Royal visit 2016: How is that for a royal arrival?

The symbolism and significance of William and Kate’s first steps in Canada

The Duchess of Cambridge holds her daughter Princess Charlotte as she speaks to her son Prince George as the family arrives in Victoria, B.C., on Saturday, September 24, 2016. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Jonathan Hayward

The Duchess of Cambridge holds Princess Charlotte as she speaks to Prince George in Victoria, B.C. (Jonathan Hayward, CP)

The arrival of Prince William and Kate, duchess of Cambridge, to Canada may seem like just a formal preview to the meat of the visit—seeing beautiful wilderness areas, promoting social causes such as youth mental health, and meeting Indigenous peoples—but it sets the tone for the eight-day tour. In doing so, it upholds a long-standing royal tradition that marks such events with symbolism and significance.

Everything is scrutinized, from how they greet officials (relaxed, formal or stilted) to what they wear.

This royal tour is significant for being the first with both children, George and Charlotte. As well, Canada is the only nation they’ve visited twice. It’s not by acccident. Canada is the senior realm country: the Queen visited 23 times, more than any other nation and is openly affectionate, saying it was “good to be home” on her last trip in 2010.

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and their children Prince George and Princess Charlotte arrive in Victoria, B.C., on Saturday, September 24, 2016. THE CANADIAN PRESS/Darryl Dyck

The Duke and Duchess of Cambridge and their children Prince George and Princess Charlotte arrive in Victoria, B.C. (Darryl Dyck, CP)

For today’s arrival in Victoria, William and Kate chatted warmly with a small group of dignitaries (the Governor General, Prime Minister, premier and family). It was more of a reunion—David and Sharon Johnston were at Rideau Hall in 2011—than an event governed by stiff protocol.

Kate’s royal blue hat was embellished with maple leaves, an echo of the national symbol and similar to the red Maple Leaf hat worn for Canada Day 2011. The Canadian references didn’t stop there: Kate wore the Queen’s Maple Leaf brooch, as she did in 2011. The brooch was created by King George VI for his wife, Queen Elizabeth, for their 1939 tour. It’s been worn by generations of royal women since.

She did the same in New Zealand, wearing the Queen’s fern brooch while deplaning with George and William in Wellington. The silver brooch was given to the Queen from the “women of Auckland” in 1953. It’s a small piece of jewellery, but for such high-profile visits, symbols matter.  

Sometimes, they are more momentous. In 2011, just before William and Kate’s marriage, Queen Elizabeth II went on a state visit to the Republic of Ireland, the first by a monarch since 1911, when it was still part of Britain. After decades  of violent conflict in Northern Ireland, it was a trip under tremendous scrutiny. The carefully chosen green hue of the Queen’s outfit set the tone for what would become a highly lauded trip of reconciliation.

To reinforce the message of reconciliation, she spoke Irish at the start of the next day’s state dinner. Ireland’s president, Mary, McAleese, mouthed, “Wow,” knowing the significance of the British Queen speaking Ireland’s language. Today, that tour is widely hailed as a turning point in Anglo-Irish relations.

Arrivals are over in a few minutes, but their impact can last for a very long time.


Royal visit 2016: How is that for a royal arrival?

  1. It’s 1939 again and the usual dangerous stair climb.

  2. Will MACLEAN’S also be covering why the Royals don’t matter or is it turning into a second Hello Canada?

  3. Irish do not forget. Ie: neither do we their kin. These two kids represent the oppression by their family of thousands of lives. To think England still adhere to aristocracy rather than of merit speaks volumes. One can only hope these disgusting displays end with the Grandmother’s last breath.
    There are many more people that can be helped rather than having government welfare spent on four tourists wasting millions on vanity trips.

    • Thanks for confirming what most of the world knows – that the Irish are an angry, combative people who resent authority. Little wonder that they were banished to a barren, wind-swept island in the middle of nowhere.

      • Wow! I guess you think the Irish should have rejoiced in the fact that they were denied land ownership and were really treated no better than serfs in their own country. Of course they resented that authority. Anyone who is marginalized resents the heel that is grinding them into the ground. I am certain it is much like the First Nations in Canada feel about the people running Canada.
        As for them being “banished”, Bono has seemed to do alright for himself despite being an member of that “angry, combative people who resent authority.”

  4. I’m just glad the Canadian press are not calling this a foreign visit like the Americans. I was once a Republican, but after a few years in the USA, soon realized Canada is a far superior system. The English system has created a pretty good country, so far. Name one time the British monarch did not give royal assent to a law here or in Britain? They did once with British parliament in 1701, they replaced the king! Sure, the old British Empire wasn’t all warm and fuzzy, towards some nations. Yes, it could be down right racist. In the post cold war years, we need close ties with Britain. There is far more advantages of sharing a monarch and head of state with the United Kingdom, then there is disadvantages. Sure, Britain was harsh in Northern Ireland. But they’d be far better off today, if they took some pointers from Quebec.