Andrew Vine looks back on King Charles III's first year as monarch

The longest-reigning sovereign in British history enjoyed such respect and affection that person and institution were indivisible. Across more than 70 years, she had been so constant a presence in the life of the nation that it was a struggle to imagine the monarchy without her.

Though she had been in increasingly frail health for several years, the announcement from Balmoral of her passing on Thursday September 8 still came as a shock.

Only weeks earlier, she had appeared on the balcony of Buckingham Palace at the climax of her Platinum Jubilee celebrations.

There was a touch of the timeless about her as she beamed and waved to the massed thousands who had come to cheer, as they had so often over the course of seven decades.

To tens of millions who had never known a time when she was not sovereign, it was hard to take in that this had been the last glimpse of her.

It was Queen Elizabeth’s personal authority and popularity that had seen the monarchy through tragedy and scandal, from the death of Princess Diana to the disgrace of Prince Andrew.

It was she who had used its prestige to smooth the way for the international diplomacy of generations of Prime Ministers. It was she who had found the perfect words of reassurance for a nation plunged into despair and fear by Covid.

Without her, where would the monarchy be?

The past 12 months have provided an emphatic answer. The institution she devoted her life to preserving and adapting so that it remained in step with a changing nation is in excellent health and the sovereign who heads it is proving the most worthy of heirs to his mother.

King Charles’s first year has been a triumph. He has not put a foot wrong, from his heartfelt tributes that gave voice to the nation’s mourning for his mother, to the rapport he demonstrates with Britain’s people as he has travelled the length and breadth of the nation.

He and Queen Camilla radiate joy wherever they go and the warmth of the welcome they have received is proof that Britain still holds the monarchy dear.

Here are a king and queen apparently completely at ease with their roles, with themselves and with the public.

They engage effortlessly with them, cheerleading for good causes and the unsung heroes of everyday life, striking a perfect balance between the formality of royalty and an unforced warmth towards those they meet.

Their achievement has already been remarkable. Without ostentation, the King and his Queen have renewed and refreshed the monarchy. Just as his mother did throughout her life, Charles III is remaking the institution to keep it in step with an evolving Britain.

There has been no upsurge in republican sentiment, and opinion polls on the King have consistently showed that two out of three people believe he is doing a good job.

But should anybody be surprised by this, really? Here is a highly intelligent man who served the longest apprenticeship as heir to the throne in British history.

A lifetime of observing his mother’s close bond with the people and learning from her example went into that moment when he became sovereign upon her death last year.

From her, he learned the lesson that the institution should come before all else, and close engagement with the people is vital for it to retain its relevance. His mother’s dictum that “The Queen must be seen to be believed” is apparent in the King’s visibility.

There were those who, once the period of mourning for Queen Elizabeth was over, voiced doubts about Charles III and made gloomy predictions about how his conduct could spell doom for the monarchy.

He would meddle in politics, they said, pointing to his history of bombarding ministers with letters. He would overstep the mark in intervening in causes long dear to his heart.

They have all been wrong. The King is too sharp to have fallen into such traps, explicitly stating in the days after he became sovereign that his days of activism were over.

But the legacy of his passions and advocacy as the Prince of Wales are adding lustre to his reign. The King has been an avuncular presence in the life of the nation for decades, and long regarded as a force for good. He doesn’t need to campaign any more, as his views are well known and shared by a majority of people.

His passion about environmental issues, whether on conservation or action to combat climate change, though sometimes derided when he was younger, have turned out to be far-sighted and chime perfectly with the attitudes of the country, as does his long-term support of young people into rewarding careers.

In more ways than one, at the moment he ascended the throne last year, this was a man whose time had come.

The King’s understanding of the country and the need for the monarchy to remain attuned to it was made explicit in his Coronation. It was thoughtful and sensitive in its blending of the medieval and the modern, sincere and successful in its aim of embracing and celebrating the multi-racial kingdom over which he reigns, and which he has termed a “community of communities”.

That understanding is also to be seen in his slimming down of a once bloated institution, of which there was a public perception of too many hangers-on living lives of luxury at the country’s expense while contributing little in the way of useful work.

There is no place for that sort of monarchy in a Britain where too many people are struggling to make ends meet. If the institution is to command continued support, it must be seen to earn its keep, and under Charles III it is doing just that.

The support of the Prince and Princess of Wales is quite obviously central to the success and popularity of the King in his first 12 months. William and Kate – and their children – are deservedly popular and symbols that the monarchy has undergone renewal and is looking to the future.

Inevitably, there are some clouds in the King’s sky. The two problem princes, his brother Andrew and his younger son, Harry, hover constantly on the periphery of public consciousness, the one an embarrassment and the other a source of tension.

The King must surely maintain his mother’s exclusion of Andrew from royal life and hope that time may heal the rift with Harry.

The impact of Harry’s complaints about his family, both in interviews and in his autobiography, Spare, appears to have been short-lived and had little impact on the public affection for his father.

The other headache that Charles III may face is the gradual disintegration of the Commonwealth that was so dear to his mother. The personal respect she inspired was the glue that held that fractious organisation together, and there is probably little the King can do to reassemble the broken pieces, with Australia, New Zealand and Jamaica likely to oust him as head of state.

But for the forward-looking monarchy the King is leading so successfully, constitutional tweaks on the other side of the world don’t matter much. It is Britain and its people that count, and in his first year, they have taken the King to their hearts.