Veterans Day

Today it is Veterans Day in America, an occasion to honor all those who have served in uniform on the far flung battlefields where duty called them. In the old days it was known as Armistice Day to commemorate the end of hostilities on the western front in World War I. That is a day I have mixed feelings about to say the least. Of course there was every reason for celebration, particularly by the victorious allied nations, but for all parties in that the slaughter had finally stopped. However, at what cost? The loss of millions of lives, the loss of the Romanov, Hapsburg and Hohenzollern monarchies as well as the fatal weakening of several others whether they knew it at the time or not. It is also hard to be too celebratory about the peace considering how short-lived it was. The post-war peace haggled out at Versailles was a far cry from the (much more successful) Congress of Vienna. If anything it only proves what sort of "peace" the world can expect when all the agreements are made a vindictive Frenchman, a socialist Welshman and a preachy American professor. Instead of peace Europe got a ceasefire for a couple of decades and to say that at least the slaughter was over requires turning away from the fact that an even greater and more inhuman slaughter was to follow it. However, as "Veterans Day" we can at least give all due credit to the brave and long-suffering soldiers who shed their blood across Europe, Africa, Asia and the oceans in that war and in all those since, none of which were of their making but which they fought with a courage and tenacity to do pride to all of their nations.

Happy Birthday Guillaume!

H.R.H. Hereditary Grand Duke Guillaume of Luxembourg (possibly the most high-born Giants fan) celebrates his 28th birthday today. Guillaume is the eldest child of Grand Duke Henri of Luxembourg and Grand Duchess Maria Teresa. The Mad Monarchist joins all his future subjects in Luxembourg in wishing the Hereditary Grand Duke a very happy birthday with many more to come!

Monarchist Destinations: Chapultepec Castle

Chapultepec Castle is one of the preeminent sites for monarchists in Mexico and has a much more natural and sleepy beauty than the imposing National Palace in downtown Mexico City. The name 'Chapultepec' comes from the Aztec language meaning 'hill of the grasshoppers'. Construction of the castle first began as a country residence by the Spanish Viceroy Don Bernardo de Galvez, probably best known for his leadership of the Spanish intervention in the American War for Independence. The important port island of Galveston, Texas is named in his honor. The building began in 1725 on the top of the hill where the feathered emperors of the Aztecs once had a summer residence. In the old days it was beyond the confines of Mexico City though thanks to urban sprawl it is well within the city today.

In 1806 the castle was purchased by Mexico City and after the war for independence it became home to the Mexican MilitaryAcademy. During the Mexican-American War it was the site of fierce fighting and one of the most remembered and revered events in Mexican history when a number of young cadets fought to the death against the attacking U.S. Marines. One wrapped himself in the Mexican flag and jumped off the walls to his death rather than surrender. For this they became known as the "Boy Heroes" and a monument honoring them now stands near the castle in Chapultepec park.

However, the castle then was somewhat dissimilar to what stands today and that is thanks to the Emperor Maximilian. When the Hapsburg monarch arrived in Mexico in 1864 he found the National Palace unsatisfactory and ordered Chapultepec Castle refurbished, restored and made into his primary residence. He brought in the best architects from across Mexico and Europe to work on the project and ordered the construction of a new avenue to connect the castle with Mexico City which he named in honor of his wife 'Paseo de la Emperatriz'. Today this, the most significant and famous roadway in Mexico City, is called the 'Paseo de la Reforma' thanks to President Benito Juarez. It was at Chapultepec Castle that many if not most of the important events of the reign of Emperor Maximilian took place and it is still much the way he had left it with portraits of himself, the French Imperial couple and his wife Empress Carlota decorating the walls.

After the tragic fall of Emperor Maximilian Chapultepec Castle went unused for a time and then became in succession an observatory, a military college again, an episcopal residence and finally a presidential residence during the administration of the dictatorial Porfirio Diaz. Other Mexican presidents made use of it and later it became a residence for visiting dignitaries. Finally, in 1939 President Lazaro Cardenas made the castle the national history museum of Mexico. It is, however, still used for official events from time to time. The castle is an awesome sight, sitting like an island of serenity in the hustle and bustle of Mexico City, still seemingly haunted by the memory of the tragic couple Maximilian and Carlota.

Crown Princess Matthilda of Belgium and Mexican First Lady Calderon in Chapultepec Castle below the portrait of Mexico's Belgian Empress Carlota

Addition to the Post Below

I feel I must add something to the post below I had intended to say when I decided to write it but which slipped my mind when I actually got to it. Keeping in mind what I said below I must also point out that I am adamantly opposed to the principle of putting the monarchy up for a vote in a referendum. I object to it (though were it done I certainly would have participated to help effect the end I desired) on principle because I believe in the concept of legitimate authority. To be specific I believe that the Crown is the legitimate authority of Australia and no vote, in which the public can be or can be attempted to be manipulated by a biased media with an agenda and dishonest politicians can legitimately say that H.M. Elizabeth II is not the Queen of Australia. I think that even holding the referendum itself (keeping in mind what I said about it being a credit to the Australian constitution that the government could not decide this on its' own -I'm saying the decision should be beyond all) is a product of the degenerated "fast food" culture of the modern first world. The referendum and the thinking behind it, to a very large extent at least, I think is a symptom of this culture in which everything is viewed in terms of immediate gratification and everything is seen as disposable. So, even something as ancient as the monarchy, can have its existence in Australia subject to the whim of a majority which can decide to retain or discard the Crown if at any moment it fails to please them. To many people today do not appreciate the ancient, mystical nature of the monarchy and view like anything else in their lives, which they can accept or dispose of at will. This very attitude robs monarchy of one of its greatest assets which is the ability to set itself apart and view things dispassionately because it keeps the monarchy in a constant state of crisis-mode for fear that any little thing could be blown out of proportion to cause the public to vote to discard the monarchy as they would any other passing trend which held them fascinated for a time but which they quickly tired of to move on to the next 'latest' thing. The world today is suffering from severe A.D.D. and it pains me that any monarchy should be subject to such whims and fancies. Am I clear?

Anniversary of the Australian Referendum

I had not planned to post on this subject as there are plenty of others who have, however, somewhat after the fact I decided that contemporary monarchist victories are so few and far between that I'd give my two cents. The vote of November 6, 1999 rejecting an Australian republic was a victory for the monarchy and should be celebrated as such. However, I may be paranoid, but it is no time for monarchists to rest on their laurels and I'm proud of the Australian monarchists for not doing so. The number of those supportive of a republic in the land of Oz are still far too high and if the republican traitors had managed to come up with some coherent plan as to what sort of republic they were advocating I fear they might have done better. In some ways they lost because they could not tell Australians what sort of republic they were for and why they were for it. Their only real message was that they were against the Australian constitutional monarchy.

Loyal Australians have also kept their noses to the grindstone because the republicans have not accepted defeat. Like "democrats" the world over they champion democracy on the assumption that the people can be made to agree with them and when the people do not they quickly call for a new vote and another new vote, re-packaging and re-branding their snake oil until 51% of the public will buy it. Fortunately, the Australian government (which is actually quite different from the British constitutional monarchy despite what the republicans would have Australians believe) does not allow for constitutional changes without the consent of the public. Were that not the case Australia might have already been reduced to dreary republicanism by a simple decision of the legislature. So, there is at least a fighting chance and so far the Australian monarchists have been putting up a damn good fight and I salute them for it.

As usual though, you have one side fighting like the gallant knights of old and the other side fighting like rhetorical terrorists. Probably the tactic that angers me the most, and which I would think proud Australians would find downright insulting to themselves and their ancestors, is the tired line that by being a constitutional monarchy, sharing a sovereign with Great Britain, modern Australia is somehow immature and only by becoming a republic will they show how they have "grown up". In the first place, there should be no discussion of "independence". The Australians as a people have always been an independent lot, growing out of the rugged determination required to tame and settle their fierce continent. Even as part of the British Empire there was something unique about Australia, just as their was about every other member. When I hear someone say that the Australian monarchy is some sort of sign of immaturity I cannot help but wonder if these same limp-wristed republican traitors would call "immature" the men who stormed the beaches of Gallipoli, who held off the triumphant legions of Marshal Rommel in Tobruk or in more recent decades who crawled into communist booby-trapped tunnels in south Vietnam.

The history of Australia and its place in the British Empire cannot be changed, cannot be erased and it should be embraced as it was that history that made the Commonwealth of Australia the 'young and free' nation that it is today. I was glad to see that Prince William will be visiting Australia in the not-to-distant future and I hope a proper welcome is given to Australia's future king and that it will still be around when his turn comes. If any are so obsessed with republicanism as to turn their back on all of Australian history I would suggest a quick trip north to Indonesia, Taiwan or Vietnam would be a quicker and easier way for them to content themselves.

Monarchist Profile: General Christophe de Lamoriciere

The name of General Christophe Leon Louis Juchault de Lamorciere may not be an extremely well known one, but in his own time he was one of the most famous and prominent religious monarchists in Europe. He was born in Nantes in 1806 and, coming from a military family, he entered the army as a young man, becoming a lieutenant of engineers and being posted to Algeria where he earned a great reputation for his skill, personal bravery and a polite and friendly attitude that won him many friends among the native Arabs. He was so popular and respected that, almost alone among French officers, he could travel freely through native areas with no weapons at all. In 1835 he was promoted to lieutenant colonel of zouaves and won steady promotion thereafter for his heroism in battle. In 1843 he was made a lieutenant general and a few years later was even appointed temporary governer of Algeria. After winning another spectacular victory in 1847 Algeria was pacified and, considering his work done, he retired from the army.

Lamoriciere was very much known for his royalist opinions as he dabbled in French politics and as such he was very much opposed to the presidency of Louis Napoleon Bonaparte. When Louis became Emperor Napoleon III he had Lamorciere arrested and later exiled for 9 years, going to England and Germany before settling down in Belgium. He befriended Charles de Montalembert and this fired his religious devotion which was to remain with him forever after. When the Papal States came under threat from liberal forces in Italy the Blessed Pope Pius IX appointed the Belgian prelate Msgr. Xavier de Merode Minister of War and charged him with finding someone to lead the Papal army in the coming crisis; a crisis that would determine whether the Pope would remain a temporal monarch as well as a spiritual leader or if he would become a prisoner of the united Italy. The very Catholic and very monarchist Lamoriciere was an obvious choice, also being Merode's cousin.

For General Lamoriciere to even accept the post was an act of considerably courage and selflessness. The odds arrayed against the Papal States were so huge nothing short of a miracle could save them and given his illustrious military reputation many generals would not have wanted to accept a command that was doomed to failure. However, Lamoriciere accepted the job and did the best he could with the small budget and small army of international volunteers he had to work with. In a throw-back to his days in North Africa he even outfitted the papal troops in zouave uniforms and the high command of the Papal army looked very much like that of a French legitimist royalist movement. Lamoriciere worked feverishly but before a year was up it was clear that the liberal nationalists would overwhelm his tiny army. Nonetheless, he put up a brave and skillful fight, if for nothing else than to show the world that the Papal States were being conquered against their will.

With only 8,000 men he confronted 50,000 Italian liberals at Castelfidardo on September 18, 1860. It was a defeat, though a gallant one, for the Papal forces. Ancona surrendered soon after and, feeling that he had done his best and could do no more, resigned his command and returned to France, refusing all honors offered to him on the grounds that he had not achieved victory. At the pressing of the Pope, he did accept the honor of the Supreme Order of Christ; the highest papal order, for his service. He spent the rest of his life in religious study and charitable work; building a church at his own expense for a poor parish and founding a Catholic school and orphanage which he financially supported. His only son predeceased him and leaving only daughters his family name died with him on September 11, 1865. His is, nonetheless, remembered very well in certain circles for his military service to France and his command of the Papal army in the struggle against liberal revolutionaries in defense of the papal monarchy.

Royal Profile: Princess Caroline Ferdinande de Bourbon

HRH Princess Caroline Ferdinande of Bourbon Two-Sicilies, Duchess de Berry certainly had a very colorful and eventful life. Even with all of the ups and downs I cannot help but marvel at the audacity of the woman. She was born Princess Maria Carolina Ferdinanda Luisa of Bourbon Two-Sicilies on November 5, 1798 to the Sicilian King Francis I and Queen Maria Clementina of Austria. In 1816 French and Sicilian diplomats arranged a marriage for her to Charles Ferdinand, Duc d'Berry, the nephew of the French King Louis XVIII. Their marriage was fruitful, producing three daughters, and it came as quite a blow to everyone when the Duc d'Berry was stabbed while he and the Princess were leaving an opera performance. The duke died of his wounds shortly thereafter but he had left his wife with child and seven months later Princess Caroline gave birth to the boy called the "miracle child" Henri Duc d'Bordeaux, better known by his later title the Comte de Chambord. As the direct male heir of King Louis XIV, little Henri was set to make Princess Caroline the future Queen Mother of France.

Everything was upset though with the overthrow of the much-maligned King Charles X (the man who famously said he would rather saw wood than be a constitutional monarch) in the July Revolution which unseated the senior Royal Family line. Princess Caroline was forced to go into exile in Great Britain. However, anyone who counted her out was sorely mistaken. She was determined to see the old royal line restored and her son crowned King of France. He had already been proclaimed and she always stressed to him and those around her that he was the legitimate French sovereign. Family connections helped her cross the continent back to Naples. Soon she was busy with a conspiracy to launch a royalist uprising in France to restore her son, the nominal King Henri V of France and Navarre.

Her primary confederate in this enterprise was the Vicomte de Saint-Priest. In 1832 the two of them led an attempted royalist rebellion in the famously loyal Vendee region and in Provence against the Orleanist "King of the French" Louis-Philippe. Unfortunately for them the would-be counterrevolution was a complete failure and both were arrested. Princess Caroline was arrested and thrown in prison but released the following year when she gave birth to the daughter of the Italian Duke della Grazia whom she had married in secret after returning to Naples. The two of them bought a villa and settled down to as normal a family life as possible, having three more children, until the nationalist unification of Italy forced them into hard times. The Princess and would-be Queen Mother of France finally died in Styria, Austria in 1870; the last person to attempt to restore the Bourbon monarchy by counterrevolution.

The Legend of Maximilian's Gold

By 1867 the Mexican Empire was in its death throes but the core of committed loyalists around Emperor Ferdinand Joseph Maximilian refused to accept defeat. The Empress Carlota had gone to Europe to try to rally international assistance and Maximilian tried to ensure that the treasury did not fall into rebel hands and could be used to continue to fund the imperial cause. The Emperor chose four Austrian officers and between fifteen and twenty Mexican loyalists who he could trust to load fifteen wagons with an estimated $10 million in gold, silver and jewels.

It was considered too risky to try to take the treasury across Mexico to a Mexican port since so much of the countryside was infested with rebel bandits. Instead, it was decided to get the treasure out of Mexico to neutral territory as soon as possible and then load it on a ship where it could be taken to a safe place. The Austrians and Mexicans headed for the port of Galveston, Texas. After making it safely through the wilds of northern Mexico on an erratic course to throw off any pursuit the party crossed the Rio Grande into Texas and camped at Presidio del Norte. There they met six former Confederate soldiers from Missouri.

At the end of the American Civil War many Confederates had gone to Mexico rather than surrender to Yankee rule. Many had even fought in the Mexican Imperial Army. Because of these close political ties and sympathies the Austrians, Mexicans and Missourians soon became good friends. The Austrian officers did not reveal the truth about their cargo, but they did ask the Confederates to ride as escort with them to Indianola to guard against bandits or Indian attacks. As it turned out, the Austrians were right to be suspicious as poverty and the chance of fabulous wealth can easily overpower subtle wartime alliances.

At the border of Crane and Upton Counties, near where route 385 is today, at Castle Gap the Missourians discovered the truth about what was in those fifteen wagons belonging to the Emperor of Mexico that they had been escorting. Immediately overpowered by temptation the Missourians shot and killed all of the Austrian officers and their Mexican drivers. The six former Confederates buried the treasure there at Castle Gap, taking only as much gold as they could carry on their persons to pay their way until they could return for the rest of it. They ran off the animals and burned the wagons over the spot they had buried the treasure and then rode off toward San Antonio. However, the strange story of the Emperor’s treasure was far from over.

As the six soldiers turned bandits rode back to civilization one of them fell ill at Fort Concho. With all that loot waiting behind them and the gold they had on them burning holes in their pockets the other five Missourians were in no mood to wait on a sick man and left the comrade behind as they rode on. However, the fear of being cut out of his share of the treasure was powerful medicine and before the sick man had fully recovered he got back on his horse and set out after his comrades. To his shock he found them sooner than he expected; not far down the road he discovered their bodies at the spot where they had been attacked by Indians and killed to the last man. This meant that this one sickly Confederate was then the only man alive who knew the location of the lost treasure of Emperor Maximilian.

However, this man suddenly decided that he had had enough of the wild west and as he could not possible take all the treasure out by himself he gave up on Texas and headed for home in Missouri. The fact that he was still very ill also influenced his decision. Yet, bad luck seemed to plague the old soldier. He fell in with a group of men who, unbeknown to him, were horse thieves wanted by the law. One night the law caught up with them when a posse from Denton captured them and took them to jail; including the Missouri Confederate whom they assumed was just another member of the gang of horse thieves. The doctor at Denton informed the fading soldier that he had contracted a disease and would soon die.

This Denton doctor had been very good to the dying Missourian and so, with no hope of ever claiming the treasure himself, he told the doctor the tale about he and his buddies discovering the gold and jewels, killing the Austrians and Mexicans and hiding it at Castle Gap. He told him how his partners had been killed by Indians and drew a crude map for the doctor and tried as best he could to describe the area where they had buried the treasure so the doctor who comforted him in his final days could find it. The Missourian died and a few months later in 1868 the doctor from Denton organized a group of men and rode off toward Castle Gap to find the treasure of the Mexican Emperor.

The doctor and his men rode all over the Crane and Upton County line at Castle Gap but to their great disappointment could never find any trace of the buried treasure. Tales and legends of the buried gold of Emperor Maximilian are still told across Texas to this day. Many people have searched for the secret cache and there are several versions of the story about what exactly happened. Some believe that Maximilian never had such riches himself at the end of his reign and that the entire story is a fabrication (probably the most realistic point of view). Others, however, believe that the gold was found by someone else who knew how to keep a secret while still others believe that the lost treasure of Emperor Maximilian is still buried in Texas today waiting for someone to find it and confirm the legend to be true.

Tension Between Monarchies in SE Asia

The two remaining monarchies in Indochina, the Kingdom of Thailand and the Kingdom of Cambodia are again in a political stand-off. For some time now there have been minor skirmishes on the shared border of the two countries regarding territorial disputes and shouting between the two governments. However, things have recently become worse when the Cambodian government appointed the ousted former Thai prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra to an economic advisory council (Shinawatra is a telecommunications mogul). Cambodia has also said that they consider the former Thai PM a political refugee and have refused Thai requests for his extradition. The outraged government of Thailand took this as an intentional slap in the face and have recalled their ambassador to Cambodia, effectively breaking off diplomatic relations with the Khmer monarchy -though I'm sure it is not quite as serious as it sounds; they are certainly still keeping in-touch so to speak. It pains me greatly that these two countries should continue this feuding when they are both endangered species. However, I also feel it essential to point out that the government in Cambodia is effectively a communist one in all but name. Ever since the fall of Pol Pot at the time of the Vietnamese invasion the Cambodian government has been dominated by Prime Minister Hun Sen, an ally of the communist Vietnamese and the leader of the Cambodian People's Party. He is a communist himself though he does not openly call himself by that title anymore and he has seen to it that some national emergency always arises which enables him to deploy troops around election time to ensure that he is reelected every time.

Mad Rant: "Radical" Islam

In light of the recent events at Ft Hood, I thought the time as good as any other to discuss "radical" Islam. First of all, my own experiences prompt me to dismiss any effort by some to judge by the group when it comes to Muslims. I was once on a tour with a group of Muslim families who were obviously western converts and they were the most ill-mannered, ill-behaved, flat out rude bunch of people I've ever had to endure. Yet, while I was at university I had several classes with an African Muslim from Benin and he was the most polite, friendly, hard working student I ever met while I was there. He earned my sincere respect and was often the only other person besides myself to speak up in defense of traditional morals and values. So, to judge by the group is simply absurd.

Those Muslims who have carried out terrorist attacks are certainly enemies of civilization, both in terms of their goals and in terms of how they pursue them, launching cowardly surprise attacks on innocent people. These are the same people who are not only the enemies of my people and my own religion but also my politics; they are the same stripe as those who destroyed the monarchies of Iran, Iraq, Egypt, Libya in terms of their political enemies if nothing else and wish to do the same to virtually all others even so staunchly Islamic a monarchy as Saudi Arabia. It would be totally wrong though to paint all Muslims with the same brush. In fact, there are ways in which I think the Christian world could take some lessons from the devout Muslims who are not terrorist fanatics. I remember an interview with His Highness the Aga Khan in which he spoke of Muslims being different from "most" Christians in that Muslims cannot seperate their religion from how they live their lives as it touches every aspect of their lives. That should be the same attitude for Christians as well and yet so many regard their faith as little more than a flag, a form of identification; something they 'are' but which has no bearing on how they live their lives.

I can also, to some extent, understand Muslim outrage at "western culture" as much of it today outrages me as well. One item I will never forget is hearing on the news, in the aftermath of the U.S. and coalition victory of the previous regime in Iraq, that for the first time in Iraqi history the "Playboy" channel was available on Iraqi TV. I can fully understand a devout Iraqi Muslim being quite outraged at the introduction of that smut which so many in the west hold up as an example of "freedom of speech". Like most religious people Muslims share many if not most of the same core traditional values as Christians. However, that understanding does not equal sympathy with how every individual chooses to deal with confronting such threats. I am also certainly not in the same camp as the multi-culturalists. I am all for learning about other cultures, appreciating them and so on, in fact I pride myself in being able to find something admirable in every people around the world. However, what is pushed for by those shouting for multiculturalism today is actually the destruction of these cultures; mixing them all together until all lose their value and all fall prey to the dull, mechanical, Bolshevik mono-culture of the liberal, elite "one world" types.

That is another reason why my zeal to defeat the current crop of terrorists does not cause me to paint all Muslims with the same brush. Most Muslims are not terrorists and I do not regard most Muslims as a threat to my religion. The greater threat is the enemy of all religions; the Bolshevik, secularist, atheist, agnostic liberal elites who look upon all relgions as hinderances to their one-world, socialist utopia. I have never seen Muslims protesting Christian symbols in my country but I see the secularists attacking them constantly. I remember a case of a Muslim in Italy protesting the presence of crucifixes on the walls of Italian classrooms but I think it telling that the person in question was a Scottish convert to Islam who had moved to Italy. For that, I have no sympathy at all -another reason why I am no multi-culturalist. If a Muslim is offended by Catholic icons he shouldn't move to the very country where the Pope lives! In the same way, someone who is offended by Buddha statues should probably not move to Thailand. If one is to move to a foreign country one must be prepared to accept the traditions of the majority and not expect them to change to please the foreign minority, though I realize that has been all the rage lately in many places.

I am a pan-monarchist and I do not want to see Muslim extremists marching in London heaping insult on the British Queen and culture. I would be very pleased to see Muslims restoring their own countries to greatness with the restoration of the great Muslim monarchies of the past. I also think the current problems reveal what a disaster it was for the west and the world as a whole when the monarchies of Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt and so on were destroyed. I would like to see more forceful work done toward their restoration though I am at least pleased that in Iraq and Afghanistan monarchist parties have been able to compete in the political process for the first time since their monarchies were destroyed. The world would be a better place in every way and a more peaceful place if these monarchies were restored to their former glory. I have my particular beliefs and opinions but I am also in favor of religion in general, in opposition to the liberal secularists and I am a pan-monarchist in favor of monarchy in general in opposition to leftist republican rule and, of course, I am ..... The Mad Monarchist.

A Prayer Request for the Soldiers of Ft Hood

Today an unprecedented mass shooting took place at the US Army post of Fort Hood, Texas the largest military post in the United States, capable of sustaining two full armored divisions. The primary gunman was, shockingly enough, an officer, a major Malik Nadal Hasan (a mental health specialist no less) who was set to be assigned to duty in Iraq, who was killed by a responding police officer who was himself killed in the exchange of gunfire. Two other men have been arrested as suspects and there are accounts of multiple gunmen in an attack that was evidently well-planned and done execution style. The current reports are of 12 dead and as many as 31 wounded. Fort Hood was established in the 1930's as an armored training base since the terrain of the area was similar to that of northern Germany. The fort was named after Confederate General John Bell Hood. The Mad Monarchist would ask all readers to keep the soldiers of Ft Hood and the victims' families in their prayers on this very sad day.

*Update: The commanding general at Fort Hood has now said that the alleged gunman, Major Malik Nadal Hasan, is in fact still alive, in custody in intensive care. Further, the policewoman who shot Hasan who was also reported killed is also still alive, in very serious but stable condition. The two suspects arrested have been released and the military police is now saying that Hasan acted alone. He was purportedly upset about the U.S. fighting Muslim forces overseas and was in the midst of a legal fight with the army over his deployment to Iraq as he stated to friends that it was wrong for Muslims (such as himself) to fight other Muslims (like the terrorists). Something was obviously seriously wrong with this guy, and I can only say that if he was picked on for being a Muslim in today's situation, how much harder will things be now thanks to his actions for the Muslims in America who have no sympathy or support for the terrorist fanatics killing in the name of their religion? This is a tragedy for everyone.

Monarch Profile: King Christian IX of Denmark

King Christian IX of Denmark is the common ancestor of most of the crowned heads of Europe today, a fact which accounts for the King being known, even in his own time, as the "father-in-law of Europe". He was born in Gottorp on April 8, 1818 and was not heir to anything being the fourth son of Duke Friedrich Wilhelm of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Gluecksburg and Princess Louise Caroline of Hesse. He grew up in Denmark and attended the Copenhagen Military Academy and once courted the future British Queen Victoria. In the end he married a niece of King Christian VIII; Princess Louise of Hesse-Kassel. Denmark faced a succession crisis when the senior branch of the royal family was set to die out with King Frederick VII, a hard-drinking and somewhat odd but jovial monarch who had no legitimate offspring. The matter was made worse by infighting within the family and the Germans anxious to take advantage of the situation to expand. Fighting even broke out between Denmark, Schleswig-Holstein and Prussia and the threat was real that it could revive and even spread.

To avoid this the great powers of Europe got together and it was decided to make Christian heir-to-the-throne of Denmark in 1847, mostly by virtue of his wife's family ties. In 1863 King Frederick VII died and Christian IX became King of Denmark. That same year Frederick of Augustenburg claimed Schleswig and Holstein and soon Denmark was at war with Prussia and Austria in 1864. Denmark was swiftly defeated, losing her southernmost provinces to Prussia and sparking a wave of quite unjustified unpopularity against Christian IX. He took his role as Danish monarch very seriously and had done everything in his power to save the situation but opposed by the masterful military machine of Prussia there was scant reasons to expect success.

King Christian IX was also a monarch who took monarchy seriously and looked with disgust at the wave of liberalism sweeping Europe which did not leave Denmark untouched as calls came for greater democracy and a more constitutional monarchy. In an effort to stave off this eventuality he supported the authoritarian prime minister Jacob Estrup who held power from 1875 to 1894. In his homelife his marriage to Queen Louise was certainly successful as they produced six children between 1843 and 1858. His eldest, Crown Prince Frederick, would become King Frederick VIII of Denmark after him; Princess Alexandra who married King Edward VII of Great Britain; Prince Wilhelm who became King George I of Greece, Princess Dagmar who married Czar Alexander III of Russia, Princess Thyra who married the Duke of Cumberland and Prince Waldemar who married a Bourbon-Orleans princess.

Domestic politics were a constant problem for King Christian as his government tried to suppress the spread of liberalism through press restrictions, firearm restrictions and increased powers for the police. However, he also tried to be reasonable such as by giving Iceland a constitution but keeping the island under Danish control. Toward the end of his reign there was no stopping the emergence of a parliamentary monarchy under the opposition party though the King did see to it that the upper house held the most power. He also gained some popular prestige by the introduction of old age pensions, unemployment assistance and tax breaks for families. Christian IX died at the royal palace in Copenhagen on January 29, 1906 at the age of 87 when he was succeeded by his son. His more liberal son would lift most of his father's restrictions and put Denmark on a different course of development.

Danish State Visit to Vietnam

The official events have kicked off with the formal start of the Danish Royal Family's state visit to the Socialist Republic of Vietnam. Communist Party General-Secretary Nong Duc Manh was on hand for the festivities as was the current incarnation of national founder Ho Chi Minh, President Nguyen Minh Triet. Their were reviews of the troops of the People's Army of Vietnam, dinners and of course the ceremonial wreath laying at the tomb of President Ho Chi Minh, founding dictator of the communist regime. Now, I point this out not to criticize HM Queen Margrethe II, who is one of my favorites, she has nothing to do with these sort of decisions and the governments handle everything; this is part of the usual diplomatic routine. However, I also cannot deny that it pains me to see someone like Queen Margrethe II, or any such leader, paying hommage to a brutal, murderous communist dictator like Ho Chi Minh. Off-hand I cannot think of any other such state that insists on similar sychophancy. Nor are the crimes of the Ho Chi Minh regime confined to the past. Recently Rome Reports did a story on the continued oppression of Catholics in Vietnam. They are, of course, not alone as anyone is persecuted who speaks out against the communist party or, as is more often the case, anyone who is suspected of being in opposition. The Catholic Church has tried to assure the leaders in Hanoi, as they have tried in Beijing, that they are not a threat to the local political system (they probably cannot understand why communist governments cannot accept them but ignore them as is standard procedure in the west) but there remains no official diplomatic relations between Vietnam and the Holy See because the Communist Party sees all religion as a threat. Monarchs like Queen Margrethe II must often make the best of bad situations, and congratulations to Her Majesty for having the strength to do it, but I would also like everyone to remember the true nature of the man and the government that was being honored in Hanoi.

MM Video: Ming Dynasty

The Ming Dynasty was the last Han Chinese dynasty of Imperial China. The Ming, under the first Emperor Hongwu, came to power with the decline and fall of the Mongol Yuan Dynasty. The Ming era is often considered the peak of Chinese government efficiency. It was also during the Ming reign that the famous "Treasure Fleet" of Admiral Zheng He made its epic voyage. The Ming Dynasty declined, fell into turmoil and was finally overthrown by the Manchu Qing Dynasty that would see the Chinese Empire to its end.

Shameless Plug

Fourth Monarchist Victim in Iran

The Radical Royalist in Australia reports on the fourth Iranian monarchist to be sentanced to death in the recent crackdown. This is very important, monarchists everywhere should be outraged by this and all pan-monarchists should respond and make their feelings known! Check the article for a link to sign the petition for the release of Iranian political prisoners, many monarchists being among them.

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.