Own up, all of you who watched even an excerpt from the TV coverage of the recent wedding of the future King and Queen of UK and thought, well, yes, sure the Brits are good at this kind of thing, after all they've had hundreds of years of practice at it. Ummm, no actually. As by far the most readable of the essays in this volume claims, it was not until the very late nineteenth century that the monarchy was aggrandized through elaborate public ritual: William IV's coronation was mockingly known as the Half-Crownation, and at the beginning of her reign, Victoria was obstinate and obstructive, and those responsible for devising ceremonies were incompetent. Did you know, for example, that Victoria's coronation was completely unrehearsed? The clergy lost their place in the order of service, two trainbearers talked throughout the entire ceremony, and the choir was 'inadequate'. Indeed, the function of these ceremonies is as old as the monarchy itself, but the form that the ceremony should take is a reflection of how the role of the monarch is conceived, and that is different in different ages. In his essay, David Cannadine sees a correlation between the waning of royal influence and the growth of enhanced ceremonial - the beginning of what he calls the 'cavalcade of impotence'. He analyses the theatrical performances of royalty between 1820 and 1977, taking in the first show that I remember watching on TV, the investiture of the Prince of Wales - which, as I clearly recall, struck me at the time as a load of humbug.
Another highlight in this volume is Hugh Trevor-Roper taking delight in riling the 'Scotch' as he insisted on calling them, to the annoyance of Scotsmen and women everywhere who normally like to be kept distinct from the stuff sold in bottles. He takes every possible opportunity to remind the reader that it was an Englishman who invented the kilt in the early eighteenth century. With enormous gusto he describes how the idea of a separate tartan for each clan was a 'hallucination' sustained by economic interest, and is surprisingly indulgent and forgiving of the (English) Allen brothers who styled themselves the Sobieski Stuarts and were virtually single-handedly responsible for the creation of the mythology around the 'ancient' Highland dress as a vestige of an early rich civilization - as represented by Ossian. Those clever Englishmen, forging a Scottish national identity and duping the Scots into believing in their own cultural superiority.
Equally informative, if a tad drier, is the piece on Wales by Prys Morgan. Welsh national costume? Invented by the wonderfully named Augusta Waddington."In 1834 she was not even clear as to what a national costume was, but she was sure there ought to be a costume that would be distinctive and picturesque for artists and tourists to look at." Eisteddfods, druids, bards, national heroes? All in the interest of creating a romantic concept of nationhood through cultural history.
I could go on with more examples of the excellence within these covers: the essay 'Representing Authority in Victorian India' (Bernard S. Cohn) could almost be hilariously funny if it weren't for the fact that, sadly, this is all true. Mr. Cohn concentrates on the great assemblage of 1877 whose function was to establish the authority of Victoria as Empress. The arrangements and the attention to hierarchy, symbolic acts and representational insignia is utterly astonishing, and ridiculous, and tragic: when the salute was fired, the noise of the cannon and gunfire stampeded the assembled elephants and horses, killing a number of bystanders and casting a pall of dust over the rest of the proceedings.
Terence Ranger's own contribution on the invention of tradition in colonial Africa is the one I found least enjoyable, probably due to my own lack of knowledge of African history, thus making it hard to grasp. Hobsbawm's essay on Europe is also not an easy read, but there I felt it was the intense concentration of his ideas that made for the slight difficulty. On second reading, it is a magisterial account of the reasons for the mass production of traditions in Europe in the period 1870-1914. He sees these invented traditions as a kind of social cement, collective group self-representations that create cohesive structure in a changing world. He's also excellent on the problematic nature of analysing these inventions - do they come from the top down? Well, yes, but they can only take hold if they touch on a need that is already there.
This is the kind of book that causes a huge shift in the way that you see the world. Magic.