debunked: City of London a sovereign state

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
My assertion:
The British monarch needs permission from the Lord Mayor of London to enter the City of London.
Numerous sources which confirm this:
https://www.google.co.uk/#q=monarch...309&bih=713&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&cad=b

Mick's assertion:
This is purely ceremonial, the British monarch can comes and go as (s)he pleases in the City of London.
Sources Mick's provide to prove his case:
1. Wikipedia cites an unpublished art student's paper, which in-turn cites an unpublished English Heritage report - Nothing then.
2. The City's website, which confirms the monarch asks permission to enter the city - Thanks for that one.
3. A book which mentions the Protector (not a British monarch) having to perform the ceremony too - This doesn't help Mick's case.
3. A book (snippet view) which mentions the ceremonial - So what?

A bunch of Google results will also tell you that aliens abduct people and implant things in their bodies. Perhaps you could point to some sources that say this is anything more than a tradition (which is actually what most of the Google results say)?
 

BRoI

New Member
"The City of London is the only part of Britain over which parliament has no authority. In one respect at least the Corporation acts as the superior body: it imposes on the House of Commons a figure called the remembrancer: an official lobbyist who sits behind the Speaker’s chair and ensures that, whatever our elected representatives might think, the City’s rights and privileges are protected."

- George Monbiot
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/31/corporation-london-city-medieval

31Israel-Ambassodor-Gets-Freedom-of-City-of-London.jpg
The Remembrancer Paul Double (in the the wig) giving the Israeli Ambassador the Freedom of the City of London, something our Queen doesn't enjoy.
http://www.thejc.com/news/uk-news/freedom-city-prosor
 

BRoI

New Member
A bunch of Google results will also tell you that aliens abduct people and implant things in their bodies. Perhaps you could point to some sources that say this is anything more than a tradition (which is actually what most of the Google results say)?

Already linked on this thread are recent articles in two of Britain's leading publications (New Statesman & The Guardian) which state why the Queen still needs do this.

Watch the video, if the articles are too difficult for you.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
Already linked on this thread are recent articles in two of Britain's leading publications (New Statesman & The Guardian) which state why the Queen still needs do this.

Watch the video, if the articles are too difficult for you.

That articles do not say the Queen "needs" to do this - they say she does this as tradition, and that the Mayor acknowledges the authority of the Queen
 

Trailspotter

Senior Member.
Unfortunately your youtube source only shows the Queen in the City of London, not entering it.

St. Pauls, as you can see on the map, is towards the centre. So your video doesn't prove anything either way.

It wasn't supposed to prove anything. It just shows the Lord Mayor of London meeting the Queen at the steps of St Pauls inside the City of London, rather than at the point where she was entering it. The Diamond Jubilee pageantry has been watched by millions of people gathered in London streets and broadcasted live on british TV. I have watched a lot of it on BBC. There may be a full video of the Queen's procession to the St Paul's Cathedral still available, but I did not bother to find it. But I'm sure that there was no red cord and ceremonial stop during her procession to the City. If it were, this event would be witnessed and recorded by many.
 

BRoI

New Member
That articles do not say the Queen "needs" to do this - they say she does this as tradition, and that the Mayor acknowledges the authority of the Queen

"Whenever the Queen makes a state entry to the City, she meets a red cord raised by City police at Temple Bar, and then engages in a colourful ceremony involving the lord mayor, his sword, assorted aldermen and sheriffs, and a character called the Remembrancer. In this ceremony, the lord mayor recognises the Queen's authority, but the relationship is complex: as the corporation itself says: "The right of the City to run its own affairs was gradually won as concessions were gained from the Crown." The modern ceremony strikingly marks the political discontinuity at the City's borders."
- Your source
http://www.newstatesman.com/economy/2011/02/london-corporation-city

Admittedly it doesn't say "needs", but nor does it say "she does this as tradition", as you claimed—but I'll not quibble over semantics.

All sources posted state the monarch has either to ask for permission to enter and go through an strange ceremony, or just go through a strange ceremony before entering.

No one, not one of you, has posted anything that suggests the British monarch can freely come-and-go in the City, as you claim.
 

BRoI

New Member
It wasn't supposed to prove anything. It just shows the Lord Mayor of London meeting the Queen at the steps of St Pauls inside the City of London, rather than at the point where she was entering it. The Diamond Jubilee pageantry has been watched by millions of people gathered in London streets and broadcasted live on british TV. I have watched a lot of it on BBC. There may be a full video of the Queen's procession to the St Paul's Cathedral still available, but I did not bother to find it. But I'm sure that there was no red cord and ceremonial stop during her procession to the City. If it were, this event would be witnessed and recorded by many.

But you claimed

Well, during the celebration of her Diamond Jubilee in June this year, the Queen attended a service at St Paul's Cathedral, which is in the City. She arrived there without any special ceremony of asking permission to enter the City.

The only tribute to this tradition was her walking in the Cathedral behind the Lord Mayor bearing the Pearl Sword. Following the service at St Paul's, the Queen attended a reception at nearby Mansion House - the official residence of the Lord Mayor of London.

That's purely speculation.
 

BRoI

New Member
I've just stated the facts as they were. The Queen arrived to St Pauls from the Buckingham Palace making no stops on her way and was met at the steps by the Lord Mayor. Where is a speculation here?

Nonsense.

You've a few seconds footage of her approaching St. Pauls in her limo. You've no idea whatsoever, let alone proof, as to which route she took into the City, nor that the centuries old tradition the monarch performs when entering the City, was on this occasion skipped.
 

Trailspotter

Senior Member.
Nonsense.

You've a few seconds footage of her approaching St. Pauls in her limo. You've no idea whatsoever, let alone proof, as to which route she took into the City, nor that the centuries old tradition the monarch performs when entering the City, was on this occasion skipped.

Do not be so sure. As I said, I have watched the live broadcast on BBC. Here is a full video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KrlaW_IpRg0

A narrative by Huw Edwards in the beginning explains that the ancient tradition on this occasion was reduced to the Queen's brief touching the Pearl Sword at the steps of St Pauls. The moment of her Bentley passing Temple Bar without stopping is also recorded. The commentator was saying at this moment that, on the two previous Queen's jubilees, the traditional ceremony was held at this point.
 

BRoI

New Member
That's a better source you've found. But it's not Huw Edwards commentating, it's James Naughtie.

So, she had to ask permission, as ever, to be in the City.

Well, during the celebration of her Diamond Jubilee in June this year, the Queen attended a service at St Paul's Cathedral, which is in the City. She arrived there without any special ceremony of asking permission to enter the City.

The only tribute to this tradition was her walking in the Cathedral behind the Lord Mayor bearing the Pearl Sword. Following the service at St Paul's, the Queen attended a reception at nearby Mansion House - the official residence of the Lord Mayor of London.


You must have missed Naughtie commentary when watching it live.
 

Trailspotter

Senior Member.
That's a better source you've found. But it's not Huw Edwards commentating, it's James Naughtie.
You must have missed Naughtie commentary when watching it live.

It was Huw Edwards, or, possibly, at some moments, Simon Schama:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...disastrous-team-Huw-Edwards-Simon-Schama.html
Why on earth the BBC Radio 4 James Naughtie would be given a job to comment a major event on BBC One ahead of its leading TV presenters?

And touching the Sword is not the same as asking permission but quite the opposite: the Lord Mayor presents the City's pearl-encrusted Sword of State to the Sovereign as a symbol of the latter's overlordship.

Here is an account of the ceremony during the Queen's Golden Jubilee ten years ago:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1396320/Pearl-Sword-opens-City-to-sovereign.html
 

BRoI

New Member
It was Huw Edwards, or, possibly, at some moments, Simon Schama:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...disastrous-team-Huw-Edwards-Simon-Schama.html
Why on earth the BBC Radio 4 James Naughtie would be given a job to comment a major event on BBC One ahead of its leading TV presenters?

And touching the Sword is not the same as asking permission but quite the opposite: the Lord Mayor presents the City's pearl-encrusted Sword of State to the Sovereign as a symbol of the latter's overlordship.

Here is an account of the ceremony during the Queen's Golden Jubilee ten years ago:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1396320/Pearl-Sword-opens-City-to-sovereign.html

@ 8:42 Huw Edwards mentions Temple Bar, the formal point of entry to the City of London
@ 19:35 Huw Edwards states that on previous Jubilees the carriages have stopped at Temple Bar for the formal greeting by the Lord Mayor, "but today's arrangements are not quite as formal as that."
@ 22:48 James Naughty picks up the commentary once again, and states the Queen has touched the Pearl Sword. The Mayor then turns his back on the Queen, and she then follows him up the steps.

Commentary from St Paul’s will be provided by James Naughtie
http://www.bbc.co.uk/mediacentre/latestnews/2012/jubilee.html

And touching the Sword is not the same as asking permission but quite the opposite: the Lord Mayor presents the City's pearl-encrusted Sword of State to the Sovereign as a symbol of the latter's overlordship.
- You

That's you own interpretation. Personally I'll go with what the City themselves claim:

The Temple Bar ceremony, which is still occasionally re-enacted at a monument to the Bar, involves the monarch stopping to request permission to enter the City and the Lord Mayor presenting the Sword of State as a sign of loyalty.
http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/abou...ildings-within-the-city/Pages/Temple-Bar.aspx

How can you argue with that, when you've nothing at all to back-up your theory?
 

Trigger Hippie

Senior Member.
I found some references on this "queen asking permission thing", many of which once led to The official website of The British Monarchy. The link no longer exists today, but can be seen on the Wayback Machine here.

Q: Gwyneth - Truro
Is it true that through an ancient law, The Queen can be prevented from entering the City of London?

The citizens of London, through the Corporation of the City, still retain their ancient privilege of being able to bar the Sovereign from entering their streets.

Technically, before Her Majesty may enter the boundaries of the City, she must seek the formal permission of the Lord Mayor and on State occasions this colourful ceremony is usually carried out at Temple Bar, near the Law Courts.

The custom goes back to the days when London was a walled city whose gates were closed at the order of the Lord Mayor. The ceremony is now symbolic as the ancient walls and old Temple Bar no longer exist.

When the Royal carriage is about to cross the boundary of the City of Westminster to enter the City of London, the Sovereign is challenged by the Lord Mayor, the City Marshal and the Aldermen. The Lord Mayor steps forward carrying his Sword of State and offers it point downwards to The Queen, who stretches out her hand and touches it. By surrendering his sword, permission to enter the City is given and the cord stretched across the road marking the boundary is lowered.

Content from External Source
The respondent could be an authoritative source, it's certainly more so than anything found printed in the Guardian. I'd much rather read the actual statute that states the queen must ask permission to enter the city. Even if the statute exists, it is possible that it's observed simply to preserve a tradition. Much like being awarded the Freedom of the City of London, which allows members of a guild to practice their craft within the city, practically unnecessary, open to anyone and maintained as a living tradition.

From the City of London's website:

Today most of the practical reasons for obtaining the Freedom of the City have disappeared. It nevertheless remains as a unique part of London’s history to which many people who have lived or worked in the City have been proud to be admitted. Prior to 1996, the Freedom was only open to British or Commonwealth Citizens. Now, however, it has been extended globally and persons of any nationality may be admitted either through nomination or by being presented by a Livery Company. Applicants must be over 18 years of age and of good character. There is a long standing tradition of admitting women.

The City of London is keen to maintain the Freedom as a living tradition. The Freedom is open to all who are genuinely interested and invited or born to it.

Content from External Source
I'm willing to acknowledge that legally, she must ask permission. However if a requirement is a "technicality", the implication is that it's not really necessary. For instance, technically you're not allowed to eat mince pies on Christmas day in the UK. Apparently it's the law. An obscure antiquated law that nobody follows or enforces. The law we are talking about here may fall into the same category; an obscure antiqued law, but one that's followed for the sake of tradition.
 

Trailspotter

Senior Member.
@ 8:42 Huw Edwards mentions Temple Bar, the formal point of entry to the City of London
@ 19:35 Huw Edwards states that on previous Jubilees the carriages have stopped at Temple Bar for the formal greeting by the Lord Mayor, "but today's arrangements are not quite as formal as that."
@ 22:48 James Naughty picks up the commentary once again, and states the Queen has touched the Pearl Sword. The Mayor then turns his back on the Queen, and she then follows him up the steps.

OK, both Huw Edwards and James Naughty said something on the subject of this ceremony. They somehow merged in one person in my memory. Perhaps it is because I regularly see the former on TV but only hear the latter on radio.


That's you own interpretation. Personally I'll go with what the City themselves claim:
The Temple Bar ceremony, which is still occasionally re-enacted at a monument to the Bar, involves the monarch stopping to request permission to enter the City and the Lord Mayor presenting the Sword of State as a sign of loyalty.
http://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/about...emple-Bar.aspx
How can you argue with that, when you've nothing at all to back-up your theory?

'Occasionally re-enacted' does not imply that this ceremony was performed every time when the Sovereign entered the City. I can give you another famous occasion when the Queen had made an uninterrupted journey to St Pauls and was greeted at the destination by the Lord Mayor presenting the Sword of State as a sign of loyalty. It was on July 29, 1981, the Royal Wedding of Prince Charles and Lady Diana:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgmpgvf1O44
with more recording of the initial procession toward St Pauls in:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kz5wxzvo4G0
 

BRoI

New Member
Excellent piece of investigation by Trigger Hippy.


'Occasionally re-enacted' does not imply that this ceremony was performed every time when the Sovereign entered the City. I can give you another famous occasion when the Queen had made an uninterrupted journey to St Pauls and was greeted at the destination by the Lord Mayor presenting the Sword of State as a sign of loyalty. It was on July 29, 1981, the Royal Wedding of Prince Charles and Lady Diana:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgmpgvf1O44
with more recording of the initial procession toward St Pauls in:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kz5wxzvo4G0


Again Trailspotter, you're just putting forward your own theory. Although the City and the Monarchy themselves state this ceremony is about the monarch asking permission to enter the City, you choose to ignore that, and claim it's just about the Mayor signifying his loyalty.


At Charles and Diana's wedding, the Mayor meet the monarch on the steps of St. Paul's, as his successor would do 31 years later on the Diamond Jubilee. The ceremony of the monarch touching the Pearl Sword happened on the step's of St. Pauls.

Can you find a video of the Queen arriving in the City without having to touch the Pearl Sword?
 

MikeC

Closed Account
Looks to me like every time the Queen enters the city, the Lord Mayor has to symbolically give her the sword to show his subservience to her authority.
 

BRoI

New Member
An account of the ceremony from 1833, no film footage I'm afraid.

41759e102ec72b77be715e3a37e41c62.jpg
The Times (of London), June 14, 1833, p.6.
 

BRoI

New Member
Well regardless of what it looks like to you, the Monarchy and the City state she must ask permission to enter the City.
 

Trailspotter

Senior Member.
Again Trailspotter, you're just putting forward your own theory. Although the City and the Monarchy themselves state this ceremony is about the monarch asking permission to enter the City, you choose to ignore that, and claim it's just about the Mayor signifying his loyalty.


At Charles and Diana's wedding, the Mayor meet the monarch on the steps of St. Paul's, as his successor would do 31 years later on the Diamond Jubilee. The ceremony of the monarch touching the Pearl Sword happened on the step's of St. Pauls.

Can you find a video of the Queen arriving in the City without having to touch the Pearl Sword?

Actually, I have asked myself a different question: how many times the ceremony of touching the Pearl Sword was re-enacted during the Queen's 60-year reign? It should be a very public event each time, that would attract many royal watchers, so there would be a plenty of videos or photos, right? Well, it is quite opposite. I have found only four such events: Silver Wedding Anniversary, Golden and Diamond Jubilees and Royal Wedding of Charles and Diana. In the former two events the touching ceremony was at Temple Bar:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hg_cadCg-2s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QftRZ3pGqC8
There was no second touching at the St Paul's steps in those two events. In contrast, there was no stopping at Temple Bar in the latter two events, the Sword was presented to the monarch at the steps on her arrival to St Pauls.

EDIT: There is a video of fifth event from 1954. It probably was her first touching the Pearl Sword (at Temple Bar):
http://www.britishpathe.com/video/londons-city-welcomes-queen/query/15601

There must have been other occasions when the Queen visited St Pauls, for example, her Silver Jubilee, but I could not have found a photo or video record of the touching ceremony being perform.
EDIT: There is a newspaper report of the touching ceremony at Temple Bar.

So far, regardless of the places where the touching ceremony was performed, all records show, as pointed by MikeC, that the Lord Mayor symbolically presents the sword to the Queen to show his subservience to her authority, but they show nothing to suggest that the Queen is actually asking his permission to enter the City.

Anyway, these were the state events, involving official processions, state coaches, cavalry escort etc. Apart of them, the Queen has been doing hundreds official public engagements every year, visiting many places of her realm, including the City of London, like, for example:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TeFtAzDxiI

There is nothing on the record to suggest that any of her public engagements in the City has begun with her touching the Pearl Sword.
 

MikeC

Closed Account
Well regardless of what it looks like to you, the Monarchy and the City state she must ask permission to enter the City.

I see nothing in any of the accounts to support a conclusion of anything other than the Lord Mayor is required to acknowledge the supremacy of the crown - none of them mention the crown asking permission at all, whereas all of the, even the 1833 one, mention the LM acting as I have said. The touching of the sword is clearly identified as the LM presenting his sword to the crown to acknowledge the authority of the Crown.

So I suggest that you need to either provide some actual evidence to support a case otherwise, or accept the evidence that actually exists.
 

BRoI

New Member
I see nothing in any of the accounts to support a conclusion of anything other than the Lord Mayor is required to acknowledge the supremacy of the crown - none of them mention the crown asking permission at all, whereas all of the, even the 1833 one, mention the LM acting as I have said. The touching of the sword is clearly identified as the LM presenting his sword to the crown to acknowledge the authority of the Crown.

So I suggest that you need to either provide some actual evidence to support a case otherwise, or accept the evidence that actually exists.

So you can simply ignore it, like you've consistently done with the evidence already posted numerous times on this thread, from the monarchy and the City themselves!

How about you address them. Specifically.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
So you can simply ignore it, like you've consistently done with the evidence already posted numerous times on this thread, from the monarchy and the City themselves!

How about you address them. Specifically.

You mean the one that describes the ceremony as an occasional re-enactment?

The Temple Bar ceremony, which is still occasionally re-enacted at a monument to the Bar, involves the monarch stopping to request permission to enter the City and the Lord Mayor presenting the Sword of State as a sign of loyalty.
Content from External Source


or the one that describes it as "symbolic"

Technically, before Her Majesty may enter the boundaries of the City, she must seek the formal permission of the Lord Mayor and on State occasions this colourful ceremony is usually carried out at Temple Bar, near the Law Courts.The custom goes back to the days when London was a walled city whose gates were closed at the order of the Lord Mayor. The ceremony is now symbolic as the ancient walls and old Temple Bar no longer exist.
Content from External Source

 

BRoI

New Member
There is nothing on the record to suggest that any of her public engagements in the City has begun with her touching the Pearl Sword.

Is this suppose to be satire?

All the videos you've posted have begun with the Queen touching the Pearl Sword.

Same point to you that I've just made to MikeC.

What's your basis for completely ignoring the sources from the City and the Monarchy, which states the monarch asks for permission?
 

BRoI

New Member
You mean the one that describes the ceremony as an occasional re-enactment?

The Temple Bar ceremony, which is still occasionally re-enacted at a monument to the Bar, involves the monarch stopping to request permission to enter the City and the Lord Mayor presenting the Sword of State as a sign of loyalty.
Content from External Source

Occasionally re-enacted, as she only occasionally goes there.

If you can find proof she's ever been there without having to touch the Pearl Sword, please share it.

or the one that describes it as "symbolic"

Technically, before Her Majesty may enter the boundaries of the City, she must seek the formal permission of the Lord Mayor and on State occasions this colourful ceremony is usually carried out at Temple Bar, near the Law Courts.The custom goes back to the days when London was a walled city whose gates were closed at the order of the Lord Mayor. The ceremony is now symbolic as the ancient walls and old Temple Bar no longer exist.
Content from External Source


We can all quote-mine Mick.

Technically, before Her Majesty may enter the boundaries of the City, she must seek the formal permission of the Lord Mayor and on State occasions this colourful ceremony is usually carried out at Temple Bar, near the Law Courts
 

Trailspotter

Senior Member.
Can you find a video of the Queen arriving in the City without having to touch the Pearl Sword?

Yes, I've just found one on StPaulsLondon channel:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0E66w1Qwik

The Queen attended the St Paul's Cathedral 300th Anniversary Thanksgiving Service on 21 June 2011, which was her public engagement. She and Prince Philipp were greeted by the Lord Mayor at the steps, but no sword was presented to her on that occasion. He also saw them out after the service. After the Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh departed the Pearl Sword appeared in the front of the Lord Mayor's party leaving the Cathedral.

Also, there are some photos in the St Paul's Cathedral album on facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.10150652657800068.696869.78127040067&type=3
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Is this suppose to be satire?

All the videos you've posted have begun with the Queen touching the Pearl Sword.

I suspect he meant "other than the occasional re-enactment of the purely symbolic traditional temple-bar ceremony"
 

BRoI

New Member
Nick Shaxson, whose book is discussed in the previously posted New Statesman & The Guardian articles writes:

... the Queen’s ceremony with the Lord Mayor and his sword on coming to the City’s boundary is not so much an iron prohibition but has more of a ceremonial, tourist flavour than I perhaps suggest. In Treasure Islands, I wrote (page 270) that “the Queen cannot wander into the City whenever she wants” and I suppose this, in light of last week’s discussions, is over-egging it a bit. She does, apparently, drive through the City, from time to time, without having to ask permission. This, at any rate is how Buckhingham Palace described it to me during my research:
“Today the procedure always takes place at Temple Bar in Fleet Street, which marks the western City limit on the road to Westminster. Today whenever the Sovereign is due to make a State entry into the City, a red cord, held by City police, is stretched across the west end of Fleet Street to symbolise the gate of the now absent Temple Bar. The Lord Mayor, accompanied by a deputation of the Court of Aldermen, the two Sheriffs, a deputation of the Court of Common Council, and the City Remembrancer, awaits the royal procession. As it approaches, the cord is withdrawn, and the royal carriage halts just within the City boundary. At this moment, both the pearl sword and the great mace are reversed, in acknowledgement of the presence of the Sovereign.”
Still, there is no doubt that this is, as I put it, “a telling marker of the differences between the City and the rest of the country.”
http://treasureislands.org/the-city-meets-a-naughty-schoolboy/

So she can drive through the City without permission.
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
We can all quote-mine Mick.

You know that "Technically" in this context means, "according to 600 year old tradition, but not really", right? You know that "technically" is usually prepended to something to contrast with "in practice"? Example usage:

For instance, a bill passed by Parliament technically only becomes a law when approved by the Queen, but in practice this is only a formality
Content from External Source

Policy in these areas is technically devolved but, in practice, follows policy set by Parliament to provide consistency across the United Kingdom
Content from External Source
The Queen can vote, but in practice it is considered unconstitutional
Content from External Source

Korea Times pointed out that stores are already technically required to post signs in English.... But in practice, the law does not specify which department will handle...
Content from External Source

Polygamy is technically an open marriage, but in practice the women are not
Content from External Source

Victorian or Napoleonic law technically restricted to one spouse, but in practice allowed men access to unlimited sexual partners
Content from External Source



 

Trailspotter

Senior Member.
Same point to you that I've just made to MikeC.

What's your basis for completely ignoring the sources from the City and the Monarchy, which states the monarch asks for permission?

I think that you are clutching at straws. Your sources provide no actual documents regulating the relationships between the City and the Crown.

The point is that the City of London is not a sovereign state but a subject to the Crown. Having accepted the Crown supremacy in the past, the City was granted royal protection together with a special status and some ceremonial privilegies, which it still exercises at the state occasions. Every year the newly elected Lord Mayor of London swears allegiance to the Sovereign in the presence of the judges of the High Court.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lord_Mayor_of_London

The privilege to bar the Sovereign entering the City is purely ceremonial and is used to acknowledge the supremacy of the Crown as well as to demonstrate once again the City's special status. In the Queen Elizabeth II reign, this medieval ceremony has been re-enacted only during the state events, even so, it occasionally has been reduced to merely presenting her the Pearl Sword at her destination in the City.
 

Trigger Hippie

Senior Member.
There are many useless laws that remain on the books. Some of those useless laws are preserved as "living traditions". The queen asking permission to enter the City of London could be an old law that is preserved as more of a tradition than have some practical purpose. Either way, it's poor evidence that the City of London is a sovereign state.
 

BRoI

New Member
15dc3c1ee1e3713a869066761e2a79a1.jpg

Drake-Carnell, Francis John. Old English Customs and Ceremonies. NY; Scribner & Sons. 1938. p.31.
 

BRoI

New Member
From the horse's mouth, back in 1899:

In the City, the Lord Mayor takes precedence of every subject of the Crown, including Princes of the Blood Royal. He is the head of the City Lieutenancy, and
Admiral of the Port of London, and a Trustee of St. Paul's Cathedral.

- The Guildhall of the City of London together with a short account of its historic associations, and the municipal work carried on therein.
Printed by order of the Corporation of London, under the direction of the City Lands Committee.

http://archive.org/stream/guildhallofcityo00londuoft#page/116/mode/2up

The Mayor had the more privileged position in the procession into St. Pauls on the Jubilee, than the heir to the throne:

30d7ed22e592783c51b6c38f5f6a2007.jpg
http://www.thediamondjubilee.org/si...e.org/files/22248 Diamond Jubilee service.pdf
 

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member
Why would you expect the City of London to have it's own laws Mick?

All cities have their own laws.

You know, the real issue here is the special position of the City in terms of unelected councils, excessive lobbying power, specific financial regulation, and tax advantages. This "must the Queen ask permission" is basically an irrelevant anachronism. There are very real issues that deserve airing.
 
Top