First Savoy Reign over Sicily

The island Kingdom of Sicily was first under the reign of the House of Savoy from 1713 to 1720 during the reign of King Vittorio Amedeo II. It came about as a result of Piedmontese participation in the War of Spanish Succession alongside Great Britain and Austria. At first, it was proposed to give the House of Savoy both Naples and Sicily (at the time separate kingdoms) but as the Hapsburgs still ruled in Naples this was finally dropped. King Vittorio Amedeo II was more interested in gaining Milan which the Savoy had been reaching for over many years but his Dutch and Austrian allies objected to this. The British, under Queen Anne, finally took decisive action and, being in command of the Mediterranean thanks to the success of the Royal Navy, announced that Sicily would be given to the House of Savoy and King Felipe V of Spain had little choice but to agree and renounce his claim on the island. The British tried to maintain a commanding influence but King Vittorio Amedeo II refused to grant British merchants any additional favors than they had known previously under the Spanish. Still, Britain was convinced that Sicily would be better off and the region more stable under the Savoy.

The King & Queen depart for Sicily

King Vittorio Amedeo II and Queen Marie d’Orleans arrived in October of 1713 to formally take possession of their new kingdom and were given a joyous welcome from the local population when they were delivered to Palermo by a British naval squadron. Early the next year the Sicilian parliament was assembled to officially swear their allegiance to the new king and the Savoy Crown. The Kingdom of Sicily was to remain legally separate from the continental realms of the House of Savoy but in personal union through King Vittorio Amedeo II. However, there did arise some complaints that the King was putting Piedmontese officials in positions of importance after being less than impressed with the state of affairs that he found on the island with widespread waste and corruption. Still, the Sicilians could not complain too much since financial aid also poured in from Turin to allow Sicily to balance its budget. A census was taken of all people and livestock and the King introduced beneficial reforms to the tax system and the customs office which had been riddled with corruption. Still, many groaned at the additional ‘special taxes’ that had to be implemented to carry out these changes.

The Hapsburgs did not recognize the treaty, the Treaty of Utrecht, by which the Savoy gained the Kingdom of Sicily and so, being just across the straights in Naples, King Vittorio Amedeo II placed priority on improving the coastal defenses of Sicily and raising a new army which consisted of two regiments of volunteers and a unit of royal guards. When King George I came to the British throne and the Royal Navy was withdrawn from the Mediterranean, King Vittorio Amedeo II also took care to expand the Sicilian navy to pick up the slack. The King, of course, ultimately had to return to Turin but left behind a Viceroy to rule in his place. The Viceroys had plenty of problems to deal with as, despite the renunciation of Felipe V, the Spanish maintained agents on the island who spread pro-Spanish and anti-Savoy propaganda and encouraged resistance. The reconciliation between France and Austria also posed a potential threat. There was also a ridiculous and frustrating dispute with the Holy See over Savoy rule of the island.

King Vittorio Amedeo II

Problems with the Church came about when a local bishop objected to having to pay an import duty on chickpeas. He excommunicated the local customs officials, which some might call just a slight overreaction, but the Tribunal of the Monarchy, which was set up to exercise the special ecclesiastical authority traditionally given to the kings of Sicily since the Norman era, nullified the excommunications. The bishop then placed his entire diocese under the interdict and left to ask help from Rome. The issue was further complicated by the fact that the Pope, Clement XI, did not recognize the authority of the tribunal because he did not recognize the right of King Vittorio Amedeo II to the throne of Sicily because, claiming it as a papal fief and the King of Sicily his vassal, the change in royal leadership had happened without his approval. The King sent agents to Rome to reach an amicable agreement but the Pope refused to consent to the clergy paying any taxes or import duties and ordered the tribunal abolished. The King refused to disband the tribunal and refused to be invested as a vassal of the Pope, on the grounds that Sicily was a sovereign kingdom. The Pope then re-issued the excommunications and interdict as well as placing spiritual restrictions on the local clergy who were loyal to the King while the King had pro-papal clergy arrested. Finally, the Pope did consent to the existence of the tribunal if he could control it but as he still refused to recognize the King, there was no agreement.

The era of Savoy rule over Sicily started to come to an end in 1717 when the Spanish attacked Sardinia which was then ruled by the Hapsburgs. This set off the War of the Quadruple Alliance with Spain on one side and the British, French, Dutch, House of Hapsburg and House of Savoy on the other. The following year the Spanish also invaded Sicily. The British navy won a victory that stranded the Spanish forces and the Austrians sent troops in from Naples. Spain was finally forced to concede defeat but Savoy rule over Sicily would not be restored. Instead, the allied powers essentially forced King Vittorio Amedeo II to take the Kingdom of Sardinia in exchange for Sicily. Although his forces had held no control over the island since 1718, the official hand-over did not occur until 1720 and the King did not relinquish his title as ‘King of Sicily’ until 1723 and was still seeking compensation for the loss as late as the autumn of 1729. 

The Thousand Lands in Sicily

It was on May 11, 1860 that Giuseppe Garibaldi and his “Thousand” red shirts landed at Marsala on the island of Sicily to instigate the uprising against the Bourbon rule of King Francesco II. Although an independent operation, Garibaldi was certainly not without outside support or sympathy. Elements within the government in Turin certainly supported him (as did pan-Italian nationalists in general but this was a stateless group) and beyond the Italian peninsula there were numerous sympathetic governments, one of the most prominent being that of Great Britain (and not just because they appreciated the fashion-sense of his army). It helps to explain how such a seemingly hopeless and even farcical operation turned out to be such a stunning success. After all, it seems incredible that an invasion force of a thousand men could end up bringing down the entire Kingdom of the Two-Sicilies; that long-time Spanish bastion in the south of Italy. Actually, “The Thousand” were probably not even that numerous and they consisted, for the most part, of volunteers drawn from across northern Italy, unfamiliar with Sicily and unaccustomed to the harsher climate of the south. Some were not even Italians at all such as the Hungarian Legion of Italia which fought enthusiastically for the famous Garibaldi after having their own nationalist movement thwarted. How could such a rag-tag group be victorious?

The Kingdom of the Two-Sicilies certainly has the reputation of being a place one would not expect to find much sympathy for a revolutionary like Garibaldi. It has long been known as a very conservative, Catholic, absolute monarchy in traditional Spanish style. However, that proved to be part of the downfall of the kingdom and part of the reason for the lack of international support for the status quo and a pro-Garibaldi attitude from the British in particular. Ever since the Congress of Vienna the “Great Powers” had been most concerned with peace and stability, keeping rebellion from ever breaking out anywhere for fear of it spreading as in the past. The British (and most other northern European monarchies such as Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark and even Prussia to a degree) firmly believed that the best way to ensure stability as through a constitutional monarchy that provided for some level of popular representation. Effectively, to give the people enough of a voice that they would feel they had some control over the national destiny but never enough to actually determine policy. This, the accepted thinking went, would make the public less susceptible to the arguments of the revolutionaries who wanted the people to rise up and overthrow the monarchy. This is why, in Spain, for example, the French and the British supported the liberal monarchists of the Queen mother rather than the absolute monarchists of Don Carlos. Or at least it was one reason.

King Ferdinando II of the Two-Sicilies, part of the Spanish Royal Family, annoyed the British by siding with Don Carlos. They were also concerned by the growing discontent in the Two-Sicilies and the increasing support for a republican revolution. Why were the British or French concerned at all? What was Sicily to them? The answer, of course, was that Sicily was right next to the British naval bastion of Malta and straddled the main seaway to the Suez Canal which was just starting to be built the year before Garibaldi and his men landed at Marsala. The French and British were therefore greatly concerned about any unrest that might disturb this enterprise upon which so much of global commerce was to depend. The British even sent warships to encourage the Neapolitan navy to stay away while Garibaldi and his men were landing (once the troops had disembarked the Neapolitans destroyed one ship and captured the other).

When Garibaldi landed, his forces were not opposed at all. The Neapolitan army, while not exactly having the best reputation in the world, should have been able to swamp such a tiny group with their massive numerical superiority if nothing else. However, King Francesco II inexplicably failed to take decisive action such as leading the army himself. Compounding the problem was the fact that his forces often did more to turn the local population against the monarchy than stopping the invaders. On May 14 Garibaldi declared himself ‘Duce’ of Sicily in the name of King Vittorio Emanuele II of Piedmont-Sardinia and the following day met the Neapolitan army for their first battle. The result was the unimpressive battle of Calatafimi which amounted to a victory for Garibaldi despite being outnumbered 2-to-1. It helped that the Neapolitan commanders seemed to be equal parts incompetent and vindictive. Previously, the one, reliable hardcore of the Bourbon forces had been the Swiss mercenary guard. However, they had earlier gone on strike for better pay and King Francesco II responded by having them all massacred; which was probably not the best idea.

Garibaldi captured Palermo and his ranks slowly grew as locals volunteered to join him. The Neapolitan army also had a problem with desertion. A key element was the local aristocracy who responded in various ways to the crisis, none of them very helpful to Francesco II. Some fled the island immediately as soon as Garibaldi landed and these were those most supportive of the Bourbon monarchy. Obviously, they would be no help. Most, however, considered the cause of Francesco II lost and decided to make common cause with Garibaldi who promised to respect their rights and privileges. This would later cause a degree of rebellion and banditry by those peasants who felt Garibaldi had sold them out by not tearing down the aristocracy completely and redistributing their lands. King Ferdinando II had shown that he would do whatever was necessary to maintain his rule, be it promising a constitution only to revoke it later or shooting down rebels and shelling entire cities to rubble. If he had still been around things might have been different but few had confidence that Francesco II was made of such tough stuff. The pragmatic types looked at the situation and reasoned that the Bourbons were doomed and their only options for the future would be a united Italy ruled by Giuseppe Mazzini and his radical republicans or a constitutional monarchy ruled by King Vittorio Emanuele II. Mazzini was unthinkable so these invariably suppressed their distaste for Garibaldi and supported his red shirt army to maintain the existing social order.

Rebel forces soon besieged Palermo, with disastrous consequences for the Neapolitan side. Political prisoners were broken out of jail, causing panic in the rear and the commanding Neapolitan general seemingly lost his nerve and ordered a retreat only to then order his artillery to shell the city indiscriminately, killing hundreds of civilians, many of whom must have been loyal to the Bourbon monarchy. Naturally, this made the cause of the King in Naples all the more unpopular (though he, of course, had nothing to do with it). Still, more Neapolitan troops arrived and the city might have been retaken but the commanding general, whether due to befuddled panic or simply corruption, decided to surrender. The Neapolitan troops began withdrawing from the island, even where they held the upper hand, and in their absence several peasant rebellions broke out. These were then suppressed by Garibaldi’s red shirts which, again, bewildered many of the locals who had envisioned him as their liberator. These rebels, however, were typical of the types who would have seized power and set up a revolutionary republic if not for the presence of Garibaldi who was moderating his more radical inclinations to win the support of powers like Piedmont-Sardinia and Great Britain.

In a last, desperate effort to avoid disaster and win back popular support, King Francesco II issued a constitution in June but it was to no avail. After the “now you see it, now you don’t” constitutions of his father, very few people were prepared to believe that the King was serious about constitutional government and simply ignored him. More volunteers joined Garibaldi though the Neapolitan army still had some sizeable garrisons on the island. In July Garibaldi captured Milazzo with 5,000 men after the overall Neapolitan commander refused to reinforce the garrison there. His caution did him no good and a few days later he surrendered Messina to Garibaldi by which time it was the rebels who held a significant numerical advantage and the remaining garrisons surrendered quickly. Throwing caution to the wind (and alarming the government in Turin) Garibaldi wasted no time and transferred his forces over to the mainland at Calabria. After that, a string of victories ensued as many Neapolitan forces deserted, some even joining the red shirts and most of those who did offer resistance did so with little support or coordination. The army and navy seemed to melt away, King Francesco II fled Naples and made his last stand at Gaeta.

The Neapolitans were still able to slightly outnumber the forces of Garibaldi and might have defeated him, at least temporarily, were it not for the arrival of the Piedmontese army under King Vittorio Emanuele II who was alarmed at how fast and far the red shirts were advancing and just a little concerned about how genuine their newfound monarchist sympathy was. Between them, Gaeta was doomed (though it would hold out until early the following year) and at the bridge of Teano on October 26, 1860 General Garibaldi and King Vittorio Emanuele II met, bringing their forces together and joining, from that time ever since, the north and the south of Italy together for the first time since the days of the old Roman Empire. In March of 1861 the unified Kingdom of Italy was officially proclaimed. It was not something that either the new King of Italy or even his first minister Cavour had planned for in advance. Even his royal predecessor, King Carlo Alberto, had only ever had ambitions to unite northern Italy. However, just as in those days, the drive to end foreign rule and unite the Italian people was such that it became a race between the republicans of Mazzini and the monarchists of the King of Piedmont to see who would accomplish the act and establish the first real Italian government since Roman times. There was plenty of tragedy along the way, but between those two competing ideologies, it is fortunate that it was the King who reached the goal first.

The Sicilian Kingdom of Africa

To hear many modern commentators, even some claiming to be historians, speak about the expansion of the Kingdom of Italy into North Africa in the early years of the last century, one would think that Italian troops had never set foot on the continent before. Any Italian alive during the colonization of Libya, for example, would have laughed at such an idea. The Italian presence in northern Africa goes back, of course, to the time of ancient Rome but, more than that, even after the fall of the Roman Empire, Italian forces were never long absent from the “fourth shore”. The Italian acquisition of the provinces that became Libya as well as the frustration at the colonization of Tunisia by France are often painted today as simple aggression, yet, when one understands the very long history of close Italian association with this region one can see why, when the Kingdom of Italy began to colonize at least part of northern Africa, the Italians were not “arriving” but rather “returning” to lands that had long been ruled from the Italian peninsula. One of the most overlooked periods that serves as one example was that of the Kingdom of Africa under the Norman King of Sicily Roger II.

King Roger II

The story, starts much earlier, with Norman-Sicilian forces making forays into northern Africa in 1123; the first of many. Even then, Count Roger I of Sicily was already keeping troops in Mahdia in Tunisia to collect export duties. By 1135 King Roger II already had what amounted to a defacto Sicilian protectorate over most of the north African cities closest to southern Italy based simply on their economic interdependence. Having conquered Pantelleria in 1123, Roger II captured the pirate island of Djerba in 1135. By 1142 he established a protectorate over Mahdia after they were unable to make their grain payments on time. The local emir remained on the throne but was forced to accept the King of Sicily as his overlord as he had already become deeply beholden to Roger II because of the vast sums of money he had borrowed from him. In 1146 Norman-Sicilian forces captured Tripoli which, after suffering a terrible famine, had fallen into civil war. After that, numerous other local chieftains came forward to recognize Roger II as their overlord, valuing the security and economic prosperity that came with association with the Kingdom of Sicily. In 1148 Norman troops led by George of Antioch conquered Tunisia after the emir of Mahdia rose against Roger II. The Sicilian forces soon took control of the entire north African coast between Bona and Tripoli.

The strongest support for Sicilian rule came from the Christian minority in north Africa and these people still spoke a local variation of Latin and were actually the remnants of the original population from the time of the old Roman Empire. This is something to keep in mind when people dismiss Italy pointing to the Roman roots of the Italian imperial presence. The links of the chain go right back to Rome and the original Roman communities lasted much longer than most realize. In any event, under Sicilian rule, the economy of north Africa prospered and there was a measure of religious freedom too. Once he took direct control of the area, Muslims had to pay a special tax for their right to worship, just as the Christians had been forced to do previously when under Islamic rule. However, it was less than the tax imposed on the Muslim refugees living on the island of Sicily itself. This was because the King wanted to encourage the Muslims in Sicily to resettle in north Africa, both to remove them from Sicily and because their presence would help show their co-religionists the way forward.

The rulers of Tunis feared a Sicilian attack and sent Roger II tribute in an effort to persuade him to desist (so that their own rule could continue) but, although he had planned further expansions in Africa, the King was diverted by a war with the Byzantines and died in 1154 without returning to his ambition to restore the former Roman lands of Africa to Christian rule. Roger II was succeeded by his son King William I and the reign of King William I was one marked by rebellions on the part of local nobles, both in the Kingdom of Sicily and the Kingdom of Africa. In Africa it came in the face of the rising power of the Almohad Caliphate out of Morocco. The local Muslim rulers were discontented because the Sicilians gave them little autonomy when it came to taxation and, as has long been the case the world over, whoever collects the taxes tends to become quite rich (somehow). With the Almohad forces gaining strength on the horizon, many decided to change allegiance, turn against the Sicilians and appeal to the Almohad Caliphate for protection.

At first, King William I was successful in suppressing native rebellions and even struck out at the Egyptian coast and launched raids on the Muslim-held Balearic Islands in an effort to disrupt the supply lines of the Almohad invasion force he knew was coming (already Christian refugees were pouring into Sicilian Africa as the Almohad forces advanced). However, the Sicilian position was quickly seen as a lost cause. The loyalty of local leaders could not be counted on, supplies were low from all the recent conflict and the Almohad forces seemed unstoppable. Soon, almost everything in north Africa had been abandoned save for Mahdia in Tunisia. In 1158 Tripoli fell and the following year Mahdia was besieged. It held out until January of 1160 when the walls were breached and the city taken. The conquerors gave the local Christian population a simple choice: convert to Islam or be executed. Christendom tended to blame King William for the atrocities, for not fighting harder to defend the Kingdom of Africa. Under the circumstances, however, there was little he could have done and few were willing to support him at the time. Indeed, many Christian powers had long been jealous of the success of King Roger II and his grand aspirations. Eventually, under King William II, Sicily and the Almohad Caliphate even became allies of a sort as they battled other Islamic forces that posed a threat to both of them.

Royal Profile: Prince Ferdinand, Duke of Genoa

HRH Prince Ferdinando di Savoia, first Duke of Genoa, lived a short life but one filled with promise. He is another one of the “might have beens” that appears in royal history on occasion and during his time he was one of the most respected and admired royal figures in Italy. He was born Prince Ferdinando Maria Alberto Amedeo Filiberto Vincenzo on November 15, 1822 in Florence, the second son of Prince Carlo Alberto of Carignan and Princess Maria Teresa of Tuscany. Only two years later Prince Carlo Alberto was recognized as heir to the throne by King Vittorio Emanuele I of Piedmont-Sardinia. This raised the profile of the young family and soon brought to the forefront the ideas of Prince Carlo Alberto in favor of constitutional monarchy. In 1831 King Carlo Felice died and Prince Carlo Alberto became King of Piedmont-Sardinia and, with his own promotion, he named Prince Ferdinand the Duke of Genoa. Like the other sons of the House of Savoy, Prince Ferdinand grew up being trained to be a soldier and inculcated with the long history the royal family. As a second son, it was expected that he would have a military career.

The Duke of Genoa embarked on such a career, becoming a general in the army and admiral of the Sardinian navy. He gained considerable respect for his role in the First Italian War of Independence (1848-1849) in which he commanded a division of the Piedmontese army. During the course of the conflict his heroism earned him the Gold Medal of Military Valor for his service. He was tall, very similar in appearance to King Carlo Alberto and always led from the front. His soldiers admired him greatly as an intelligent commander and one who would not hesitate to expose himself to danger. Like both of his parents he was also a devoutly religious man as well as a man of high ideals. Many others, evidently, thought the same and agreed with his vision of what a modern monarchy could or should be. In this regard, it is difficult not to underestimate the influence of the British model of constitutional monarchy among the moderate people who were unhappy with their political situation but too traditional to favor something with so poor a record as republicanism. Many people hoped to find success as well as political freedom equal to that of Great Britain by emulating the British model of mixed government with power divided between the people, nobility and monarchy rather than being concentrated at the top.

In 1848, starting in Palermo, the Sicilians rose up in revolt against the House of Bourbon. The nobles of Sicily had, during the Napoleonic Wars, (with British encouragement) forced King Ferdinando III of Sicily and IV of Naples to enact a constitution which gave the Kingdom of Sicily a more British-style government. However, this constitution was later revoked and discontent had spread. On January 11, 1848 rebellion erupted again and in a more violent fashion. The old constitution was restored, establishing a representative government with the central role being given to an elected parliament. Rebel forces took control of almost the whole island (not the Bourbon bastion of Messina) and even talked of establishing a pan-Italian confederation. They also began looking around for an appropriate prince to be the new sovereign of their new constitutional monarchy and, given the leadership shown by King Carlo Alberto in Piedmont-Sardinia, quickly turned to his son the Duke of Genoa. Knowing his temperament and background, the representatives of the British government were pleased with such a choice and encouraged the Duke to accept the offer, with the British ambassador in Turin promising that Britain would immediately recognize Sicilian independence once he did so.

By the summer everyone was well enough convinced and the Sicilian secessionist government voted unanimously to offer the throne to the Duke of Genoa. Since having another king named Ferdinand would have aroused some resentment, it was expected that he would reign as King Alberto Amedeo I of Sicily. However, when the Sicilian delegation came to Turin to make their formal offer, the Duke of Genoa was at the front with his troops and reluctant to leave them. King Ferdinand II of Naples had joined in the war against Austria alongside King Carlo Alberto, the Grand Duke of Tuscany and (for a time) even the Pope, but when he learned that the Duke of Genoa was being considered as his possible replacement on the throne of Sicily, he immediately broke off the alliance and recalled his troops. When the war ended in victory for the Austrians and defeat for the Piedmontese, the Duke of Genoa respectfully declined the offer of the Sicilian throne. Things also began to fall apart back in Sicily where the Neapolitan navy shelled Messina, killing many people, following by a massive campaign by Bourbon troops to retake the island. It took about nine months and was a very bloody affair but finally the rebel government was subdued and their leader forced to flee to the protection of the British on Malta.

That ended any chance of the Duke of Genoa becoming the King of Sicily. However, he proved his worth well enough on the field of battle with the Piedmontese army. At the disastrous battle of Novara, the Duke of Genoa fought like a lion and had four horses shot out from under him. But, in the end, the Piedmontese were defeated and King Carlo Alberto abdicated in favor of his son, King Vittorio Emanuele II. After the war, the Duke of Genoa was put in command of the Piedmontese royal artillery, a branch of the service he set about reorganizing and modernizing. The following year he also achieved some domestic happiness with his marriage to Princess Elizabeth of Saxony, daughter of King Johann and Queen Amalie Auguste of Bavaria. They married on April 22, 1850 in Dresden and the following year had their first child, Princess Margherita, who would go on to one day marry her cousin King Umberto I and become Queen consort of a united Italy. Their second child, Prince Tommaso, was born in 1854 and would go on to preside over the Italian government during the First World War. The Duke of Genoa remained a very respected military figure and when Piedmont-Sardinia joined in the Crimean War alongside the United Kingdom and Imperial France, he was to take command of the reserve corps in the expeditionary force being dispatched to Russia. However, despite being a young man still, he had fallen ill and was growing increasingly frail. He died on February 10, 1855 at the age of only 32 in Turin and was buried in the royal crypt, succeeded by his son Prince Tommaso who became the second Duke of Genoa.

Consort Profile: Queen Maria Amalia of Naples

Queen Maria Amalia of Naples and Sicily, consort of King Louis Philippe of the French, is an interesting historical figure and, in many ways, not the sort of person one might expect her to be. She was born Princess Maria Amalia of Bourbon-Two Sicilies at Caserta Palace on April 26, 1782 in the Kingdom of Naples/Two Sicilies. Her parents were King Ferdinand IV and Queen Maria Carolina. From her earliest education she was noted for her religious piety and sincere Catholic faith. With a mother like Queen Maria Carolina and a grandmother like the Empress Maria Theresa, she was fully expected to follow in their footsteps as a strong, involved Catholic consort. While still very young her mother and her aunt, Queen Marie Antoinette of France, planned for her to one day marry her cousin the Dauphin. Obviously, the French Revolution and the tragic death of the poor Dauphin ended that childhood dream. However, it was important inasmuch as Maria Amalia had it in her mind from a very early age that it was her destiny to be the Queen of France.

As a child she watched the horrific forces of the revolution sweep Europe, first France where her aunt and uncle were murdered, and then Italy itself which forced her to flee with her parents to Sicily on more than one occasion. She watched as her mother rose to the occasion to do whatever was necessary to save her family and maintain their kingdom. It was a very difficult time for the Neapolitan Royal Family and left quite an impression on the young princess. It was while in exile as revolutionary turmoil swept across the Italian peninsula that she first met Prince Louis Philippe of Orleans. Few would have expected an instant romance. Prince Louis Philippe came from quite a liberal background, his own father, the Duke of Orleans, having been a supporter of the French Revolution, whereas Princess Maria Amalia was a conservative Catholic of the Bourbon and Hapsburg dynasties that had most opposed the entire revolutionary movement. Nonetheless, three years later they were married in 1809 and Princess Maria Amalia became the Duchess of Orleans.

Despite their lofty titles, however, the new couple were not living in grand style. With the revolutionaries and later Napoleon ruling France the pair were constantly in exile and essentially living off of the charity of the British government. However, throughout these difficult times Maria Amalia never lost her regal bearing, her principles or the values with which she was raised. Given the, shall we say “undignified”, way in which her father often behaved, it is to her credit that she viewed being royal as a service, a duty (both to God and the people) and that as a royal she had to set an example to those around her and she always conducted herself with dignity regardless of her circumstances at the time. Ultimately, thankfully, those circumstances changed and she led the restoration and revival of the Orleans ancestral home at the Palais-Royal and she accomplished it without breaking the bank. Indeed, throughout her life, Maria Amalia was known for her generosity and Christian compassion. Even as a staunch royalist who opposed revolution and all it stood for, she never held anger against the common people whose actions may have been entirely wicked but who were often motivated by privation and concern for their families.

It was the human, moral side of things that concerned her the most, far above and beyond power politics and diplomatic chess play. This was certainly her biggest issue when she suddenly became “Queen of the French” following the July Revolution of 1830 which turned out His Most Christian Majesty King Charles X and placed her husband on the throne. This was the “July Monarchy” of France, a strange hybrid of the traditional Bourbon kingdom and the revolutionary republic. Her husband was made king but of what was known as a “popular monarchy” (very trendy at the time but a fashion that faded rather quickly) in which he was “King of the French” rather than the “King of France”. Traditional monarchists were outraged at a Kingdom of France under the revolutionary tricolor, led by a king from the House of Orleans which had been tainted by complicity in the revolution and they were certainly unimpressed when King Louis Philippe I adopted the title of “Citizen-King” to show how royalist and republican sympathies were trying to be united.

The now Queen Maria Amalia was greatly disturbed by all of this, certainly not overjoyed at her new status. As a conservative, Catholic royalist she did not approve of how King Charles X had been overthrown nor of the style of the new regime. However, she was also a devoted wife who felt bound to support her husband. Thrust into this position that she did not seek, she determined to make the best of it and to shun politics as completely as she could. She had real sympathy, even anguish, at how the previous Royal Family had been treated but, dutiful as ever, she carried on. Many monarchists since have criticized both the Queen and her husband for this, but few have ever even attempted to answer the question of what they, and certainly at least the Queen, could have done instead? Had they refused to participate at all France would certainly have simply restored the republic and become completely devoted to the revolutionary ideal once again. While there is certainly at least room for criticism of King Louis Philippe on this occasion, none can attach itself to Queen Maria Amalia who was simply responding to circumstances beyond her control. She also had an inherently stabilizing presence on France since many monarchists who were opposed to the “Citizen King” and the new popular monarchy were at least comforted by the fact that there was a traditional, Catholic Bourbon Queen of France in the best tradition of those who had gone before her.

In some ways, this goal of unity, was the one primary aim of her time as Queen. While her husband tried to bring the republicans around to accepting having any sort of monarchy at all the Queen tried to bring conservatives and the royal courts of Europe around to the idea of accepting the popular monarchy as being the only means of making the best of a bad situation. She was dutiful as ever, to her husband and her adopted homeland. Ultimately, of course, this new monarchy could not be all things to all people and in the Revolution of 1848 the last King in France was overthrown and Queen Maria Amalia had to flee with her family again, this time to Great Britain. She spent the rest of her life attending to her children (and she had always been a very good mother) and spending her time in pious reflection, prayer and daily mass. She died on March 24, 1866 and was buried in the same dress she had worn when she had her husband had been forced to leave France. She was, after all, going “home” to the ultimate restoration and made a statement even after leaving this life.

Consort Profile: Queen Maria Sophie

Queen Maria Sophie was the last Queen consort of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. The daughter of Duke Maximilian Joseph of Bavaria her older sister was the famous Empress Elizabeth of Austria who married Franz Joseph I. In 1859 she married the soon-to-be King Francis II of the Two Sicilies whose country was on the verge of extreme crisis. The Italian peninsula was in the grip of turmoil brought on by a combination of revolution, nationalism and republicanism. Before the year was out the old monarch, Ferdinand II, was dead and Marie Sophie and her husband were King and Queen of the Sicilies that were targeted for invasion by the army of revolutionary republicans led by Giuseppe Garibaldi. Toward the end of 1860 the Bourbon forces had to abandon Naples and Francis II decided to make his stand at Gaeta.

By this time the Kingdom of Piedmont-Sardinia under Victor Emmanuel II had joined the fight for Italian unification and his naval forces began to shell the city. The siege of Gaeta was the defining moment in the life and short reign of Queen Maria Sophie. She was constantly on the walls, caring for the wounded, encouraging the troops, shouting defiance at the enemy and sharing her food with the hungry soldiers. It was, however, a hopeless fight and the King and Queen were forced to give up Gaeta and go to Rome where they established a government-in-exile which was recognized by most of Europe. They were honored guests of the Papal court but the position of the Pope was under the same threat that had already befallen their own country.

The marriage of Francis II and Marie Sophie was not always without problems but things did improve somewhat following the birth of their daughter in 1869 though the child only lived a few months. When Italian nationalist troops conquered Rome in 1870, ending the era of Papal rule, the King and Queen went to Bavaria where Francis II died in 1894. However, Queen Maria Sophie continued to preside over a Two-Sicilies court-in-exile and never gave up hope for a restoration of her adopted kingdom. During World War I (not surprisingly for a Bavarian princess) the Queen sided with Germany and Austria and hoped that the defeat of Italy might to lead to the restoration of the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies. However, that was not to be but it is remarkable that the Queen generated so much respect and admiration, even from those who would be her most extreme political enemies such as the famous Italian ultra-nationalist Gabriele d'Annunzio who called her the "stern little Bavarian eagle". The Queen died still in exile in Munich in 1925 but her remains were later moved to Naples where she rests with her short-lived daughter in the Church of Santa Chiara.

Guest Article: King Roger II of Sicily

(This bio was contributed by blog follower Paul the "Mediterranean Monarchist", posted at his request)

King Roger II of Sicily was a descendant of the Norman knights whom the Popes had recruited to fight the Muslim expansion in the Mediterranean. He succeeded his brother Simon of Hauteville as Count of Sicily in 1105 with his mother (queen consort of King Baldwin I of Jerusalem) as regent and grew up in a very cosmopolitan atmosphere unique to the Mediterranean in the Middle Ages. One of his earliest advisors was the Emir Christodulus of Palermo and in 1110 he was visted by King Sigurd Jorsalfare of Norway who was going to the Holy Land.

When he reached his majority in 1112 he began to rule on his own with the help of a diverse array of advisors as the Sicilian court was unmatched in its racial and religious tolerance. Over the course of his reign he was assisted by Arab and Greek scholars as well as men from all across Europe. Talent brought promotion rather than favoritism of faction. His court included the Arab geographer Muhammad al-Idrisi, the Greek historian Nilus Doxopatrius, the aforementioned Christodulus and made Thomas Brun (the son of a courtier of King Henry I) of England the leader of his court. In 1117 he married his first wife Princess Elvira of Castile and he claimed and finally conquered the Hauteville family possessions in the south of Italy, starting a campaign that would ultimately lead to the unity of all Norman Italian possessions.

His campaigns to take control of Capua and Apulia were resisted by Pope Honorius II. Though it was the popes who had invited the Norman presence in the Mediterranean they feared any consolidation of power on their part. At one point a crusade was even declared against him but Roger II was aided by the ongoing warfare between the Pope and the Holy Roman Emperor. When imperial troops forced Pope Innocent II to flee to Pisa Roger II backed the rival Pope Anacletus II. Eventually papal misfortune left them dependent on Roger and to placate him he was given the title of King of Sicily. He was crowned on Christmas in 1130 in Palermo.

For the next ten years Roger II had to fight rebellions in the south of Italy as well as papal-backed coalition of powers against him who was called “half-heathen” because of the way Christians and Muslims, Catholics and Orthodox served alongside in his domain. Roger knew victories and defeats in the long struggle but could not take Naples from the rebel forces. In 1136 German imperial troops moved in from the north with naval support coming from the Byzantine Emperor, both of whom were jealous of Roger’s growing power in the Mediterranean. Luckily, once Apulia was taken by imperial troops the Holy Roman Emperor Lothair III went home and gave King Roger II some breathing room.

The Sicilian attack on Apulia was defeated but Roger II came back and won the final victory in Capua where the rebel leader died of malaria in his capital of Troia in 1139. All the while Roger II, who viewed himself as God’s viceroy, was eager to reconcile with the Church but the Pope demanded the price of an independent Capua between Sicily and his own states which Roger II refused to pay. Pope Innocent II invaded Roger’s country in 1139 but was ambushed by Roger’s son, his army defeated and the Pope taken prisoner. Now within his power his longtime enemy now had a change of heart and recognized Roger II as King of Sicily, Duke of Apulia and Prince of Capua. The Kingdoms of Naples and Sicily, which existed for the better part of a thousand years thereafter, were thus fixed in their familiar borders.

King Roger II put down some remaining rebels and ensured peace and stability in the years to come by centralizing power, diminishing that of the local potentates and introduced a standard currency; the ducat. Roger II was then able to focus his attention southward and with the help of veteran Greek, Saracen and west European mercenaries was able to build up a respectable naval force until the Kingdom of Sicily became the dominant naval power in the Mediterranean. His expanded his power to the northern coast of Africa, taking numerous ports and coastal territories including Tripoli and Cape Bona.

With the outbreak of the Second Crusade Roger II was able to turn some old enemies into allies and launched his naval forces against the Byzantines. In 1147 his forces captured the island of Corfu and raided places from Athens to Thebes from which he imported the Sicilian silk industry. Unfortunately he lost Corfu when his fleet launched an ultimately futile attack on Constantinople itself. Not quite ten years later King Roger II died in Palermo on February 26, 1154.