Consort Profile: Queen Marie of Edinburgh

Amongst all the royal consorts of the Kingdom of Romania probably none stand out quite so much as Marie of Edinburgh, wife of King Ferdinand. She was born Marie Alexandra Victoria on October 29, 1875 in Kent to Prince Alfred, Duke of Edinburgh (son of Queen Victoria of Great Britain) and Grand Duchess Maria Alexandrovna of Russia (daughter of Czar Alexander II). As her father was a serving officer in the Royal Navy she spent a great deal of her childhood overseas, much of the time on the strategic island of Malta. She also started turning heads quite early on and no less than the future King George V was so in love with her as to propose marriage. The British relations had no problem keeping it all in the family as it were, but Marie’s very Russian mother would have none of it, not being a very big fan of the British who, even in Victorian times, were considered scandalously liberal by the standards of Romanov Russia.

Instead, in 1893 at the age of 17 Princess Marie married Crown Prince Ferdinand of Romania, son and heir to King Carol I of the House of Hohenzollern in Germany. This was probably to the liking of the Russians who were eager to keep Romania within their own sphere of influence despite having a German family on the throne. However, seemingly from the very start, the marriage of Marie and Ferdinand was an utter disaster. Marie disliked her husband from the start and over time grew to absolutely loath the man. So, it was not really surprising that Marie began having a series of affairs and at least 3 of her 6 children are generally held to have been fathered by man other than Ferdinand, though thankfully the 3 oldest (including the heir to the throne) was certainly his own.

While Crown Princess, Marie had an affair with an army lieutenant which was stopped by an outraged King Carol. Marie became pregnant during that time but the child disappeared, whether because of being stillborn or given up for adoption no one will ever know. In 1899 while Marie was pregnant with the future Mignon, Queen of Yugoslavia, she told her father-in-law that the girl was the daughter of a Russian Grand Duke though her husband later accepted the child as his own. He did the same for Prince Nicholas when he was born despite rumors that his real father was Waldorf Astor. However, Marie came into her own when her husband became King of Romania in 1914 and, despite the family ties with Germany, the very pro-British Queen consort led the campaign within the palace for Romania to enter the war on the Allied side in return for territorial expansion at the expense of Hungary.

Queen Marie helped stir up public support for the war, opposition to Germany and solidarity with the Allies. She also volunteered as a nurse for the Red Cross. However, Romania did not do well on the battlefield and the country was soon overrun by a combined Austro-German offensive. Kaiser Wilhelm II was particularly bitter that his Hohenzollern cousins would declare war on him. In the end though, Romania emerged on the winning side and Queen Marie went to Paris to lobby for Romania to get all of the additional territory she demanded from the Allied leaders re-drawing the map of Europe at Versailles. As a result the Kingdom of Romania almost doubled in size. However, domestic problems continued to plague the still popular queen.

Marie and her son, the future King Carol II, initially were very close but soon drifted apart as both interfered in the romantic lives of the other and in time they became completely estranged. In 1927 King Ferdinand died and Queen Marie, ignored by her son, devoted her time to writing books and to her religion. Originally Church of England, she incorporated some Eastern Orthodox elements to please the Romanian people but later embraced the Baha’i religion, a rather obscure sect which had originally grown out of Shia Islam. Queen Marie later said that she found in her new religion what she believed was the true spirit of God all other faiths sought but lacked. She died on July 18, 1938 and was buried next to her husband leaving behind a one of the most controversial and colorful lives of any modern royal consort.

Feliz dia de los Muertos

For all the Catholic compatriots along the southern border and in Latin America.

Danish Royal Family in Vietnam

Today is the official start of state visit of HM Queen Margrethe II of Denmark to the Socialist Republic of Vietnam, but the royal family was out and about seeing the sights yesterday. TRH Crown Prince Frederick and Crown Princess Mary were also on hand but it was HRH Prince Henrik who took center stage as they toured around the capital city of Hanoi. Although born in France, Prince Henrik spent his earliest years in Hanoi, then part of French Indochina. His excitement was evident as he showed his son the house he grew up in and the streets where he played as a child. The Prince's family was involved in a number of businesses in Vietnam and after going to school in France Prince Henrik returned to Vietnam in 1950 to continue his studies at the French secondary school in Hanoi, despite the fact that conditions were not exactly ideal in Vietnam at the time. He remained until 1952 when he returned to France to attend the Sorbonne. Obviously, with the withdrawl of the French and the communist takeover the family did not return after that.

Prince Henrik was able, with his son, to place a plaque commemorating his father at St Joseph's Cathedral (his father's body went missing after the communist takeover, probably because he had been part of the colonial government). His family had been in Indochina since 1928 (the 3rd year of the reign of Emperor Bao Dai). It might be interesting to note that his childhood home is located on what is now Phan Dinh Phung street, named after one of the most famous and ardently monarchist anti-French fighters of the colonial period. The Danish royals will continue their visit in Vietnam until November 6.

Papal Profile: Pope Innocent III

Whenever one considers the concept of "papal monarchy" the name that immediately comes to mind is Pope Innocent III, a man whose reign saw the combination of immense secular power as well as firm morals and religious devotion. An Italian of aristocratic background, Innocent was born Lotario de Conti, the son of a count whose family was to produce nine popes in all. He studied in Rome, then theology in Paris and law in Bologna. A servant of several popes he was elevated to the rank of Cardinal-Deacon in 1190 and wrote a very popular work on human suffering. In 1198, upon the death of Pope Celestine III, Conti was elected to the Throne of Peter and took the name Innocent III. From the very outset his primary goals were to reassert papal authority, restore Christian unity and bring about a revival of the faith. The recent fall of Jerusalem was, in his mind, divine punishment for the moral failures of Christendom.

Innocent III sent papal troops to clean out the banditry that was rampant in Rome and to recover the states of the Church. Sicily was a primary concern as he had been named guardian to the young future Emperor Frederick II who he crowned King of Sicily and for whom he was regent. In Church matters he called the 4th Lateran Council which ruled on the regulations for the reception of communion, called for a more strict life for the clergy and which outlawed harsh corporal punishments given to atone for sin. He also stressed the superiority of the spiritual life over the physical life, something which complemented his teaching that secular powers must be ultimately subordinate to spiritual powers -the Church was not to be ruled by any government. To many, his reign seemed like the era of the caesars, with all of Europe ruled from Rome, had returned.

In a sense, this was true as the reign of Innocent III saw the zenith of Catholic history with almost all of Europe united in one faith and with a great many countries declaring Innocent himself their feudal overlord. He put forward Frederick as Holy Roman Emperor, ruled on royal disputes in France, clashed with King John of England, eventually forcing him to concede on the issue of the rights of the Church and ruled on issues in countries as far flung as Spain, Sweden and Bulgaria. There was no doubt that Pope Innocent III was the single most powerful man in all of Europe. However, nominal submission did not always mean total obedience and two events were to scar his reign. The first was the calling of the Fourth Crusade. This was intended to march on the Holy Land via Egypt but the crusaders got sidetracked and ended up taking sides in one of the endless political disputes in the Byzantine Empire. The result was the infamous sacking of Constantinople for which Innocent III excommunicated the lot of his wayward warriors.

The other was the Albigensian crusade, a horrific civil war in France that grew out of political opportunism and a new heretical movement certain powers were eager to take advantage of. The fighting became gruesome and often merciless. It is disputed whether or not Innocent III's legate actually said, "kill them all, God will know his own" but it was to be a scar on the image of his reign thereafter. However, in Rome the Pope showed his benevolence by building hospitals, universities and cleaning up the city; restoring something of the old greatness of the region. Pope Innocent III died suddenly in Perugia in 1216, leaving behind a reputation as both a moral man and a strong leader. Never before or since did the Roman Pontiff hold such sway over the crowned heads of Europe.

To All Readers

A Nun from Monaco

One of my favorite portraits from the ranks of the Princely Family of Monaco is this one of HSH Princess Charlotte of Monaco, a nun of the Order of the Visitation.

Georgios I of the Hellenes Arrives in Greece

It was on this day in 1863 that Prince Wilhelm of Denmark arrived in Greece to begin his reign as George I, King of the Hellenes. Elected by the Greek National Assembly his nomination was supported by the United Kingdom, the Second French Empire and the Russian Empire and, while he certainly had plenty of problems to deal with, he would become the longest reigning monarch in modern Greek history, occupying the throne for 50 years before his assassination in 1913 during the First Balkan War.

He was only 17 when he arrived in Greece and, conscious of the fate of the former King Otto, was careful to be more Greek in his habits and more approachable with his people. Yet, like his predecessor (though somewhat more humble in his ambitions) he envisioned the Greek kingdom becoming the dominant power in the eastern Mediterranean. The Ottoman Empire was his natural enemy and was widely considered a fading power. He set Greece on the path of expansion, reclaiming Greek territory and paving the way for the widest expansion of modern Greece, even holding territory on the Asian mainland for a time. It was not exactly the re-birth of the Byzantine Empire that the romantic Otto had envisioned, but it was a grand dream that could stir the hearts of all patriotic Greeks.

Losses gave the Greeks pause and George even considered abdication, but his determination in the face of adversity and courage in the face of disasters won him considerable admiration from his subjects. Political chaos may have hampered him and finally cost him his life, but his reign did give hope for a new glorious era in Greek history, a dream for a brighter future that would restore the glories of the past and that dream first came to Greece in the person of a teenage Danish prince 146 years ago today.

Et tu Obama?

Just when you thought that the glorification of "the One" could reach no more absurd depths an Obama appointee, one Rocco Landesman, now Director of the National Endowment for the Arts, has compared the President to someone held by many (including Alexander Hamilton) to be the greatest man who ever lived; Julius Caesar. To quote the new artsy moron-in-chief, "Barack Obama is the most powerful writer since Julius Caesar". Fellow faithful, I am aghast. Just when you think you've heard it all someone compares the President to Julius Caesar, forefather of that masterpiece of ancient civilization the Roman Empire. Just to be clear about the record here, Obama rose to office in Illinois mostly by legal tricks that got his competition thrown out, was a junior senator yet to finish his term in office, most known for his multitude of "present" votes before being elected President. Since taking office, with a commanding majority in the House and Senate Obama has accomplished nothing, lived up to none of his promises and was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize for basically doing --nothing! Compare that to the accomplishments of Julius Caesar who conquered what is now France, Holland, Belgium, western Germany, led two expeditions into Britain, defeated the armies of Pompey in the Roman Civil War and was prepared to embark on further expansion to the east when he was murdered. However, the awed but noble Romans of ancient times still had more integrity than Obama's modern sycophants. They at least waited until after Caesar was dead to declare him a god whereas Obama, poster-boy of the "me" generation must have all of his accolades now, whether he has earned them or not.

Monarchist Profile: Grigory Semyonov

General Grigory Mikhaylovich Semyonov was a half-Buriat, half-Cossack born on the frontier of eastern Siberia in 1890. In 1908 he joined the Imperial Russian Army, graduated from Orenburg Military Academy in 1911 and during World War I rose to the rank of captain in the Trans-Baikal Cossack host. He served on the Persian front and was planning to raise an all-Buriat regiment when the revolution broke out that toppled the Romanov dynasty. The Provisional Government sent him to oversee the Transbaikal region and he became a general of the White Russian forces there and instigated an uprising against the Bolsheviks but was ultimately defeated by the Red forces. During this time his chief partner was Baron Roman von Ungern-Sternberg but unlike his more reactionary friend Semyonov favored a more modern form of constitutional monarchy, even if the constitution was mostly symbolic. The two eventually went their different ways.

From Chita, Semyonov tried to set up his own autonomous government with the support of the Empire of Japan which was looking to extend its influence in Siberia. He set up a very cosmopolitan court around him including Russians, Mongols, Japanese, Manchus and even had a unit of entirely Jewish volunteers. When the Kolchak government fell Semyonov inherited command of the remaining counterrevolutionary forces but, with the Allies pressing Japan to withdraw her support, his forces were left to live off the land and eventually crossed the border into Manchuria by the autumn of 1912. While there he tried to keep the flame of White Russian resistance alive and also forge alliances with Manchu and Chinese monarchists. He was, for a time, on the payroll of the last Emperor of China who mentioned Semyonov in his memoirs as the most prominent of the Russian exile community offering to assist in his restoration.

However, revolutionary republican pressure finally forced him out of Manchuria as well and he relocated to Nagasaki, Japan before moving on to the United States. He had, however, got on the bad side of several members of the AEF-Siberia and legal troubles forced him out of America and he went back to Manchuria where he was given a pension by Japan and worked in cooperation with the Japanese and the Russian exile community against their common Soviet enemy. He remained there during World War II and in 1945, during the Soviet invasion of Manchukuo, Semyonov was captured by Red Army paratroopers and the following year was slowly and brutally executed as a counterrevolutionary by Bolshevik kangaroo court. Although he gained a rather unsavory reputation at times, and was in the end unsuccessful in his crusade, Semyonov is still widely remembered as one of the most prominent White Russians and a near legendary figure in the Far East.

This Is Only a Test

Battlefield Royal: Grand Duke Nicholas of Russia

Grand Duke Nicholas of Russia was the grandson of the "Iron Czar" Nicholas I and thus a first cousin to his sovereign Czar Nicholas II. He was set on the path of a military career early in life and served on the staff of his father in the Russo-Turkish War, earning himself a high reputation for his skill and courage and was rewarded in 1884 with command of the Guards Hussar Regiment. He was everyone one would expect of a good Russian general. He was a strict disciplinarian, but also a father figure to his men; a Russian nationalist, an advocate of pan-Slavism and devoutly Russian Orthodox praying several times a day. He favored the simple, rustic life of the Russian countryside to city life at court and held to a romantic view of the rural Russian peasantry. Denied a command in the war with Japan he was instrumental in forcing Czar Nicholas II to give in to the demands for limited reforms in 1905, an act for which the Czarina Alexandra never forgave him and was to greatly trouble his command in World War I.

After the outbreak of war in 1914 Grand Duke Nicholas was called in to take command of the largest army the Russian Empire had ever assembled although the established war plans were not his own and he had never commanded an army in battle before. He was widely respected and popular with the troops but Russia suffered from the lack of a coherent staff and command structure such as the Germans had established on the Prussian model. As a result he often was reduced to being 'umpire in chief'. Nonetheless, given the inferiority of his army in virtually every area save sheer numbers he was able to win some successes. He was, for instance, decorated with the St George Cross for the Russian victory at the siege of Przemysl. However, he could not best his enemies at court where he was opposed by Rasputin and Alexandra. Thus, in 1915 the Czar made the fateful decision of dismissing his cousin and taking command of the Russian army himself.

In the aftermatch Grand Duke Nicholas was assigned to the Caucausus front where he won a string of victories over the Ottoman Turks, advancing southward and sending troops to link up with the British in Persia. After the Bolshevik revolution he went into exile in Italy and later became the leading figure in the monarchist movement among Russian exiles. With General Pyotr Wrangel he led the Russian All Military Union and was a marked man as a special enemy of the Soviet Union. They carried out a number of small, clandestine attacks on the Soviets before the Grand Duke's death in the south of France in 1929.

Monarchist Destinations: Texas' Royal Palace

Drive past the old City Hall in downtown San Antonio and you will find the humble building that was once home to the capital of Texas. Originally the Commandancia, home of the commander of the troops guarding the city, it later became the official residence of the Royal Governor of the Province of Texas, part of the colony of New Spain. It was completed in 1749, and the original keystone displays the words "ano 1749-se acabo" under the coat of arms of the monarch of the time, King Ferdinand VI of Spain. In front are the famous 6 Flags of Texas. As you walk in, look up and you will notice the original keystone above the main entrance to the palace, bearing the coat of arms of the Spanish King. It is interesting to see that these are the arms of the House of Hapsburg, one of the most ancient and respected dynasties in Europe which supplied many kings of Spain, Holy Roman Emperors, and Emperors of Austria. Due to the work involved, and the remote location, it is naturally a much simpler version of the arms than would be seen elsewhere. However, at the time the palace was built, after 1700, the Hapsburgs no longer ruled Spain, having been replaced by the Bourbon Dynasty of present day. The last Spanish King to rule over Texas was King Ferdinand VII.

Outside the front door to the palace, visitors will be greeted by a large statue of a Spanish Conquistador, given to Texas by Spain in the 1970's as a reminder of the historical ties between the two countries. It was the conquistadores who were the first Europeans to set foot in Texas and officially claim the area for the King of Spain. However, though the conquistadores won the glory and riches, it should not be forgotten that most of the real colonization and all that it implies was done by the Franciscan missionaries who accompanied the conquistadores, winning souls to Christ and spreading the Spanish culture.

The palace has been restored with antique period items from the Spanish colonial era and reflects the differences of those good ol' days. After coming inside, and paying the very modest tickett fee, the first room to your right will be the small chapel, where the Royal Governor and his family attended to their spiritual needs. There is a lovely carved statue of Our Lady, crowned and holding the Divine Child at the back of the room. There are antique wood carved crucifix's, portraits of saints and Jesus, as well as a small container for a holy relic. The constant religious objects throughout the palace speaks of the devotion during that time and the strongly conservative, Catholic nature of the Spanish Monarchy and House of Hapsburg or Bourbon. Scarcely a single room is without some sort of religion icon if not several of them, including images, statues, crucifix's and a large antique rosary.
Moving on you will see the kitchen and the official dining room where the Royal Governor would hold banquets, as lavish as possible on the remote colonial frontier. There is an antique wine chest and a lavabo for the washing of hands before the meal that was a religious practise at the time. The room features a framed mini-flag of the Spanish regiment that occupied the city as well as an icon of San Antonio de Padua, the saint for whom the city was named. The back patio is a lush, walled-in mini tropical paradise dominated by the lovely central fountain. Naturally, it is believed that a coin dropped in the fountain will grant a wish. Pebbled walkways wind through a tangle of local trees and bushes, including clumps of palm and banana trees. This is the area most often seen in pictures and post cards of the Governor's Palace (which are available of course) and given the serene feel of the garden, it is no wonder why. The vine-covered portico is a good place to relax, the stone benches also carved with the double-eagle (though for picnic comfort go for the wooden benches).

One can also see many items of interest in the Royal Governor's office. Monarchist visitors will notice signed letters from HM King Juan Carlos of Spain on the wall, speaking of the very long and deep ties between Texas and the Kingdom of Spain. There is also a woven wall-hanging in the office, bearing the names of the first families to come to San Antonio de Bexar in 1731 during the reign of His Catholic Majesty King Philip V. The first settlers were mostly natives of the Canary Islands. Because of the history of the place in part, it must be said, the Governor's palace is often listed as the most beautiful home in the Lone Star State. Some might smirk at so humble a home being called a palace, but for the time and place it was and homes such as that were often referred to as palaces, such as the Veramendi Palace and others. For any monarchist visiting the "Alamo City" it is a must-see and usually free of the throngs of tourists at said Shrine of Texas Liberty and the historic mission trail.

Monarch Profile: Emperor Duy Tan

Of the latter Nguyen dynasty emperors of Vietnam, probably none are so popular amongst Vietnamese today as the boy-king Duy Tan. He was born on August 14, 1899 to Emperor Thanh Thai as Prince Nguyen Vinh San. He succeeded his father on the Golden Dragon Throne in 1907 at the age of 7 and took as his reigning name Duy Tan, "friend of reforms". His father had been replaced on grounds of insanity but also for being uncooperative with the French. It was hoped that a younger boy could be groomed to be a better friend of the protectorate and a model colonial monarch. To add stature his courtiers added a year to his age so many history books record him as being enthroned at age eight.

Choosing which son would succeed Thanh Thai was not a forgone conclusion. When the time came to make the choice Prince Vinh San was absent and later found chasing crickets. The French immediately decided that a boy so uninterested in imperial matters would be their best choice and so he was enthroned as Emperor Duy Tan. The French would later be proven wrong. Emperor Duy Tan became an extremely devoted and concerned monarch who was determined to set his country free. From the very begining the child-emperor was surrounded by advisors and tutors that were friendly towards France. This included the Council of Regency that was to govern until Duy Tan reached his majority. However, as he grew older Emperor Duy Tan became quite adept at getting around the many spies in his court. While he has been described as a Francophile, Duy Tan nevertheless opposed the excessive aspects of French rule and called for a revision of the Patenotre agreements of 1884.

Even at a young age the Emperor also instituted tax relief and the lessening of chore duties, he eliminated wasteful court protocals, cut back on government spending and reduced the salaries of high officials, including his own. When the French violated the tomb of Emperor Tu Duc he was enraged and protested vehemently. Emperor Duy Tan announced that as the "Son of Heaven" it was his right and his duty to manage Vietnam's affairs. Shortly after this, the Emperor and a small group began planning a rebellion against the French protectorate. The 16-year-old monarch even took to the water and encouraged the people to revolt from his junk with a loud-speaker. Unfortunately, one of the collaborators turned the others in to the French garrison in Annam.

The Governor of French Indochina asked the Emperor to reconsider his actions, and more or less repent for his "treason". Duy Tan replied, "If you compell me to remain Emperor of Annam, you should consider me as an adult emperor. I should need neither the council of regency nor your advice. I should manage the country's business on the same footing with all foreign countries including France." With that announcement it was clear to Paris that Emperor Duy Tan had to go. The other collaborators confessed their crime on the condition that Duy Tan not be executed. They were beheaded at An Hoa still repeating, "The sky is still there. So are the earth and the dynasty. We wish long life to the Emperor." Duy Tan was excused on the grounds that he was a minor and on November 3, 1916 he was exiled from Vietnam with his father. After this, most Vietnamese royals gave up hope of resisting the French occupation.

Emperor Duy Tan, known officially again as Prince Vinh San continued to do what he could to help his nation in any way possible. During World War II he even joined the Free French army as an interpreter to help the Allied cause. With all of the problems Vietnam had been going through because of the war and the Japanese effort to set up an independent "Empire of Vietnam" some French officials, particularly Charles DeGaulle, began to consider restoring Vinh San to the throne as he had seemingly proven his friendship toward France but was still widely popular as a nationalist hero in his country. However, the rumors, secret talks and hopeful aspirations were to come to nothing. He was on his way back from Europe, where he was serving with the occupation forces in Germany in late 1945 his plane mysteriously crashed over the African wilderness and the former monarch was killed. His ashes were interred in the Central African Republic until 1987 when the Socialist Republic of Vietnam allowed his remains to return home. On April 4th Vietnam saw a glimpse of it's old imperial splendor when the ashes of Emperor Duy Tan were laid to rest in the old capitol city of Hue, in the tomb of his grandfather Nguyen Duc Duc, with all of the pomp and ceremony of a happier time.

Consort Profile: King Ferdinand II of Portugal

Ferdinand II was, in turn, royal consort of Portugal, co-monarch of Portugal and regent of Portugal during his life. He was Prince Ferdinand Augustus Francis Anthony of Saxe-Coburg-Gotha-Kohary on October 29, 1816 to Prince Ferdinand of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha and his wife Princess Maria Antonia Kohary de Csabrag and spent his youth moving around Slovakia, Austria and Germany. As part of the Saxe-Coburg-Gotha family he was a nephew of the Belgian King Leopold I and first cousins with King Leopold II of the Belgians, Empress Carlota of Mexico and Queen Victoria and Prince Albert of Great Britain.

In 1836 Prince Ferdinand married Queen Maria II of Portugal, daughter of King Pedro IV of Portugal, Emperor Pedro I of Brazil. In September of the following year Queen Maria gave birth to their first child, a son and heir, at which time, according to Portuguese law, her consort became King Ferdinand II of Portugal. Like many of his family Ferdinand was a very modern-minded man of a very artistic nature. He also proved himself to be quite an adept administrator and intelligent monarch. King Ferdinand and Queen Maria were a devoted couple and worked well together, proving themselves a winning team for the Portuguese monarchy. In 1838 he built the magnificent Pena National Palace near Sintra, one of the most unique royal palaces in the world, often compared to Ludiwg II’s Neuschwanstein because of its mixture of various architectural styles. When his wife was pregnant Ferdinand II ruled the country alone and this happened fairly frequently as Queen Maria II had 11 children during their marriage though only 7 survived.

It was the birth of the eleventh child, who did not survive, that took the life of Maria II in 1853 and the reign of Ferdinand II came to an end. However, he still stayed on to serve as regent for his 16-year-old son King Pedro V until 1855. He instilled in his son the need for Portugal to modernize, build up its infrastructure, industry and so on as well as making sure he retained a compassionate nature. After retiring from active involvement in politics Ferdinand was able to focus on those artistic causes dearest to him. He also remarried to Elisa Hensler, Countess of Edla, an opera singer and the two lived in the Pena National Palace where he entertained a long succession of the great artists of his time. The former King himself was quite skilled at etching, painting and making pottery and was president of the Royal Academy of Sciences and the Arts as well as lord-protector of Coimbra University. In this peaceful, artistic environment, he spent his final years with his wife by his side until his death on December 15, 1885.

MM Video: Norwegian Royals

Mad Rant: Anglicans Changin' Their Religion

I'll admit I must have missed the significance of this story when it first came out, but everyone seems to be talking about it, most in a negative way. I am speaking of course of HH Pope Benedict XVI taking matters in hand to allow for easy entry of disgruntled Anglicans seeking reunion with the Church of Rome. Most of the media coverage of this event has tried to portray Benedict XVI as some sort of papal spider luring Anglican flies into his web, promising the protection of their Anglican rituals as his siren call. Needless to say, I take a very different view and from the quarters these protests are coming from it is clearly the frustrated cry of those who see it as yet another sign that liberalism has ruined the Anglican communion. The Pope is trying to make the transition go as well as possible and the only Catholics who are upset about it are the radical liberals who don't want more traditional, serious Christians to interfere with their efforts to turn Catholicism into Woodstock with communion.

There is also a tie-in with monarchy here. As everyone knows, the Anglican communion comes from the Church of England, born by royal command, and of which the British monarch is still supreme governor. We also know from a recent story that HM Queen Elizabeth II is not too pleased with the state of Anglicanism today; which should probably not surprise anyone. Some even tried to suggest that the Queen was leaning in the Catholic direction. All I can say to that is, don't let's be silly. The Queen is a very sincere and committed Protestant who would never think of 'going Roman' I think I can safely assure everyone. However, this points to a larger problem and yet another example of why no monarchists, even in as safely monarchial a country as the UK, can afford to be complacent. The problem is that the Queen does not actually govern the church of which she is governor. Only in Britain...

There is no doubt in my mind that the C of E would not be in such terrible condition today if the Queen was actually in charge. Officially she is of course, but like virtually all of her powers it is actually the Prime Minister that makes the decisions. So, we have, to my mind, the rather ridiculous situation of a political hack appointing bishops. Politicians have screwed up the Church of England just as they tend to do virtually everything they touch. I don't think any British monarch would approve of the religious situation in the Anglican communion as it stands today. Can you imagine what Queen Victoria would think of women priests and gay bishops? Safe to say she would not be amused. However, Catholics can also take a lesson at the problems Anglicans are having and refute those arguing for many of the same things. Fortunately for Catholics, and any Christians who think the Bible actually carries some weight, Benedict XVI will not be listening to any of that sort anyway. This last week did witness the first Tridentine-rite high mass in the Vatican in 40 years, only the latest of my lapsed traditions that the much more monarchial Benedict has revived in the Catholic Church. As this is a pan-monarchist blog, not a place for religious arguments I will keep my specific opinions to myself except to say that I always prefer those who are true to their traditions. If you're going to be Catholic, be Catholic! If you're going to be an Anglican, be William Laud! Call me a purist that way I guess. Or, just call me ... The Mad Monarchist.

MM Video: King Leopold III

Exit of the Ex-Emperor of Vietnam

It was on this day in 1955 that the last Emperor of Vietnam was removed as "Chief of State" of the French-sponsored State of Vietnam based out of Saigon and struggling to survive against the communist revolutionaries in Hanoi. After an epic, heroic defeat at Dien Bien Phu the French were forced to pull out of Southeast Asia and the U.S. began to take over their job of defending the area. In the north, the government and people were united by a totalitarian regime, in the south Prime Minister Ngo Dinh Diem was unifying the region, but making alot of enemies doing it. He appointed his family to most high offices, sent military troops after dissidents and Communist insurgents and promoted Catholic moral values. He turned against the Binh Xuyen gang in a street war, though the group had been sending Bao Dai a percentage of their profits to maintain their status. Diem would not tolerate this. When word reached Emperor Bao Dai in France he immediately decided to remove Diem from office.

Prime Minister Ngo Dinh Diem knew this was coming. He was also supported by the American Colonel Edward G. Lansdale (member of the OSS, forerunner of the CIA) who urged him to replace the "State" that seemed like a monarchy but technically was hard to categorize with a more "American style" republic, which the people in the United States would be more willing to support. On October 6, 1955 the Ministry of the Interior announced that a referendum would be held to depose Bao Dai in favor of Ngo Dinh Diem and replace the "State of Vietnam" with a republic. The Emperor denounced this decision, and said such on the 13th in a note to the French government and the Paris embassies of Britain, the United States, Russia and India. On the 18th Emperor Bao Dai announced the dismissal of Ngo Dinh Diem as Prime Minister and the revocation of all powers he had previously granted him. The next day he told the Vietnamese people he did this because, "police methods and personal dictatorship must be brought to an end, and I can no longer continue to lend my name and my authority to a man who will drag you into ruin, famine and war". However, the Emperor was in France and Colonel Lansdale had been using funds from the C.I.A. to bribe government officials and buy support for Ngo Dinh Diem. He also attempted to have one of the Emperor's most loyal supporters assassinated but when the attack failed, the government silenced the issue. None of it was probably necessary. The Emperor had been associated with the French for so long, and had been away from Vietnam for such lengthy periods that his government never really had any grass-roots support. Ngo Dinh Diem could have undoubtedly won without the use of any strong-arm tactics. However, in Vietnamese politics, regime-change was never about democracy but rather about power. Diem had it, Bao Dai did not.

When the referendum was held, Ngo Dinh Diem was in complete control of the polling stations and the entire voting process. Colonel Lansdale had also helped to give the would-be president an unfair advantage. He had the ballot cards for Bao Dai printed in green ink, the color of misfortune, and printed those for Ngo Dinh Diem in red, the color of good luck and prosperity. Those who did not understand the voting system were told by the troops at the polls to place the red ballots in the envelopes and throw the green ones in the trash. Those who persisted in trying to vote for Emperor Bao Dai were caught outside and assaulted by the soldiers. Some were severely beaten, others had water forced down their throats or hot sauce poured up their nose. In retrospect many said that Bao Dai never had a chance of winning even a fair election. However, this was a matter of principle for Diem who wanted to send a clear message to the country and the world as to who was in charge. A life-long monarchist (at least until now) Diem wanted a display of power as well as 'democratic progress'. When the votes were counted Ngo Dinh Diem claimed victory by 98%. Colonel Lansdale advised him to lower the number to a more realistic percentage, after all, anyone with experience in democracy knows that winning 98% of the electorate is unheard of. This advice was refused and everyone knew the referendum to be fraudulent. In Saigon for example, Diem claimed to have received more votes than there were registered voters in the entire area.

Bao Dai had few choices after this development. With America in support of Ngo Dinh Diem, no one had even listened to his original objection over the holding of the referendum and he had no reason to believe that this would change now. Already the Americans were taking on a larger role in the war effort. Most of the government officials had been bribed into supporting the new president (though only temporarily as time would tell) and Bao Dai had no real avenue with which to protest the results. He also knew that any effort to contest the results of the referendum would only further fragment an already divided nation. Instead, he decided that his only choice was to accept defeat and abdicate once again as the Head of State for Viet-Nám. The Emperor made one last appeal as he left the political stage for peace and unity and for his successors in the Saigon government to give consideration to all parties in the national struggle. He then settled into a life in exile and watched from the sidelines as his country was torn apart. In 1965 he told the French writer Hilaire du Berrier, "If your government had given me one thousandth of the sum it spent to depose me, I could have won that war." Colonel Nicholas Thorne, the U.S. Marine Corps language specialist and authority on the central region of Annam, had said the same as early as 1959.

With the new Viet-Nám being called America's "Showcase for Democracy" Colonel Lansdale came home and left behind Colonel Albert Pham Ngoc Thao to replace him. After the war it was released that Thao had been a communist agent and his remains were removed to the "Heroes Cemetery" in Hanoi. As for Emperor Bao Dai, he was reduced to the life of a powerless exile. During his final years in politics the Emperor's reputation was ruined by the American media. The CBS bureau chief in Paris, David Schoenbrun, wrote a story in Collier's of September 30, 1955 regarding Emperor Bao Dai. He was more concerned with politics than factual journalism however, saying, "Diem must not only remove Bao Dai but must do it in such a way that he no longer has any usefulness as a symbol of Vietnamese unity". In this at least, it can be said that the efforts of advocates of the "third force" in Vietnam were entirely successful.

Monarchist Profile: Comte de la Rochejaquelein

Easily my favorite of the great French royalists, Henri du Vergier Comte de la Rochejaquelein was a dashing young monarchist, the youngest general of the Catholic and Royal Grand Army, and his youth, noble background and great zeal and audacity made him something of a celebrity of the counterrevolution. Of the entire effort probably the two most well known leaders of the uprising in the Vendee were the common coachman Cathelineau and the young nobleman Comte de la Rochejaquelein. He was born on August 30, 1772 in the Chateau de la Durbelliere, Saint-Aubin-de-Baubigne, near Chatillon. Like many young men of his background he was destined for a military career early in life.

Rochejaquelein was an officer in the Constitutional Guard of King Louis XVI and first saw action on August 10, 1792 when he tried to defend the Tuileries Palace from revolutionary mobs. After returning to his home he avoided being drafted into the republican army by refusing to apply for the levé e en masse; a revolutionary innovation that gave the world the concept of the ‘nation in arms’. In April of 1793 he joined with his cousin, the Marquis Louis-Marie Lescure at his estates in Poitou to join the counterrevolutionary forces.

In no time at all the cousins were fighting republican revolutionaries alongside Maurice d’Elbee and the Marquis de Bonchamps. Rochejaquelein showed great skill and bravery and was a very inspiration figure. His handsome youth and great courage made him a natural leader that his troops would follow anywhere. He once gave an order which has become one of the most famous phrases of the counterrevolutionary forces, "Mes amis, si j'avance, suivez-moi! Si je recule, tuez-moi! Si je meurs, vengez-moi!" - "Friends, if I advance, follow me! If I retreat, kill me! If I die, avenge me!"

With only a few thousand peasants under his command Rochejaquelein won his first great victory on April 13 and on May 3 fought in the victory at Bressuire, then at the battle of Fontenay-le-Comte on May 25 and the battle of Saumur on June 9. Showing great leadership again, he inspired the Vendee army to fight on when they were on the threshold of giving up and going home to tend their crops. He rallied the troops and led them to victory at the battle of Chantonnay in September. However, the odds were long and Rochejaquelein was not invincible and he was defeated at the battle of Cholet on October 17 after which he was forced to retreat across the Loire river.

Nonetheless, in spite of this setback, after the death of d’Elbee he was chosen to be generalissimo of the royalist forces on October 20. The Comte de La Rochejaquelein would seem to some to be an unusual choice for such a high command since he was always a "front-line" soldier. However, he proved his strategic abilities quickly. He attacked toward Granville and captured Avranches on November 12. Granville, however, eluded him and he was forced to re-cross the Loire and retreat to Angers. Pursued and harassed by superior forces under Marceau and Kleber until being caught and defeated piece by piece from December 12-23 where the final blow came at Savenay. However, Rochejaquelein managed to escape and continued to lead a guerilla war against the republican forces until he was killed by revolutionaries on January 29, 1794. After his death his brother Louis carried on the fight until his own death in 1815.

Few other royalist leaders so fit the perfect image of the inspiring, romantic royalist at the Comte de la Rochejaquelein who will be forever remembered for his heroic leadership, his loyalty unto death to cross and crown and for his stirring command, “if I advance, follow me! If I retreat, kill me! If I die, avenge me!”

M.M. Movie Review: Kingdom of Heaven

I put off seeing "Kingdom of Heaven" for a while, mostly because of all the hype the film received, particularly as being anti-Christian and especially anti-organized religion, but I always knew I would see it eventually and so I did, curiosity finally getting the better of me. It was about a historical period I find fascinated and featured some of my favorite historical characters. Of course, it wastes no time in attacking the Church. The film only happens because of a wicked, uncaring, grave robbing priest and it is remarked how the Pope has urged all Christians to kill Muslims as though the Crusades were supposed to be some kind of campaign of genocide and it is noted several times with a very un-Medieval 21st Century mentality that you can only be truly devoted to your faith if you are a fanatic. All of the "good guys" in this movie only let religion influence them up to a point. For them, it is no so much a belief as it is simply a matter of which camp you are in and what sort of flag you fly. The supposed hero is openly agnostic.

As for the cast, Liam Neeson plays the father of our would-be hero Godfrey of Ibelin, the would-be hero himself, Balian of Ibelin, is played by Orlando Bloom; possibly the most annoying character in the movie. David Thewlis is an unnamed knight Hospitaler, Marton Csokas is Guy de Lusignan, a character totally out of step with his historical counterpart, much like the star of the show; Eva Green is Princess Sibylle, Jeremy Irons plays a guy called Tiberius, the Marshal of Jerusalem but based on Count Raymond of Tripoli, Ghassan Massoud does a good enough job as Sultan Saladin, he might easily be mistaken as the hero of the film given his portrayal; Brendan Gleeson plays the maniacal Reynaud of Chatillon with about the right level of cruel fanaticism and finally Edward Norton portrays excellently the part of King Baldwin IV of Jerusalem. In my opinion, as well as at least one other I know, the movie would have been much better and certainly more inspirational and uplifting had it simply been about him.

Perhaps even more so than "Gladiator" the historical inaccuracies in "Kingdom of Heaven" are numerous. The attempt to add modern moral lessons is clumsy and arrogant and takes up time that could have been better spent showing actual, exciting events central to the story like the battle at the Horns of Hattin for instance, which happens off screen in this movie. There is plenty of action to be sure, but the siege of Jerusalem is the only really big battle depicted on screen. Probably the worst part of the movie is Orlando Bloom. His character is totally inaccurate, annoying and rather pathetic. Rest assured the actual Balian of Ibelin was nothing like this. In the movie he is a simple blacksmith until Godfrey of Ibelin rides up and announces he had a one-night-stand with his mother and Balian was the result. He assures the young man that his mother was taken willingly -oh yeah, what a gentleman.

The character is totally unbelievable. The movie would have us believe that he is not in the least bothered by finding out that he is the illegitimate son of a noble lord who never came to see him in his whole life, nor made any provision for him or his mother to ensure that his son did not have to become, well, a blacksmith in a dirt poor French village lets say. Furthermore, after being a blacksmith all his life he somehow learns to be a knight in less than a day, after only one unfinished lesson before dear old daddy bites the dust. He continues on to the Holy Land as his father wished, to serve the king and the people, though he arrives there after a somewhat bewildering shipwreck that really was not necessary. He then kills a Muslim who challenges him and has the man's servant escort him to Jerusalem, after which he gives the man his freedom and his horse. Evidently, this man then spread word of this great act of charity to every single Muslim on the planet so that they all like Balian in the future and know what a great guy he is.

Once in Jerusalem he goes to see King Baldwin IV. On the way he sees Knights Templar being executed for violating the peace agreement with the Muslims. Marveling at what a great king they had, Balian remarks that these men were killed for doing what the Pope would have commanded them to do. Nothing like that happened in real life of course, but it is important for the filmmakers to highlight just what an evil warmonger the Holy Father was. In town he meets the sister of the king, Princess Sibylle who takes an instant liking to the heartthrob Balian even though she is married to rough and tough Guy of Lusignan who naturally takes just as strong a disliking to our would-be hero. Princess Sibylle is portrayed as a woman trapped in a loveless and unhappy marriage, when in fact the opposite was true. Guy was basically a big, dumb brute, but she was very devoted to him in real life.

Finally, Balian meets King Baldwin IV, the man who SHOULD have been the star of the movie. In this case, the filmmakers mostly get it right. Baldwin IV was, in reality, a very good, upright, wise and heroic ruler who really did come down with leprosy when he was only nine years old. He didn't actually ride around wearing a silver mask, but that is easily forgiven since it looks so cool. In fact, by the end of his young life Baldwin the Leper, as he was called, was so covered by sores that he could not walk at all but had to be carried everywhere on a litter. He is the best man in the movie and my favorite character by far. Of course, they try to portray him as being somewhat more "modern" than he actually was, not one of the religious fanatics, though in fact the young leprous king was a pious man and a great warrior who bested the fierce Saladin more than once when he was only a teenager. Undoubtedly my absolute favorite scene of the entire movie is when King Baldwin confronts the wicked Reynaud of Chatillon. Ordering him to his knees, Baldwin announces, "I am Jerusalem" before taking off his left glove to reveal his withered and sore-covered hand, extending it to Reynaud and ordering him to give him the kiss of peace. Once this is done he gives the bad knight a good thrashing with his riding crop. That is a scene everyone would have to appreciate, and, as a side note to something the movie got right, Saladin really did send his doctors to try and treat the gallant young Christian king.

When the young king finally dies it is a truly sad and touching scene. His sister is there to comfort him and after his death she removes his mask to reveal the ravages of the disease he had kept hidden for so long. However, in his last moments, as he remembered the happier days of his youth, she correctly remarks that he was a man beautiful in every way. That is, in the way that really matters -in the heart. However, as much as I prefer Baldwin, I should get back to the star of the show, Balian of Ibelin. Just to refresh, the real Balian was not illegitimate, he was not French, not a blacksmith and not humble born. He was actually born in the Holy Land, head of a noble family with ambitions of his own, his wife was a Byzantine princess and he did not have a one-night-stand with Princess Sibylle. Oh, did I forget to mention that? The star of the film having an affair with the only babe on screen, boy, I bet no one saw that coming did they? Oddly enough, in the movie (none of this happened in real life) King Baldwin offers to knock off the wicked Guy of Lusignan and marry his sister to Balian. After all, in the movie Sibylle does not love Guy, she does love Balian and this way the Kingdom of Jerusalem will pass to a good guy rather than a murdering thug. The ideal plan right? You would think so, but Balian won't go along with it since our agnostic knight who complains that God does not know him has moral qualms about being responsible for the killing of the wicked and murderous Guy. Oddly enough he didn't seem to have any moral qualms about sleeping with the man's wife! It is just another reason why Balian is such a terrible movie hero. So, ultimately, a maniac takes the throne, provokes a war with Saladin that the Christians cannot win and brings about hundreds or thousands of deaths and the fall of Jerusalem all because Balian does not want to be involved in the death of a bad man who deserved to die anyway. And, I might add, the sole reason given for Balian becoming agnostic is that he went to Calvary and felt no different afterwards. I guess his whole faith hung on visions of angels and a booming voice from the sky telling him everything is okay. For crying out loud, he could have just gone to confession!

Anyway, that is how it works out. The upright King of Jerusalem dies, Baldwin the Leper, and his sister becomes Queen. She automatically makes Guy the new King and he and Reynaud pick a fight with the Muslims by massacring some Arab pilgrims and kidnapping the sister of Saladin (Reynaud was a jerk -most Christians and Muslims would probably agree on this). They are then defeated by Saladin at the Horns of Hattin, after which the Muslim army marches on Jerusalem. It is up to Balian to defend the city even though the local Patriarch advised immediate surrender on any terms. This is another character the films gets wrong, from what I have read the real Patriarch was an upstanding guy. In any event, Balian leads the defense of the city, which is accurate, and does surrender the city after threatening to fight to the death and destroy every holy place therein, which is also true though I think in actuality he only threatened the Muslim sites and I cannot imagine Saladin thinking that might be a good idea (rest assured though Christians come off looking worse there is plenty that would offend devout Muslims as well). Once again, we see how Balian is not the standard sort of hero when his greatest claim to fame is giving up the Holy City. The film then ends on even greater distortions of truth. In fact, Saladin did not let the Christians go free, he ransomed them and anyone who could not pay the ransom was sold into slavery. The film really loses touch with reality when Balian and Sibylle go back to France to live happily ever after where Balian is once again a blacksmith in his same shop (the film ignores the fact that Balian is a wanted criminal here at the start of the film and burns his shop down, so the movie is not even accurate to its own story line) and he turns down an invitation to return to the Holy Land by King Richard I of England. In truth, the real Balian never left and he and Richard were enemies in a bitter dispute over the kingship of Jerusalem, but evidently the film totally abandoned history by the end, throwing up its hands and saying WE JUST DON'T CARE! Of course, what is possibly the least believable thing is that a Medieval princess turned Queen would go off to live in a hut and be the wife of a blacksmith.

Now, with that out of the way, let me say that there were things about this movie that I liked. Ridley Scott knows how to do good battle scenes as we saw in "Gladiator" and this movie has great ones and would have been even better if they had shown the so-called marriage siege at Kerak castle and the Horns of Hattin. There are some great scenes and great lines in this film to compensate for the bad ones. One of my favorites is when the Muslim soldier sees dust on the horizon and announces that "Jerusalem has come" as the Latin knights come marching and riding in, with the True Cross held up front before them and Baldwin the Leper riding in the vanguard. Of course, all of his scenes are touching, and I love how they had his horse trained to kneel so the leper king could step off rather than dismounting in the traditional way. I did not like the way the Templars were portrayed to be a bunch of bloodthirsty fanatics, but there is a lesson to be learned in expecting that God will get you out of any fight just because you are a Christian. What happens at Hattin is a slight parallel to what happened to the Israelites in the Bible when they think they can fight for their own reasons and still gain help from God by carrying the Ark of the Covenant before them, only to have God prove them wrong and allow them to be defeated in spite of the presence of the Ark.

The movie also does show, though only slightly, that there was peace and tolerance in the Latin Kingdom of Jerusalem, that there were real heroes like Baldwin the Leper and that knights were expected to live by a moral code to protect the weak and innocent, which Balian does before the Muslims at Kerak. The film moves well, the only notable exceptions being the time wasted showing Balian spruce up his inherited fiefdom and the boring affair between him and Sibylle. The look of the movie was good, and though I would be wary about recommending it to just anyone because of the anti-religious slant and the gross inaccuracies, I would say it is worth a look if only for the portrayal of the noble Christian King, Baldwin IV and the touching and truthful scenes he is the center of. Once again we see that Hollywood knows all the technical tricks to make a good movie, they just need better stories; better writers.