an Annie Leibovitz!

        Like

        1. Not Annie Leibovitz but Hugo Burnand. You can see photos at hugofoto dot com. It’s another world.

          Like

Leave a comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Discover more from Photograph Works

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading