Your thoughts about (Dutch) Abdications

[emmeleia]

However, there are rumours that Beatrix will abdicate in the next five years...

[Henri M.]

The rumours about an abdication are of all times: when Prince Claus died, people expected the Queen to abdicate and to lock herself up as the mourning lady in the tower.

Then people expected Queen Beatrix to abdicate when she became 65, the normal age of retirement in the Netherlands.

Then people expected Queen Beatrix to abdicate when The Prince of Orange fathered a Heiress.

Now people are expecting the Queen to abdicate when the renovations of the Royal Palace Amsterdam are done.

It is also possible the Queen will never abdicate, to break the 'trend' and not lay a virtual limit to the Reign of her successors.

[Marengo]

It is most likely, due to past experiences in The Netherlands, that the Queen will abdicate. She never said that she disliked the idea. Instead she commented that she wanted to give her son and daughter-in-law time to establish and enjoy their family.
For now HM is still going strong, but I can understand that in X years she feels that her son would do a better job as she is simply less energetic. As the Queen is a pragmatic woman (all changes she made in the household certainly prove that) I expect she will continue her mothers and grandmothers example.

People never expected her to abdicate when her husband died or when Catharina-Amalia was born. There might have appeared one or two articles in boulevard magazines but that was it. The serious press never hinted at any abdication untill recently, when it became clear that both Drakensteyn Castle and the Royal Palace in Amsterdam are being renovated.

[princess olga]

Originally Posted by Thomas Parkman

Queen Beatrix is one quite capable, intelligent and wise individual. So she is 68. In this day and age that is not all that old. To deprive the kingdom of the immense experience and ability prematurely would not be a wise thing to do at all.

You quite display a lot of wisdom yourself Thomas! Couldn't agree more. After all, when France's President Mitterrand was inaugurated, he was at the not-so-young age of 65. Ronald Reagan was 69 years of age when he became president of the then (and now, but that's beside the point!) most influential nation on the planet.

Originally Posted by Thomas Parkman

As for poor Charles. He is blamed for so much. He may very well surprise everybody and turn out to be a very good kind indeed.

I quite agree here. He is an original mind, and able to stand up for whatever he deems important, (be it saving old buildings or environmentally responsible farming), even in the face of adversity. I like Elizabeth fine, but what with her stellar genes, this lady might well take after her mother and live a century or longer.

Which brings me to any criticism regarding abdication. I'm with Marengo that abdication can be a healthy thing.

I read once in an interview with Danish Queen Margarethe with the British Telegraph I believe (quite a remarkable interview), she was asked whether she'd ever abdicate.

Her answer was: "In Denmark, that's not how the story goes." In other words, no, she is planning on ruling for life.

What I'm thinking there is, what if something like what happened to Dutch Queen Juliana would happen to, say, Margarethe down the road?
As in, Juliana at some point started behaving kind of confusingly--this was after she'd abdicated for years--, and it turned out years later that she had been suffering from Alzheimers' disease. What if she had never abdicated, she would have gone through a humiliating time while being on the throne? That would have been embarrassing for all parties involved, not to mention her nation.
I think her abdicating when she felt it was the right time for her as well as for her daughter Beatrix, was the honorable thing to do, by far. Why drag out a good thing too long? That seems very risky to me, in many respects.

As for those who are of the opinion that abdication is bad for a nation's PR, I think it's rather the opposite. When Juliana abdicated, I was in primary school and I remember how we all celebrated that milestone, welcoming the new, young, queen. The whole thing was incredibly well orchestrated, kindof like Willem Alexander's wedding day. It was a festive event, and actually great PR.

Whether Beatrix will rule for life or not, as Marengo said earlier, the Queen has a pragmatic side to her and she will, in time, when Alexander and his young family are ready, make the right decision at the right time.

Crown Princes such as Fred of Denmark, who may well be nearly 70 when they reach the throne, which in some ways is a bit of a waste of resource no? (ok here I'm contradicting my earlier remark on Mitterrand, but anyway)

[Marcus25]

Just wanted to clarify re: my earlier post that I in no way intended to criticise Queen Juliana for her decision to abdicate or any future decision made by Queen Beatrix. I am sure Juliana had very good reasons to step down when she did and after 32, often difficult years, she had every right to make that decision. I just think it a shame it happened as soon as it did. Queen Beatrix too has suffered, with the loss of Prince Claus and her parents so close together and could not be blamed if she chose to step down after such an energetic and dedicated reign. I would however be sad as I think very highly of her and would 'miss her' It is a pity that, if and when, she does choose to abdicate she could not receive the title of Queen Mother. I understand that constitutionally this cannot happen and traditionally this is a title reserved for a widowed Queen Consort but it would be a great way to honour her! It says a lot for the basic humility of Queen's Wilhelmina and Juliana that they did not expect that title after abdication (unlike King William II? or Leopold III (the Belgians) so I guess Beatrix is in the same mould and would be happy to return to being 'just' a princess!

[JohnRaven]

In the Netherlands, abdication is contrary what some people seem to believe a personal choice by the monarch NOT a tradition. Although it does look that way I have to admit. Indeed the monarch is not anointed and there's no religious service of any kind because contrary to some countries we have a true separation of 'church' and 'state'. The decision to abdicate was however in most if not all cases a wise one in my opinion. Why? Because obviously THEY felt it was time for the next generation to take over for whatever reason. I like the fact that the Dutch monarchs are so pragmatic about it. They give it their best for as long as they feel up to it and then they simply hand over after having instructed their successor. Kind of like a family business! And let's be frank, that's what it is.

If I think of QEII and her adament wish to stay Queen untill her last breath I get images of QEII in 2020 walking ever so slowly to the House of Lords for the opening of parliament, supported by her two grandsons, William and Harry (Charles is starting to get wobbly himself and Camilla is house bound). When she has finally reached the throne, settled down and starts to read her speech, which is written in Arial 98pts, most of the Lords and MP's are vast asleep and awoken by the screaching of her fading voice enhanced by the audio system. By the time the Queen's finished and left the building, the sun is setting in the West. Well if that's the picture the Brits are looking forward to, by all means. Personally I prefer a monarch with a bit of energy and liveliness left. Some people tend to think Oh, the Queen Mother was in such good health, QEII can do it as well. But the Queen Mother had a shorter career next to her husband and did not have to attend as many functions, events etc as her daughter is still doing at her age. A dear old 90+ Queen Mother is different from a 90+ Queen who's expected to function for 18 hours a day, 365 days a year. But that's just my opinion.

Anyway, when Beatrix feels she's ready she'll talk to W-A and decide on a date. If you ask me, she won't abdicate between now and five to ten years if her health permits because W-A's children are still so young. But when she does abdicate for whatever the reason, the Dutch will be gratefull for her years of service to the country and gladly allow her to spend her remaining 20 or so years which ever way she wants it. And if QEII wants to remain Queen for life in whatever which physical condition well that's her choice and some would argue divine right I suppose.

[lucien]

This past wednesday HM received the credentials of several new ambassadors,one of them being the new ambassador of Estonia,Mrs.Gita Kalmet.The Estonian Foreign Office later stated that HM "had expressed the wish to visit Estonia in the coming years"during the conversation at the Palace.HM can only pay a State Visit to Estonia after it's president has payed a State Visit to The Netherlands,such are the rules,new heads of state pay a visit first,invite during the visit or soon after,and then a time and schedule is set for HM to visit,but at present there are no plans or whatever for either visit.So,I hope this is an indication that HM plans to stay at Her post for years to come.

Btw,it is not done to expose conversations between HM and her visitors to the public,ever,so that's a faux pas on behalve of the Estonian Foreign Office.Thanks for that.

[timtonruben359]

Originally Posted by emmeleia

However, there are rumours that Beatrix will abdicate in the next five years...

I think Queen Beatrix will reign for years to come. She seems very dedicated to her role as monarch and to the Netherlands. I personally think that if she is in good health and has the engery, there is no need for her to abdicate.

[olga7777]

In my opinion I seem to notice two kinds of abdications:

One that cases some kind of political upheaval, or it's caused by political instability

Two the ones were just the personal circumstances of the monarch are the ones involved in the abdication.

In the case of political abdications, that they do cause instability, each case is different, and we could classify Edward VIII abdication in that class. Because they are all different it's very difficult to know what exactly is involved and what would be the consequences of such abdication.

In the Netherlands case I seem to notice that political circumstances tend not to be involved in them. They seem to be moved by personal circumstances, old age, disease, or personal choices of the kind " I prefer a different path in my life" or " I don't feel I'm up to the job". In those cases the chance of political instability is very little, and also they are discussed in advanced so proper arrangements can be made to smooth transition.

I find impossible to have a general opinion of the first type, but considering how much tradition it is involved in being a King or a Queen, I find courageous to get to point when you consider abdicating, and doing it because you consider it to be the best not only for yourself but also for the people of your country. Because what kind of king or queen can you be if you are sick with Alzheimer, or have your faculties reduced to perform the job?

I don't think that nowadays you should stay in the job if you feel it's not going to be preformed properly, and if you feel no instability will be caused. So as to the case of the Netherlands, I think that Queen Beatrix will be very courageous if she decides so, as well as she will be very courageous if she continues being the queen considering her age.

I kinda share more or less the opinions of John Raven, Princess Olga, and Thomas Parkman. But not completely sure

[banda_windsor]

It has been at least two privious monarch that abdicated from the throne in the favour of their Children.

Queen Wilhelmina Abdicated in 1948 after reigning for 58 years, and Queen Juliana Abdicated in 1980 after reigning for 32 years.

Do you think Queen Beatrix will also abdicated in the favour of The Prince of Oranje? She's now 68 and already reigning for 26 years.

[Henri M.]

Originally Posted by banda_windsor

It has been at least two privious monarch that abdicated from the throne in the favour of their Children.

Queen Wilhelmina Abdicated in 1948 after reigning for 58 years, and Queen Juliana Abdicated in 1980 after reigning for 32 years.

Do you think Queen Beatrix will also abdicated in the favour of The Prince of Oranje? She's now 68 and already reigning for 26 years.

1840
Willem I Frederik King of the Netherlands, Prince of Orange-Nassau, Grand Duke of Luxembourg, Fürst of Nassau

1919
Marie-Adelheid Grand Duchess of Luxembourg, Duchess of Nassau

1948
Wilhelmina Queen of the Netherlands, Princess of Orange-Nassau

1964
Charlotte Grand Duchess of Lucembourg, Duchess of Nassau

1980
Juliana Queen of the Netherlands, Princess of Orange-Nassau

2000
Jean Grand Duke of Luxembourg, Duke of Nassau

I for myself do hope that Queen Beatrix will remain our lady Sovereign as long as she enjoys good health and mind. There is some gossip that she will abdicate in 2010, that means in 3 years time, because then the extensive renovations to the Royal Palace Amsterdam and to her private estate Drakensteyn will have finished. But this is in fact nonsense. If Queen Beatrix dies tomorrow, there will be an investiture of King Willem IV Alexander in Amsterdam. With or without a Royal Palace available.

[Verde Esmeralda]

Originally Posted by azile

I find it fascinating that the Dutch people's immense love for their Royal Family has not been lessened by the abdications of the last two Queens.

Of course, abdication is not "Traditional" and in Britain, it carries memories to a very negative experience. Maybe in modern times, it's time for modern measures and modern monarchs.

Azile

So do I. And I would like to remind you of what Juliana said, back in 1980, when she abdicated:

"Everyone who is getting old is sooner or later confronted with the sober fact that powers diminish and that one cannot carry out one's task as one used to. And then there comes a moment when it's no longer justified to continue carrying out duties. I feel that the moment has come to resign as your Queen."

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...romoid=googlep


She felt that it was irresponsible to continue as Queen, she was probably tired, and Beatrix was ready to reign. I think it was perfectly rational. And I do believe Beatrix will act alike, in 5 years' time maximum.

[fee]

I sincerely hope, that Beatrix will reign a bit longer than that.
As many have pinted out, her grandchildren are still so young and she is still so energetic and full of life.
I am not against abdication, I always felt, that a monarch or a first in line who is not willing to do the job, usually makes a lousy performance.
And that is what actually weakens the monarchy.
Not the fact, that an old and tired monarch perhaps in ill-health, steps down for a dedicated younger generation.
A crown-prince who is more absent, whose most mentions in the press is about his hobbies and not his duties, a monarch who is slowing turning into Mad King George, however refusing to hand over any part of his/her job to the crownprince (Queen Victoria) is a much greater threat to monarchy.

[Marengo]

Originally Posted by Verde Esmeralda

So do I. And I would like to remind you of what Juliana said, back in 1980, when she abdicated:

"Everyone who is getting old is sooner or later confronted with the sober fact that powers diminish and that one cannot carry out one's task as one used to. And then there comes a moment when it's no longer justified to continue carrying out duties. I feel that the moment has come to resign as your Queen."

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/ar...romoid=googlep


She felt that it was irresponsible to continue as Queen, she was probably tired, and Beatrix was ready to reign. I think it was perfectly rational. And I do believe Beatrix will act alike, in 5 years' time maximum.

Queen Wilhelmina wrote about this in her autobiography 'lonely but not alone' to. She started wwith the example of Emperor Charles V (King Carlos II of Spain). When she was younger she felt his decision very strange and walking away from duty. But later in life she understood that instead it was the ultimate action one could do for duty, to know when you have to step down as another person can do it better.

[Next Star]

I do not believe in abicating the only reason that a monarch should abicate if their too sick to actual be head of state. By abicating your not following the terms of government it says your suppose to hold your office postion for life which means until you die.

[Marengo]

The Dutch goverment never said that a monarch should stay ' in office' untill his/her death.

The monarch says in the oath that (s)he promises to do what is best for the country, and some previous monarchs thought that an abdication and a new, younger ruler was just that.

[Next Star]

Originally Posted by Marengo

The Dutch goverment never said that a monarch should stay ' in office' untill his/her death.

The monarch says in the oath that (s)he promises to do what is best for the country, and some previous monarchs thought that an abdication and a new, younger ruler was just that.

I did not say the Dutch government had said that the monarch must hold his/her postion of life. I was stating that the meaning of a monarchy which headed a monarch holds his/her postion life that is the defintion of a monarch.

[Marengo]

Well, I could look up the definition of monarch in my dictionairy and I am sure that there won't be anything about a position for life there. However I get your point. It is a matter of interpretation and of changing society and traditions IMHO. And maybe even a matter of changing demographics. With the present longlivity of people ruling for life might mean in the future that all monarchs would be starting at an age where normal people retire, which has its disadvantages.

I am quite happy with the sollution chosen in my country, but I respect that others feel differently about the matter.

[Verde Esmeralda]

Originally Posted by Marengo

Queen Wilhelmina wrote about this in her autobiography 'lonely but not alone' to. She started wwith the example of Emperor Charles V (King Carlos II of Spain). When she was younger she felt his decision very strange and walking away from duty. But later in life she understood that instead it was the ultimate action one could do for duty, to know when you have to step down as another person can do it better.

That's exactly what I meant. Thanks again Marengo

Though I don't think Beatrix has any kind of obstacle for continuing as Queen, it would be a wise thing to do, maybe in 5 years' time, to step down and leave WA as King. He'll already be in his forties, and I believe he is already perfectly capable of carrying the crown. And I'm sure she needs some rest!

Won't start the should-Maxima-be-Queen controversy here, because it's the subject of another thread.

[Next Star]

Originally Posted by Verde Esmeralda

That's exactly what I meant. Thanks again Marengo

Though I don't think Beatrix has any kind of obstacle for continuing as Queen, it would be a wise thing to do, maybe in 5 years' time, to step down and leave WA as King. He'll already be in his forties, and I believe he is already perfectly capable of carrying the crown. And I'm sure she needs some rest!

Won't start the should-Maxima-be-Queen controversy here, because it's the subject of another thread.

People seem to forget Willem-Aleander and Maxima have very young children and that would take most of time going on foreign visit to other nations. It has nothing to do with his age but his children yes it does if maybe married sooner than he did at 27 or 28 his children would much older than they are now. His mother should only abdicate when she becomes too ill to perform her duties as Queen of Netherlands and not because of her son's age.