To Top

Historian claims the monarchy could be abolished within next 14 years

A historian has sensationally claimed that the UK monarchy will cease to exist by 2030 because the public would not like the Queen’s successors.

The claims made by Dr Anna Whitelock have been ridiculed by monarchists as ‘outlandish’ with around three quarters of the British population being pro-monarchy.

Dr Whitelock, a reader in modern history from the University of London, and director of The London Centre for Public History, made the claims just a couple of weeks before Her Majesty prepares to celebrate her 90th birthday.

Speaking to the Press Association, she said that the monarchy is on it’s last legs and support will plummet when Charles takes the throne.

She said: “I think there’ll be a discussion and a debate in a way that there hasn’t before.

“At the moment there is pretty great support for the Queen and the monarchy, but the problem is that is about the Queen and not about the monarchy.

“As the older generation who are generally more wedded to the monarchy die out, the question of the future of the monarchy will become even more pressing, and then potentially more critical voices will come to the fore.

“I would say by 2030 there will be definite louder clamours for the eradication of the monarchy. I can’t say that there won’t be a monarchy. I would definitely say that the monarchy – its purpose, what it’s about, will be questioned and challenged in a way that it hasn’t been before.”

The monarchy currently has a very high approval rating in the UK, with 80 per cent of people being in favour during the Diamond Jubilee Year of 2012.  Since 2012, support has averaged at around 73 per cent meaning three quarters of the population are pro-monarchy.

Buckingham Palace has declined to comment on the claims made by Dr Whitelock.

  • roger57

    Dr Anna Whitelock …i think that the monarchy should RULE [Like the 1st Elizabeth].IT WOULD WORK MUCH BETTER AND YOU WOULD NOT HAVE THE BIGOTS PRIME MINISTERS THAT WE HAVE HAD RECENTLY, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF WINSTON CHURCHILL .i SECONDLY THINK THAT WILLIAM SHOULD SUCCEED HER AND NOT CHARLES.I NEVER DID LIKE CHARLES. Officially THE MONARCHY REIGNS FROM 1707..IN THE REIGN OF QUEEN ANNE SOME OF YOU SHOULD REALIZE THAT WHERE THE MONARCHY’S HAVE EITHER BEEN ASSASSINATED,DEPOSED,or thrown out by the people..the situation was bad…coups, uprising, dictatorship etc.Not 1 country went better…I bet you can’t name 1 country that was better without the monarchy. Look what happened to: RUSSIA, GERMANY, AUSTRIA, GREECE, YUGOSLAVIA, ROMANIA, ALBANIA, SPAIN, AND NOT TO MENTION NON EUROPEAN NATIONS. a head of state[king queen] represents god….After all who was the KING OF KINGS[JESUS].

    • nmfd72

      rogers57, I must admit I have thought about the same thing, the only problem with that is if you get stuck with a crazy King like George III then what?? democracy has it’s drawbacks but I’m not willing to take the gamble quite frankly.

      • Jon Brown

        Or A Nazi like Eddie? A monarchy can never be a democracy.

    • Esclarmonde Massenet

      Do you know Prince Charles? He will make an excellent king but his son will not and I would be happy to see the monarchy end with the death of King Charles or the name he will rule as.

      • People still love to blindly bad mouth Charles without actually knowing anything about his characteristics and attributes that would make him a good king. Jonathan Sacks, recently Chief Rabbi of the United Hebrew Congregations of the Commonwealth, has called him a great man. Charles is a highly intelligent man of deep thought and commitment to service. I think if William and Catherine mature and acquire some more depth, they too will do the Monarchy justice, but they have some ways to go, so hopefully Charles will have his parents’ longevity genes.

    • Jon Brown

      Iceland, Finland, Ireland, Czech and Slovak Republics, Poland to name but a few places better off without monarchs.

  • Thomas Village

    This woman is after publicity. Nothing more than “click-bait”

  • Maryna MacIlwaine

    Roger57, you are so right there is no country that is better without a Monarchy. You have mentioned Europe. Try Africa, they are destroying themselves under the leadership of Dictators.
    The world over the British Royal family are esteemed. Perhaps Dr Anna Whitelock needs to stop naval gazing and make a few enquiries of all the tourists who spend a great deal of money just to experience a small part of the Royalty. Perhaps she would be better off finding out why people love the Royal Family!

    • Daisy Chain

      Please explain to me why people love the monarchy, Maryna. They are not even particularly nice people. As to Africa, your argument is off kilter. African politics is a relic of colonial rule and plunder. We too have a history of dictatorship only we called them kings.

      • Maryna MacIlwaine

        Catch a wake up Daisy Chain. Pray do tell what is your definition of ‘nice people’? …………. Right …… relic of colonial rule and plunder …… of course not a relic of King Chaka Zulu, Mzilikazi Khumalo, Idi Amin, Milton Obote, Jean-Bedel Bokassa, Muammar Gaddafi ……. For all the Kingly dictatorship you suffered … you have turned out rather well, on the whole, your standards of living enviable. Millions of people risk their lives, every day, trying to get to live a life that many live, in countries where Monarchs are the overseeers!

        • Daisy Chain

          One of my definitions of nice people are those who do not torture and kill animals for their own entertainment, which is something your heroes do quite frequently.. As to your argument regarding Africa, I can’t see the point you are making at all. I hope you are not seriously suggesting that monarchies protect us and make our lives better. That would be really quite preposterous.

    • Jon Brown

      What evidence have you to back up your claim that the British monarchy are esteemed the world over?

      • Maryna MacIlwaine

        Well what evidence have you got that they are not? What parts of the world have you travelled to? How many different countries do you have friends in?
        How many of your friends are not native to where you live and come from different parts of the world. How long is a piece of string?

        • Jon Brown

          You made the assertion it is up to you to prove it. I have travelled to most of this planet and speak five languages. Have friends all over Europe. Most of my working life I have rubbed shoulders with foreigners. Have yet to meet a single one who had any time or interest in these parasites.

          • Daisy Chain

            I agree, Jon. I have also lived abroad and while a few foreigners like the novelty of (other countries’) monarchies, most consider it a relic of the past with no place in modern society. This notion of being the envy of the world is a myth created by those with vested interests.

          • imatt

            The Windsors are a curiosity to those oversees. Rather akin to a reality show. Or a soap opera perhaps where their scandals and overall dysfunction would make the Ewings and Carringtons from Dallas and Dynasty blush.
            Of course it’s telling that other nations love the British royal family so much that fewer of them over time have comparable monarchies of their own to fawn over.

          • Jon Brown

            Or a meaningless mantra chanted by monarchists with not a shred of evidence to back up their claims. if they are the envy of the world let them stand on the hustings and face an electorate and ballot box. Should be interesting.

    • imatt

      Yes. It’s a pity Africa was pillaged by European colonial powers beforehand then, many of them monarchies at the time such as Britain, Italy, Belgium, Portugal, Germany and The Netherlands.
      Let’s not forget the deaths of 12m Congolese when Belgium conquered the Congo in the heart of Africa. All under the name of King Leopold. Adolf Hitler is rightly considered a butcher for having 6m+ Jews and others killed under his rule. What does that make this Belgian monarch?
      And LOVE the Windsors? Please tell us all why YOU love them so much? What special qualities and talents above and beyond all others do they possess? Other than the ‘correct’ parentage of course!

  • Christopher Williams

    OK! Let’s sack the Queen right now! But before anyone calls for my head. What will we replace Her Majesty with? Charles may or may not be popular, but please do not forget the Cambridge’s. Anyway let us replace the monarchy with a president. Then we will be able to bask in the glory of the United Republic of Great Britain. Instead of the Queen and her family living in Buckingham Palace and Windsor Castle etc. Our dearly beloved president can live there instead. Our highly esteemed Prim-minster will be able to rule over us instead of our Queen and any future Kings, we do have three waiting in the wings after all. I am being sarcastic by the way. I really want to say with all sincerity GOD SAVE THE QUEEN AND LONG MAY SHE CONTINUE TO REIGN OVER US. I hope the monarchy grows in strength. I do have one problem with the Queen though. She should have a home in Wales as well England and Scotland.

    • Alan Hubbard

      Iv”e often wondered why the Royal family does’nt invest in property throughout the realm — in Canada/fiji/Australia/New Zealand etc.
      If they were to become property owners , they would have somewhere to stay that they owned, where all in the royal family could go for holidays…
      It would of course be expected that they pay all land taxes etc, and employ estate staff to ensure the place is appropriately maintained. It would be a great opportunity for the monarch to “de clutter” existing properties in Britain, and send some of their “lesser” art works, antiques etc to their far flung properties..
      Such an investment would improve the popularity of the Monarchy throughout the realm- because they would be seen as being ‘productive’ in those countries.
      I live in Australia – an i’ve often wondered why the king of Bahrain owns a large estate in this country but none of the Royals do . These estates would also provide a :safe haven o=for the family in the unlikely event of some major tragedy, earthquake, war, invasion, from where the monarch can continue his/her duties until such time as the problems are resolved. The Royal estates could create wealth through tourism, and having them open when the royals are no ‘in residence’ The investment would also create a sense of “ownership for royalists in these countries, where the Royal presence always improves support for them… They could use the properties for all manner of purposes – horse breeding, wineries — public retreats,( TOURISM) and dairy/beef/lamb/pork/poultry production. If they are paying land rates etc to their local councils the regional economy would be improved- and the local town which hosts such royal properties would also receive a huge improvement to employment and significance.

      • Christopher Williams

        I agree with you

        • Jon Brown

          The Swiss manage very nicely without a head of state. The monarchy wouldn’t be missed.

          • Christopher Williams

            Yes they do he is called The President of the Confederation

          • Jon Brown

            More of a caretaker than a president. It is the council of 10 who make joint decisions. By convention though s/he never leaves Switzerland whilst they are in office. A bit different to the parasitic Saxe Coburgs. And of course s/he can be voted out. When are we going to get a democracy so the monarchy can be voted out.

  • Esclarmonde Massenet

    I cannot begin to think of the Duke of Cambridge as king with his dedicated wife and her parents! May the Lord protect us.

  • UKSteve

    Abolish historians – they seem to be about as much use as chocolate fireguards.

    God Save The Queen.

    • Christopher-trier

      I’m a conservative, patriotic monarchist and an historian.

  • lnyx

    I don’t believe it will happen for God will always save the Queen

    • Jon Brown

      Appealing to the non existent to save the non elected?

More in Her Majesty The Queen