Just over half a century later, Queen Elizabeth II ascended the throne on February 6, 1952, not only as Queen of the United Kingdom but also as the Queen of Pakistan (as Pakistan had still not become a republic). She proclaimed that: “I declare before you all that my whole life, whether it be long or short, shall be devoted to your service and the service of our great imperial family to which we all belong”. Since then, Elizabeth II has been a great example of service and strength of character, not only for the countries in which she is head of state, but for a large part of the world.
Even in the most anti-royal of places and among the most republican of people, Queen Elizabeth II has managed to attract large crowds and keen interest. In her two visits to Pakistan in 1961 and 1997 — after Pakistan had become a republic — the Queen attracted nearly a quarter of the population of Lahore in 1961 and hundreds of thousands even in 1997. In both of her visits, people spontaneously thronged to her and the leaders of the country were baffled by the love and affection she garnered. So how did a person who only visited Pakistan twice in her life and who was formally the head of state for only four years in the 1950s, achieve such popularity?
First, there is an obvious mystique about any monarchy. Its rituals, pomp and circumstance and longevity command respect, awe and inspiration — after all, over a billion people watched the wedding of Prince William and Catherine Middleton last year. In South Asia, due to the persistence of local principalities (as late as 1969 in Pakistan), people are still familiar with such an institution and so obvious linkages are made. Secondly, Elizabeth II, and good monarchs in general, represent that which modern democracy can never represent — life-long, filial, unquestioning and total devotion to the country. Modern politics, especially in countries like Pakistan, is rife with people jostling for power, self-interest and short-term gains. Therefore, in such circumstances the image of a monarch, who even at 85 years of age works long hours and attends hundreds of engagements, out of a sense of duty and devotion to her country is simply admirable. Obviously, the Queen is a queen and does not need to do anything. She can sit pretty in her palace and scoff at the people but instead, she continuously tours the countries that she governs and almost daily replies to correspondence, often from common people around the world. Again, simply, out of devotion.
Ancient Indian philosophy has a concept of ‘Rajdharma’ which perfectly explains the way in which Queen Elizabeth II relates to her role as queen. In Rajdharma, the monarch is the ‘father’ of the land which is the ‘mother’ and the people are the ‘children’. This familial relationship infuses the spirit of love, devotion and a lasting bond between the sovereign, land and the people as if they were a part of one large family. No wonder, then, that the princely states in India were largely spared communal tensions when the same was tearing apart British India. It also explains how troubled the Nawab of Bahawalpur was in 1947 when he heard that Hindus and Sikhs in his state migrated to India and implored them to reconsider.
Maybe her long reign is a reminder of an age which is fast disappearing, where people served others out of a sense of duty and love and not brazen self-interest. Thank you, Queen Elizabeth II, once Queen of Pakistan, for being that example.
Published in The Express Tribune, April 24th, 2012.
COMMENTS (19)
Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.
For more information, please see our Comments FAQ
@Udaya Bose
I thought the Pakistan reference was obvious: Victoria had adopted Maharaja Duleep Singh of Lahore, and as far as I know, Lahore and most of the state Duleep Singh and his ancestors ruled over forms Pakistan.
@Mohammed Abbasi:
"Allah save Her Majesty The Queen and bless the Royal Family. Mohammed Abbasi Association of British Muslims"
Tell me, you are joking!
Allah save Her Majesty The Queen and bless the Royal Family.
Mohammed Abbasi Association of British Muslims
Highly flawed article with incomplete facts depicting only one side of the story.
Just curious as to what connection Victoria had with Pakistan. It is of course anachronistic considering Victoria died in 1901. Ah ! Was it her Munshi? Abdul Karim, the Munshi, was born in Lalitpur near Jhansi. Is that in Pakistan? But don't you see, he was a MUSLIM and by extension a Pakistani. QED. Zindabad to that.
Why they are so nice in the country and evils out side.?????
An extremely interesting and relevant discussion is taking place on The Guardian's pages. (The link is given below.) I believe it is worth reading, what our ex-masters thought then and do now.
.
link text: Deny the British empire's crimes? No, we ignore them
@Yuri Kondratyuk:
The struggle for the Congress and the Muslime league were very different in nature. While the Congress could outwardly create mayhem and voice out their opinions strognly agaisnt the British Raj while at the same time, being in cahoots in private, the ML had to take a much more transparent route to achieve Pakistan's independence. As a party led by a man of principles, they were fighting on the basis of logic and reason. And sometimes that IS enough by itself. Going to jail is not a benchmark.
All the old people in my district Gujranwala always admire the rule of Brithishers on pakistani areas, they say it was so peaceful that you cannot even imagine in today´s circumstances. Our pakistani areas were always backwards, had almost nothing to offer but still the Britishers invested a lot in our areas in the form of Schools, Hospitals, colleges , railway etc. While it is true that British milked the resources of the areas which fall in modern day india but that was not the case for areas that fall in modern day pakistan.
Considering the fact that none of the Muslim League leaders went to jail, unlike Gandhi or Nehru or Patel. And popularity of Queen in Pak as opposed to Indian indifference (may be Diana was more popular).......does this tell us something about the Partition of India?
I have yet to meet an elder citizen who didn’t hear his parents admiring British rule for the peace they maintained
Excelent exlanation of rajdharma. That is why we indians consider country as the motherland (matrubhumi, vande mataram, bharat mata, mother india). We are the only nation where the country is given status of mother. France and Germany, on the other hand, consider nation as fatherland (faterland, patrie). India is the only country in the world that is mother for her children. Thank you for the article.
don't be fooled by the royals they are as racist as they come princess diana didn't live to tell the tale of their racism
We would have been part of the rebel alliance, using 'The Force' to battle evil empire. We meet again Obi Wan!
@Nadir what about kashmir and palestine the gifts of queens.
There is no more queen lovers left in the world i guess.....
Long live the Queen.
Are you a British agent?
Tell all of this to the population of Diego Garcia who were evicted by a Royal decree.