Changes

==King==

==King==

When his father died on May 6, 1910, George became King George V; his coronation in Westminster Abbey was June 22, 1911. Shortly afterward he and Queen Mary journeyed to India, where a spectacular coronation ceremony ("durbar") was held at Delhi, which the king–emperor declared the new capital of India.  The king's visit to Port Sudan in January 1912 was used by the British-dominated Sudanese government as an occasion for imperial display, intended to impress both the Sudanese and the British, and was subsequently reworked as the annual celebration of King's Day. It demonstrated British dominance of the Sudan making clear the minor role played by Egypt, the co-ruler under the Anglo-Egyptian Condominum. The visit impressed the king and potential British investors in economic projects. Sudanese political elites from the Arab regions were active participants, seeking to consolidate their positions through demonstrations of loyalty to the king and to demonstrate the authority they gained as a reward. But the British could not impose full-scale imperialism as a primary identity in the Sudan, because of the Egyptian claims and because of the Sudan government's use of preexisting hierarchical Sudanese political structures to provide an ordered framework for government.<ref>Anna Clarkson, "Pomp, Circumstance, and Wild Arabs: the 1912 Royal Visit to Sudan." ''Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History'' 2006 34(1): 71-85. Issn: 0308-6534 Fulltext: [[Ebsco]]</ref>

When his father died on May 6, 1910, George became King George V; his coronation in Westminster Abbey was June 22, 1911. Shortly afterward he and Queen Mary journeyed to India, where a spectacular coronation ceremony ("durbar") was held at Delhi, which the king–emperor declared the new capital of India.  The king's visit to Port Sudan in January 1912 was used by the British-dominated Sudanese government as an occasion for imperial display, intended to impress both the Sudanese and the British, and was subsequently reworked as the annual celebration of King's Day. It demonstrated British dominance of the Sudan making clear the minor role played by Egypt, the co-ruler under the Anglo-Egyptian Condominium. The visit impressed the king and potential British investors in economic projects. Sudanese political elites from the Arab regions were active participants, seeking to consolidate their positions through demonstrations of loyalty to the king and to demonstrate the authority they gained as a reward. But the British could not impose full-scale imperialism as a primary identity in the Sudan, because of the Egyptian claims and because of the Sudan government's use of preexisting hierarchical Sudanese political structures to provide an ordered framework for government.<ref>Anna Clarkson, "Pomp, Circumstance, and Wild Arabs: the 1912 Royal Visit to Sudan." ''Journal of Imperial and Commonwealth History'' 2006 34(1): 71-85. Issn: 0308-6534 Fulltext: [[Ebsco]]</ref>

===Political crises===

===Political crises===

    

    

===1920s===

===1920s===

As the war ended the king and his top advisers were deeply concerned about the republican threat to the British monarchy. They associated republicanism with the rise of socialism and the growing labour movement. Their concerns, although exaggerated, resulted in a redesign of the monarchy's social role to be more inclusive of the working class and its representatives—a dramatic change for George, who was most comfortable with naval officers and landed gentry. In fact the socialists no longer believed in their anti-monarchical slogans and were ready to come to terms with the monarchy if it took the first step. George took that step, adopting a more democratic stance that crossed class lines and bringing the monarchy closer to the public. The king also cultivated friendly relations with moderate Labour party politicians and trade union officials. George V's abandonment of social aloofness conditioned the royal family's behavior and enhanced its popularity during the economic crises of the 1920s and for over two generations thereafter.  Therefore in 1924 the king was willing, in the absence of a clear majority for any one of the three parties, to  replace Conservative Prime Minister [[Stanley Baldwin]] with [[Ramsay MacDonald]], the first Labour Party prime minister. King George's tactful and understanding reception of the first Labour government (which was short-lived) allayed the suspicions of the party's sympathizers throughout the nation.<ref>Frank Prochaska, "George V and Republicanism, 1917-1919." ''Twentieth Century British History'' 1999 10(1): 27-51. Issn: 0955-2359; Neville Kirk, "The Conditions of Royal Rule: Australian and British Socialist and Labour Attitudes to the Monarchy, 1901-11." ''Social History'' 2005 30(1): 64-88. Issn: 0307-1022 Fulltext: [[Ebsco]]</ref>

As the war ended the king and his top advisers were deeply concerned about the republican threat to the British monarchy. They associated republicanism with the rise of socialism and the growing labour movement. Their concerns, although exaggerated, resulted in a redesign of the monarchy's social role to be more inclusive of the working class and its representatives—a dramatic change for George, who was most comfortable with naval officers and landed gentry. In fact the socialists no longer believed in their anti-monarchical slogans and were ready to come to terms with the monarchy if it took the first step. George took that step, adopting a more democratic stance that crossed class lines and bringing the monarchy closer to the public. The king also cultivated friendly relations with moderate Labour party politicians and trade union officials. George V's abandonment of social aloofness conditioned the royal family's behavior and enhanced its popularity during the economic crises of the 1920s and for over two generations thereafter.  Therefore, in 1924 the king was willing, in the absence of a clear majority for any one of the three parties, to  replace Conservative Prime Minister [[Stanley Baldwin]] with [[Ramsay MacDonald]], the first Labour Party prime minister. King George's tactful and understanding reception of the first Labour government (which was short-lived) allayed the suspicions of the party's sympathizers throughout the nation.<ref>Frank Prochaska, "George V and Republicanism, 1917-1919." ''Twentieth Century British History'' 1999 10(1): 27-51. Issn: 0955-2359; Neville Kirk, "The Conditions of Royal Rule: Australian and British Socialist and Labour Attitudes to the Monarchy, 1901-11." ''Social History'' 2005 30(1): 64-88. Issn: 0307-1022 Fulltext: [[Ebsco]]</ref>

Throughout the Coal Strike and the [[General Strike of 1926]], the king used every means in his power on the side of conciliation, to the conventional limits of a constitutional sovereign's function, which is "to advise, to encourage and to warn." He made another intervention during the economic crisis of 1931, when he carried on protracted negotiations with the party leaders and invited MacDonald to head a National (coalition) government. The general election of October 1931, not the formation of the first National Government in August 1931, determined the direction of politics during the 1930s. Between 1929 and the formation of the second National Government after the election, the Liberal Party had been a major participant in the political system, a position it lost when Liberal defectors coalesced with the dominant Conservatives during and after the election. The king played a crucial - and very active - role in the formation of both National Governments, and may have been a determining influence on Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald each time.<ref>See Vernon Bogdanor, "1931 Revisited: The Constitutional Aspects," ''Twentieth Century British History'' 1991 2(1): 1-25; he is disputed by Philip Williamson, "1931 Revisited: the Political Realities." ''Twentieth Century British History'' 1991 2(3): 328-338.</ref>

Throughout the Coal Strike and the [[General Strike of 1926]], the king used every means in his power on the side of conciliation, to the conventional limits of a constitutional sovereign's function, which is "to advise, to encourage and to warn." He made another intervention during the economic crisis of 1931, when he carried on protracted negotiations with the party leaders and invited MacDonald to head a National (coalition) government. The general election of October 1931, not the formation of the first National Government in August 1931, determined the direction of politics during the 1930s. Between 1929 and the formation of the second National Government after the election, the Liberal Party had been a major participant in the political system, a position it lost when Liberal defectors coalesced with the dominant Conservatives during and after the election. The king played a crucial - and very active - role in the formation of both National Governments, and may have been a determining influence on Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald each time.<ref>See Vernon Bogdanor, "1931 Revisited: The Constitutional Aspects," ''Twentieth Century British History'' 1991 2(1): 1-25; he is disputed by Philip Williamson, "1931 Revisited: the Political Realities." ''Twentieth Century British History'' 1991 2(3): 328-338.</ref>