![]() “Government controls still affected many areas of economic activity,” Lennard pointed out. And, remnants of wartime austerity remained. The national debt, although falling, was still a whopping 165% of GDP. was left with some scars.”īomb sites still pitted the country. “1953 also marked the recovery of the level of economic activity back to the wartime peak of 1943. Jason Lennard, an economic historian with the London School of Economics. “The British economy had mostly recovered from the Second World War,” said Dr. was certainly not a land of milk and honey. While sycophantic commentators at the time gushed that the coronation marked the “dawn of a new age” and “the birth of a new Elizabethan era,” the U.K. Television set ownership was still far from universal, and more than 10 million people are believed to have watched in the homes of friends and neighbors, while around 1.5 million watched in public places like pubs and cinemas. For many of those viewers, it was the first time they had seen a televised event. The economic backdrop to his mother’s coronation was very different from that of today.īack in 1953, more than 20 million people are estimated to have watched the service on that relatively new-fangled device: black and white TV. The economy could also be a factor in the rather tepid response to the crowning of King Charles III thus far. The United Kingdom is gearing up for the coronation of King Charles III this weekend with street parties and other festivities scheduled to take place across the country.īut opinion polls suggest that the celebrations seem likely to be rather muted compared with those that accompanied the coronation of the late Queen Elizabeth II, 70 years ago.Ĭharles has always been relatively less popular than his mother was and the age of deference has been dead for many decades in the U.K.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |