LONDON.- Jasmine Allen, the director of the Stained Glass Museum in Ely, England, was preparing to send a letter to Prince Charles this month, asking if he wanted to extend his relationship with the esoteric museum.

Then, the queen died.

Charles has been the museum’s patron since 1997. It is an honorary role, yet having his name attached helped with fundraising and bolstered the museum’s profile in the news media, Allen said. The prince even stopped by occasionally.

“We’re a small organization, so to have such a significant royal patron is a big deal,” Allen said. “We were punching above our weight.”

The latest agreed term that Charles would serve as patron ended this summer, and Allen had hoped Charles would renew it. But now that Charles is king, Allen said that her letter would remain unsent.

In a televised speech last week, Charles said that it would “no longer be possible for me to give so much of my time and energies to the charities and issues for which I care so deeply.” The important work “will go on in the trusted hands of others,” he said, implying that other members of his family would take on some of those roles, although a royal spokesperson said that such decisions would be taken at a later date, after the mourning period for the queen was over.

Allen said that her museum would wait to hear from the king’s office about his plans, but she said that she realized she may soon be joining dozens of other British cultural institutions in the search for a new patron.

The queen was, at her death, the patron of more than 50 organizations, including the Royal Ballet and the London Symphony Orchestra, as well as lesser-known ones like the British Open Brass Band Championship. Her son, as heir to the throne, was the patron or president of more than 100, many connected to his passions for architecture and traditional crafts like stained glass.

The search for patrons may cause upheaval for arts organizations, but it is also drawing attention to the centuries-old system of royal patronage. What is it exactly, how important is it to cultural life in Britain, and what will now happen to organizations that lose their patrons?

What does a patron do?

A patron is simply someone who lends their name, and often time, to an organization to act as its flag-bearer, said Eileen Hammond, author of “Patrons, Presidents and Personalities,” a guide for nonprofits hoping to work with high-profile volunteers.

The level of engagement varies widely, Hammond said. A spokesperson for the Royal Opera said in an email that Charles, its patron, attended performances several times a year “both in a formal and informal capacity.” Michael Eakin, CEO of the Royal Liverpool Philharmonic, said that its patron, the queen, had visited the orchestra less regularly, perhaps “half a dozen times” in total, and largely on important occasions such as the orchestra’s 150th anniversary.

The royal family says on its website that the practice dates to the 1700s, when George II became patron of the Society of Antiquaries. Now, the royal family gets hundreds of requests a year from groups wanting a patron to help elevate their image.




Royals often become patrons of cultural institutions when the area interests them. Princess Margaret, the queen’s sister who died in 2002, had a great love of dance and was the Royal Ballet’s first president, a role similar to that of a patron but with more regular engagements.

Camilla, the queen consort, also has cultural roles. In March, when the queen was cutting back on her official positions for health reasons, Camilla took over as patron of the National Theater in London. And Catherine, the new Princess of Wales, is patron of the Victoria and Albert Museum in London. She has often been photographed on tours of its exhibitions.

Does “royal” in an institution’s name mean it has a royal patron?

No. Many theaters have had “royal” in their name since the early 18th century, when the British government decided that only those with a license, known as a royal patent, could legitimately stage performances, said Brianna Robertson-Kirkland, a musicologist at the Royal Conservatoire of Scotland who has studied the history of theater. The Theater Royal Plymouth and Newcastle Theater Royal are two examples of “royal” theaters with no royal patrons.

Others, like the Royal Ballet or the Royal Shakespeare Company, had the word “royal” bestowed on them when they were granted a royal charter, recognition of the institutions’ importance, Robertson-Kirkland added. Before getting its charter in 1956, the Royal Ballet was known as Sadler’s Wells Ballet.

Does a royal patron help raise money?

Royal patronage doesn’t come with any money from the royal family, but having a royal patron, or a “royal” title, “certainly does help with fundraising” and touring opportunities abroad, said Eakin, the Royal Liverpool Philharmonic chief. The queen’s patronage did not give the orchestra any opportunity to use Buckingham Palace for fundraising events, he said, but he noted that he had been invited to the queen’s funeral next week.

Hammond said that she was unaware of any academic study proving that having a royal patron helped with fundraising. “But,” she added, “intuitively, it would.”

Are there any risks to having a royal patron?

Hammond said that there were pitfalls with any patron, royal or not. When Charles and Diana divorced in 1996, institutions had to decide whether they were still suitable patrons, she said. More recently, Prince Andrew was seen as a potential risk because of his ties to Jeffrey Epstein, a notorious sex offender, and because he was facing a lawsuit over allegations of sexual abuse. (The prince settled the suit in February.)

In November 2019, Andrew resigned as patron of English National Ballet, and the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra also announced that it had parted company with him. This year, he handed his remaining patronage roles to the queen.

What will happen to the queen’s patronage roles, and to Charles’, now that he is king?

Hammond said that she expected the queen’s positions to be taken over by Charles or by other royals and that some of Charles’ roles would probably be reallocated among other royals, given his increased workload and demands on his attention. But the thousands of cultural institutions and charities in Britain that have royal patrons are waiting to be told for sure what will happen.

A member of the royal family is “the ultimate patron,” said Allen, the Stained Glass Museum director. The problem for an institution like hers, she added, is that members of the royal family are “in short supply,” and not all of them are as interested in stained glass as Charles is.

This article originally appeared in The New York Times.