Consort Profile: Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh

HRH Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh, consort to HM Queen Elizabeth II of the UK etc has the distinction of being the oldest and longest serving spouse to any British monarch as well as being one of my personal favorites. Prince Philip was born on the Greek island of Corfu on June 10, 1921 to Prince Andrew of Greece and Denmark and Princess Alice of Battenberg. When his uncle, King Constantine I of Greece, was forced to abdicate the newly imposed military government forced Prince Andrew and his family to leave Greece and move to Paris.

Prince Philip was educated in France and later Great Britain under the guidance of his uncle Lord Louis, Earl Mountbatten. His sisters all married into German families, his mother fell prey to mental illness and was placed in an asylum and his father moved to Monaco. Philip went to school in Germany as well for a time but later moved back to Great Britain and in 1939 joined the Royal Navy, graduating from Dartmouth the following year. During World War II he saw extensive service in the Indian Ocean and the Mediterranean where he earned promotion and a number of decorations before seeing out the end of the conflict with the British Pacific Fleet.

It was during these years that Earl Mountbatten introduced him to Princess Elizabeth. The two fell for each other quickly and began corresponding during their time apart. Prince Philip asked to marry the Princess in 1946 but HM King George VI had them wait a year and if, after that time, they still wished to the couple would have his blessing. In July of 1947 the engagement was announced and Prince Philip renounced his Greek and Danish titles, converted from Greek Orthodoxy to Anglicanism and became a British subject with the surname Mountbatten. He was raised to royal status by King George VI the day before his wedding which took place on November 20, 1947. Prince Philip and his new bride were both made members of the Privy Council owing to worsening health of the King.

A son and heir was born to the couple in 1948, Prince Charles, followed in 1950 by the Princess Royal Anne. By this time Prince Philip had returned to naval service, working at the Admiralty and with the Mediterranean Fleet before being given command of the sloop-of-war HMS Magpie in 1950. In 1952 King George VI passed away and Princess Elizabeth became Queen Elizabeth II. Prince Philip attended her coronation but was not crowned with her as that is not done with male consorts in England. In the years that followed the British Royal Family grew with Prince Andrew being born in 1960 and Prince Edward in 1964.

Prince Philip has been recognized by the Queen herself and many others for being a source of strength and support to the monarch. He also has is critics and is often accused of being gaffe prone or making insensitive jokes. Supporters like myself see this as a refreshingly honest and good natured sense of humor and although there may be some who are critical of Prince Philip there are also some natives in the south Pacific who worship him as a god -so it all balances out I suppose. Prince Philip has spoken out about the nature of the monarchy as an institution of public service and he has certainly lived up to that ideal, undertaking more engagements than any other member of the Royal Family after his daughter Princess Royal Anne, despite his rather advanced age and some heart problems.

As far as royal consorts go, and it always seems to be a more difficult job for male consorts, one would be hard pressed to find one to surpass Prince Philip. He has been a loyal husband, a devoted father, hard working supporter of the British and Commonwealth people, a defender of the monarchy and a very kind and good natured man; old fashioned, dignified but able to put people at ease. Even though he is fast approaching the age of 89 he is still the hardest working man in the British monarchy. God bless him and God save the Duke of Edinburgh!

The Face of the Foes in Thailand

(left: the criminal Thaksin Shinawatra, right: Head of the Privy Council Prem Tinsulanonda)

Due to the efforts of revolutionary agitators to spread confusion, it seems appropriate to be blunt about the two sides at odds in the current crisis in Thailand. Basically you have the red-shirted UDD on one side and the yellow-shirted PAD on the other. The reds are supporters of former populist PM Thaksin Shinawatra of the now-banned People's Power Party which ran on a typically vague platform of more social welfare programs and greater "democracy". More often they (and their current manifestations) have been known for what they are against; namely the royalist-dominated Thai military high command, the amount of influence of the King and aristocrats in government and of course the PAD which represents this. They have singled out Privy Council head Prem Tinsulanonda in what is widely regarded as a way to attack the King of Thailand without being subject to criminal prosecution.

General Prem, on the other hand, is widely known for his staunch support of the King and of royal rights and past royal programs. The yellow-shirted PAD whom the reds oppose is often accused of being "fascist" (by people in red shirts with "people's" and "democratic" in all their titles -go figure) since they include most of the traditional leaders of the country, aristocrats and the like, and have stated that they favor limits to absolute democracy (a good idea) in favor of a more careful selection process overseen by the monarch. The Reds naturally howl that if the changes favored by the PAD were put into effect most of the Parliament would end up being appointed by the King. Not surprisingly I see nothing frightening about that scenario. Toward this end the PAD founded the New Politics Party, essentially a new royalist party, to oppose the UDD and their allied red-shirted "For Thais Party" which also preaches populist socialism.

The UDD have been very adept at painting themselves as the righteous patriotic "good guys" but for anyone with any knowledge of southeast Asian politics or the situation in Thailand they cannot fool anyone. It is their leadership which is constantly arrested for defaming the Thai monarchy, it is they who adopt the revolutionary symbolism and use the traditional commie tactics of trying to incite the masses with promises of "democracy" and more government hand-outs while denouncing their enemies as "fascists" for favoring a greater role for the monarchy and the traditional authorities of the country. One side preaches a vague socialist populism, the other preaches royalism. For anyone from the monarchist camp it is no great problem deciding who the heroes and villains are in this unfolding drama.


ข้าวรพุทธเจ้า
เอามโนและศิรกราน
นบพระภูมิบาล บุญญะดิเรก
เอกบรมจักริน
พระสยามินทร์
พระยศยิ่งยง
เย็นศิระเพราะพระบริบาล
ผลพระคุณ ธ รักษา
ปวงประชาเป็นศุขสานต์
ขอบันดาล
ธ ประสงค์ใด
จงสฤษดิ์
ดังหวังวรหฤทัย
ดุจจะถวายชัย ชโย

MM Video: William of Orange

Willem III, Prince of Orange, Stadtholder of the United Netherlands came to power in 1667 and faced a number of problems. An expanding France was a threat to the west and republicans opposed to the rule of the House of Orange were a problem at home. However, Willem successfully thwarted the French and became the Protestant champion of Europe. He married Princess Mary Stuart of Great Britain (daughter of King James II) and in 1688 invaded England with a Dutch army to depose his father-in-law and take the British Crown, welcomed by the Protestant Parliament. He defeated an effort by King James II to restore himself in Ireland at the battle of the Boyne and ruled as King William III of Great Britain and Ireland for the rest of his life. Absent for long periods while he fought the French in the Low Countries his liberal supporters in Britain set up the modern style of British constitutional monarchy as we know it today. There were successes at sea but defeats on land nonetheless, William III managed to make peace with France before his death in 1702. He was succeeded by Queen Anne in Britain and Willem IV as Stadtholder of the Netherlands. His legacy is most strongly felt today in Ireland by the Protestant supporters of the union with Britain, known because of William III as the "Orange" party.

Shameless Plug

Victoria Jackson "There's A Communist Living in the White House"

You may as well laugh as cry...

Birth of the Second Mexican Empire

It was on this day in 1864 that HIRH Archduke Maximilian von Hapsburg was elected Emperor of Mexico. Ironically, it was almost exactly one year later, on April 9, 1865, that General Robert E. Lee surrendered his Confederate army in Virginia, effectively ending the American War Between the States. In many ways this surrender was the doom of Maximilian and his Mexican Empire as the United States was then able to bring her full attention to supporting the republicans in Mexico and threatening invasion if the French did not withdraw their forces.

Favorite Royal Images: Princess Bopha Devi

HRH Princess Norodom Bopha Devi of Cambodia is the daughter of HM King Norodom Sihanouk and the half-sister of HM King Norodom Sihamoni. She entered the Royal Ballet at an early age and became a famous dancer. She also served as Minister of Culture and Fine Arts.

Papal Profile: Pope John XXIII

The man who would be Pope John XXIII was born Angelo Giuseppe Roncalli in the province of Bergamo in Italy on November 25, 1881. The first son in a family of 14, his father was simple sharecropper but the Roncalli family did have aristocratic ancestry. A kind and pious youth Angelo joined the Church and was ordained priest in 1904. During the First World War he was drafted into the Royal Italian Army, attaining the rank of sergeant, in which he served as a medic and a chaplain. After gaining some experience in Church administration Pope Benedict XV appointed him president of the Society for the Propagation of the Faith in 1921.

Father Roncalli began gaining extensive diplomatic experience when Pope Pius XI made him Apostolic Visitor to Bulgaria in 1925. It was also Pius XI who raised him to the rank of bishop. In the following years Bishop Roncalli carried out diplomatic missions to Turkey, Greece and France before being appointed Cardinal-Priest and Patriarch of Venice. In place of the Most Christian Kings it was French President Vincent Auriol who presented the new cardinal with his red hat at the Elysee Palace. In 1958 Pope Pius XII passed away and Angelo Cardinal Roncalli was chosen to succeed him, taking the name John XXIII. The Catholic world had been through so much with Pius XII that it seemed no one could replace him, yet John XXIII quickly won over his global flock and many outside of the Church as well.

Pius XII and John XXIII could not have been more different in their style and background. Pius XII had come from an old aristocratic family of the Roman Black Nobility, wealthy, genteel and well connected. When photographed he would always turn his head to gaze off into the distance and carried himself in a very detached, saintly and monarchial fashion. The poor farm boy John XXIII lacked the learning and illustrious lineage of his predecessor but he had the common touch. When photographed he would look right into the camera and smile, he referred to himself as “I” rather than “We” and had a very jolly and approachable style about him. Still, because of his age, most expected John XXIII to be a temporary pope (himself included) but he was to have a great impact on the Church.

This impact was, of course, his surprising call for a Second Vatican Council, which he obviously felt important but which he also kept his distance from. This has proven to be one of the most controversial and even divisive gatherings in the history of the Catholic Church. Overall one would be hard-pressed to explain what has improved because of it. In many cases the Council was used a way for liberals to get their foot in the door of the Church and the next thing you know the hippies have taken over and Catholics are holding hands at mass. Because of this Pope John XXIII has often come under attack by some ignorant folk who take him for some sort of revolutionary when nothing could be farther from the truth.

True enough, he had a more ‘common man’ style than previous popes but he was also the last pontiff to employ the full traditional style of papal ceremony including his traditional 5-hour long coronation. In regards to his opinion on politics he could not have been more clear, calling upon the memory of Pope Pius XI who had a great impact on him. In one of my favorite encyclicals (Mater Et Magistra) of John XXIII he writes, “Pope Pius XI further emphasized the fundamental opposition between Communism and Christianity, and made it clear that no Catholic could subscribe even to moderate Socialism. The reason is that Socialism is founded on a doctrine of human society which is bounded by time and takes no account of any objective other than that of material well-being. Since, therefore, it proposes a form of social organization which aims solely at production, it places too severe a restraint on human liberty, at the same time flouting the true notion of social authority”. God bless him I say.

Pope John XXIII would not live to see the Second Vatican Council concluded. He died on June 3, 1963 at the age of 81 and was later succeeded by Pope Paul VI. The popularity the warm and jovial pontiff earned continues to endure to this day and on September 3, 2000 he was beatified as Blessed John XXIII by Pope John Paul II.

Monarchist Profile: Charles Armand Marquis de la Rouerie

Is that monarchist wearing a Continental Army uniform? Yes he is and the life of Charles Armand Tuffin, Marquis de la Rouërie displays the original alliance of the United States of America and the Kingdom of France. Born into a noble Breton family in April of 1751 he embarked on a military career early in life and was known for being a tempestuous and somewhat reckless romantic. He joined the French Guard and once tried to kill himself when he was thwarted by the Comte d’Bourbon-Busset in a love triangle with a famous actress. At the end of 1776 he left from Nantes to join the American colonists in their fight for independence.

On the way to America his ship was attacked and sunk by a British warship but he made it to shore and was commissioned in the American cavalry by General George Washington as Colonel Armand. He recruited volunteers for his unit and paid for them himself. Originally attached to Pulaski’s Legion, after the death of the Polish commander the unit was renamed Armand’s Partisan Corps, a legion type unit consisting of infantry and cavalry made up mostly of foreign volunteers. On June 25, 1778 he was promoted to general and fought in the battles of New York, Monmouth, Short Hills, Brandywine, Whitemarsh, the campaign in Virginia and the siege of Yorktown. When he returned to France to obtain weapons and supplies for his men King Louis XVI decorated him with the Order of St Louis and upon his return was promoted to brigadier general by George Washington with whom he always remained friends and corresponded for the rest of his life.

After the war he returned to France he married a wealthy aristocrat (who later went mad) and became known as something of a liberal but also one devoted to the nobility and local government of Brittany. He was confined in the Bastille for demanding that the King return to the region its traditional autonomy for which he became a hero to the left. However, when the revolution began to break out in earnest he vehemently opposed the attacks on the aristocracy. Having originally supported the revolution he came to adamantly oppose it when it became clear that this was to be a radical re-ordering of French society that would be dominated by the Third Estate which had effectively declared war on the aristocracy.

The Marquis de la Rouërie became a leader of the Breton Association which advocated the upholding and strengthening of the monarchy along with their traditional rights and privileges. He pointed out that since the radicals had taken power the people had become more poor and more heavily taxed than they had ever been. Although the Marquis had never been an especially devout Catholic he also very much opposed the Civil Constitution of the Clergy which brought the Church under total government control. Finally, Rouërie had no choice but to take up arms with his counterrevolutionary forces (the Chouans) against the republicans. Sadly, the Chouans were defeated and Rouërie became a fugitive from the revolutionary government. In January of 1793 he fell ill and suffered a severe setback when he learned of the regicide of King Louis XVI. He died on January 30 and the Breton Association later fell apart with most falling victim to the Reign of Terror.

Thai Monarchy in Crisis

The news media is now reporting that Thai Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva has declared a state of emergency in Bangkok after the red shirts of the criminal former PM Thaksin Shinawatra forced their way into the grounds of the Thai parliament. This is the fourth time in the last two years that such an emergency has been declared. In the old days this would be about the time for the revered Thai monarch, HM King Bhumibol Adulyadej, to step in, summon both sides to an audience and make peace. However, with the health of the aged monarch still extremely frail that is no longer a possibility and rumors are thick that a potential coup may be in the making as Shinawatra's red shirts might decide to take advantage of the crisis, at the time of the King's death, to abolish the monarchy and restore their own leader to power.

One of the issues which gives them hope (and these types of rumors legs) is the relative unpopularity of HRH Crown Prince Vajiralongkorn about whom many people have doubts due to past problematic behavior. What is ironic is that one of the things the Crown Prince had been criticized for in the past was his alleged business dealings with Thaksin Shinawatra. How much of the rumors are true is hard to say but despite best efforts it seems clear that there are doubts about the abilities of the Crown Prince and few would deny that it would be impossible for anyone to fill the shoes of King Bhumibol for whom public devotion and reverence is extreme to an extent not seen probably since the reign of King Chulalongkorn the Great. My only hope is that his extensive past military service will allow the Crown Prince to have their full support when the sad (and hopefully far off) death of the King does happen which will allow him to crush the red shirts once for all; which would certainly be possible if they were to attempt such a radical, revolutionary effort. Time will tell...

Mad Rant: Republican Logic

It has happened again. Someone in the Obama administration has said something that has caused me to feel like my brain is melting and oozing out of my ears. If this keeps up I am seriously going to lose the fragile grip I have on my insanity. One of the little minions of “The One” actually stood up, with a totally serious expression on her face, and said that unemployment numbers could be expected to go up but that this was a sign that more Americans are working. !@#$%^&)*!!!!!! How…? What…? She can’t….! And then I have to down a large whiskey to stop the pain.

The more politicians I ‘experience’ the more I feel like the sane one -and that’s scary. This latest bit of brilliance makes a perfect trio of coma inducing comments, standing alongside Nancy Pelosi saying that the recent healthcare bill was bipartisan even without a single GOP vote in its favor. Yes, only Democrats voted for it, not a single Republican supported it and yet it is bipartisan. Then, last but not least, we were earlier treated to VP Joe Biden saying that in order to get out of debt the U.S. needed to spend more money. And every time I hear it I die a little inside.

What is more, there is ever a crowd of highly educated lefty journalists sitting front and center, nodding and jotting down notes like it all makes perfect sense. Does no one else see it?! And it seems to go all the way to the top with our Glorious Leader, who has overseen the government takeover of the auto industry, the banking industry, healthcare and student loans (so far) and who has stated his goal is to “spread the wealth around” saying that there is no basis for calling him a socialist. Okay, true enough, I have been diagnosed as “mentally ill” but surely any reasonable, sane person can see that this is mind numbingly nonsensical. I keep waiting for the news cameras to pan left to show Rod Serling standing on the corner, smoking a cigarette.

And these same highly educated leftist morons are the same ones who say that things like religion and monarchy or any sort of traditional authority and values are absurd. And if you support any of these things you are some sort of superstitious nutcase. If this keeps up I am going to be on a short road to an aneurysm. Is this democratic republican logic? Is this the product of modern Ivy League education? It staggers the imagination. Staggers! I am speechless, I am baffled, (I’m a little bit frightened at how many people seem to think it all makes sense) and I am…The Mad Monarchist.

Highs and Lows for Scandinavian Princesses

The tables have turned somewhat for two Scandinavian crown princesses. A recent poll done in Norway shows that Crown Princess Mette-Marit is now considered a positive role model for young people. This is quite a turnaround from the general public opinion when she first joined the family when many were concerned about the example being set by her past drug abuse and out-of-wedlock child. A majority of Norwegians still think that the marriage did not improve the image of the monarchy but the Crown Princess' behavior since joining the family seems to be winning or having won over the Norwegian people by and large. On the other hand, Crown Princess Mary of Denmark, who has always been widely popular since becoming known to the Danish people and marrying Crown Prince Frederick has been enduring a rough patch recently due to her being photographed at a party with a convicted drug criminal and was embarassed when a leading figure in her primary charity assaulted an escort worker. These revelations brought about a rather tense confrontation between the Crown Princess and her mother-in-law Queen Margrethe II.

Call me the consistent one but my overall opinion of these two royal ladies has not changed because of these events. I must emphasize that I give all due credit to Crown Princess Mette-Marit for avoiding scandal since joining the family, but call me an old fashioned stick in the mud and you will, but I would prefer for royals to set a better example in their choice of spouse (I am not entirely wild about the current trend of royals marrying commoners much less un-wed mothers with a history of drug use) when Royal Families should at least try to embody the best aspects of their countries. I know "the heart has its reasons" but even if you hold that you cannot choose who you love, you certainly can choose who you associate with and if you do not associate with certain people you will not run the risk. Of course all of that is not the fault of the Crown Princess but I have also not been wild about *all* of the causes she has chosen to endorse. Again though, I am glad that she has proven a success and consider it good news that her image is doing better. The past cannot be changed and I wish the Crown Princely couple to have a happy marriage and certainly want the future Queen of Norway to be accepted and popular.

As for Crown Princess Mary, it seems to me that the controversy over her has been quite unfair. None of the scandals (for lack of a better word) can be said to be her fault. She did not decide who would be at that party, I'm sure she did not know who the person in question was and it is not her fault if one of those running her charity turns out to be a dud. It does not do the image of the monarchy any good but the whole thing seemed to be a rather trumped up controversy, perhaps by media elites a little too eager to find something negative to write about the very popular princess. Perhaps she could do a better job in picking those who work for her, but that is no asbolute solution as no one can look into the soul of another and a good record does not mean a person will not fail in an epic way in the future. And, if these are the worst stories that can be dug up about the royal families of Norway and Denmark it seems to me that the monarchy in these Scandinavian countries are in pretty good shape overall. Plus, we all have the upcoming marriage of Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden this summer to look forward to.

Battlefield Royal: Prince Frederick, Duke of York

HRH Prince Frederick Augustus was born on August 16, 1763, the second child of Their Majesties King George III and Queen Charlotte of Great Britain and Ireland. When he was only 6 months old King George III had young Frederick elected Prince-Bishop of Osnabruck in Germany, making him the youngest bishop on record to this day. Early on his father decided that Prince Frederick would have a military career and sent him to stay in his Hanoverian possessions where he lived a rather dissolute life while observing the tactics and strategies of the nearby Prussian and Austrian armies. He also went to university while in Germany and in 1782 was appointed colonel of the 2nd Horse Grenadier (Life) Guards and in 1784 was promoted to major general and colonel of the elite Coldstream Guards.

That same year Prince Frederick was given a place on the Privy Council and given the title of Duke of York and Albany and Earl of Ulster. In 1787 there were rumors that the American rebels planned to make the Duke the King of the United States but they were trumped up rumors and nothing more. The Duke returned to Britain as planned and took his seat in the House of Lords. He ran afoul of his brother the Prince of Wales over the regency crisis but was soon put out of the way when given command of the British army sent to secure the Low Countries in 1793. The Duke landed his forces and soon besieged Dunkirk and was supposed to be working in cooperation with the Austrians in what is now Belgium. However, the French had recently adopted the leveé en masse which brought a horde of untrained but zealous French troops to his front.

So, the “Grand Old Duke of York” (as he came to be known) had his butt handed to him and had to vamoose á Britannia. King George III rewarded him by promoting him to commander-in-chief of the British army (succeeding methodical and coldly effective Lord Amherst). In 1799 the Duke of York took to the field again with the Anglo-Russian invasion of the Netherlands (Batavian Republic). However, once again the Duke was thwarted by the Franco-Dutch forces and was forced to return home with little more than the capture of the ice-bound Dutch fleet to show for his effort. In short, the Duke of York had pretty much been a failure as a battlefield commander, however, that did not mean he was an ineffective general.

The Duke of York had married his cousin, the Prussian Princess Frederica Charlotte, but the two never had any children and the stories of his mistresses eventually got him into some trouble when it seemed that a mistress was being bribed to influence his appointments. However, the Duke weathered that storm and returned to his command and proved to be a very effective “desk general”. This is most often used as a derogatory term but, any army does need desk generals as well as fighting ones. The Duke of York was a very capable military administrator and he enacted a number of reforms in organization, training and logistics that proved invaluable in the coming campaigns against Napoleonic France. His job may not has been as glorious as that of the Duke of Wellington, but in all fairness the Duke of York deserves a fair share of the credit for building and supplying the military forces that Wellington led to victory. The Duke of York died in 1827 as a result of health problems brought on by his rather overindulgent lifestyle.

Happy Easter!

Christianity and Monarchy

This being Easter it is as good a time as any to take a brief look at the relationship between monarchy and religion; in this case with a focus on Christianity. The ties between cross and crown are as old as the religion itself. It was as Christ the King that Jesus suffered death and the faith was confirmed by His ascension as King of Heaven. Christianity became acceptable due to the Edict of Milan granted by Emperor Constantine the Great who later became the first Christian Emperor of Rome. Later, Emperor Theodosius the Great made Christianity the official and exclusive religion of the Roman Empire, ushering in the era of Christendom.

From these beginnings there was always a very clear cooperative relationship between the imperial monarchy and Christianity. The earliest ecumenical councils were called, not by the Pope, but by the Emperor with the Pope validating them later. Even the papal title Pontifex Maximus or Supreme Pontiff was originally a title of the Roman Emperors which was passed to the Bishop of Rome by the Emperor Gratian. Being so far removed from the Roman Empire it may be hard for modern Christians to understand just how central the role of the Emperor was to the idea of a truly Christian society. This became especially pronounced with the shift in imperial power to the Eastern Roman Empire and even more so after the fall of the Western Roman Empire. In Constantinople the Emperor was recognized as the vicegerent of God on earth and the relationship between the Church and the monarchy was a very close on and would always continue to be so.

In the west the lack of such a relationship could not be endured and in 800 it was restored with the Holy Roman Empire when Pope St Leo III crowned Charlemagne in Rome on Christmas Day. Monarchs, east and west alike, were anointed with holy oils, dressed in clerical style garb and crowned in memory of Christ being crowned with thorns. The significance of this was so great that the monarchial coronation was often referred to as the eighth sacrament. This form of altar and throne relationship, continuing traditions from the Roman Empire, did come under attack with the start of the Protestant movement, however, Protestant Christianity also contained a very strong cooperation between cross and crown of a different sort. Protestantism would never have moved beyond its embryonic stage were it not for the Prince-Elector of Saxony, Frederick III, coming to the defense of Martin Luther and harboring him while he was in opposition to the Emperor.

Luther condemned rebellions and was particularly vociferous in his condemnation of the Peasants Revolt which was done in the name of Protestantism. He called for loyalty to the German princes, reminded his followers of the Biblical commands for obedience to Caesar in temporal matters and referenced the Divine Right of Kings. While other Protestant sects diverged from this view Lutheranism maintained the authority of the local royals. In time the Lutheran states of northern Europe all set up national churches under the leadership of the monarch which still survive today in Scandinavia. Protestantism also flourished in England with a unique style in which the monarch was exalted as ‘Supreme Head of the Church on earth’ and non-resistance to royal authority effectively became the bedrock principle of the Church of England as it was originally founded. It is also, to date, only in the British monarchy that the full, medieval style coronation ceremony is still performed with the monarch remaining head of the national Church of England in the Protestant fashion but also still retaining the title “Defender of the Faith” which was a title originally given to the English king by the Pope when the country was still Catholic.

“The character of Kings is sacred; their persons are inviolable; they are the anointed of the Lord, if not with sacred oil, at least by virtue of their office. Their power is broad---based upon the Will of God, and not on the shifting sands of the people's will...They will be spoken of with becoming reverence, instead of being in public estimation fitting butts for all foul tongues. It becomes a sacrilege to violate their persons, and every indignity offered to them in word or act, becomes an indignity offered to God Himself. It is this view of Kingly rule that alone can keep alive in a scoffing and licentious age the spirit of ancient loyalty, that spirit begotten of faith, combining in itself obedience, reverence, and love for the majesty of kings which was at once a bond of social union, an incentive to noble daring, and a salt to purify the heart from its grosser tendencies, preserving it from all that is mean, selfish, and contemptible.”
-- Archbishop John Healy of Tuam

“A priest who is not a monarchist is not worthy to stand at the altar table. The priest who is a republican is always a man of poor faith. God himself anoints the monarch to be head of the kingdom, while the president is elected by the pride of the people. The king stays in power by implementing God’s commandments, while the president does so by pleasing those who rule. The king brings his faithful subjects to God, while the president takes them away from God.”
-- Metropolitan Neomartyr Vladimir of Kiev

Monarch Profile: Sultan Mehmed V

Mehmed V Reshad was the 35th Sultan of the Ottoman Empire. He was born on November 2, 1844 in the Topkapi Palace in Constantinople to Sultan Abdulmecid I and his Caucasian wife Valide Sultan Gulcemal. As was customary in the Ottoman Empire he was restricted to the palace harem for 30 years, 9 of those years spent in solitary confinement. He spent his time in the gilded cage studying traditional Persian style poetry and thus became known as an exceptional poet himself and an expert on Persian literature. However, his life of seclusion and literary study came to an end in 1909 when his brother, Sultan Abdul Hamid II was forced to abdicate by the “Young Turks” who had taken power.

On April 27, 1909 Mehmed Reshad was installed as Mehmed V, Great Sultan and Padishah of the Ottoman Empire and Caliph of Islam etc. However, with the nationalist “Young Turks” faction still holding the real power he was to remain a relative figurehead when it came to the actual decision making. One of the items on the agenda was an effort to revitalize the “Sick Man of Europe” through infrastructure and military modernizations accomplished largely through closer relations with the German Empire. At the time, many Turks viewed the Germans as their only possible ally to counter the threats they faced from Russia to the north and the British to the south and west. Ultimately this led to the event that was to dominate the reign of Sultan Mehmed V which was the First World War.

Described as a kind and gentle man, Mehmed V was left to mostly ceremonial duties while policy was directed by the leaders of the Committee of Union and Progress. A particularly dominant figure was the “Young Turk” Enver Pasha, an architect of the alliance with Germany who even wore an upturned moustache in the style of the Kaiser. In 1911 the Committee prevailed upon the Sultan to go on a tour of Thrace and Albania to encourage better relations between Constantinople and the Ottoman territories in Europe. However, in the wars that followed almost all of these territories were lost as was Tripoli following a lost war with the Kingdom of Italy. These setbacks only served to strengthen the hand of those who advocated a military alliance with Germany to win back territories previously lost to Britain and Russia.

The Ottoman and German Empires had signed a secret treaty on August 2, 1914 (which Enver Pasha put together) and on November 2, 1914 the Middle East was at war. To the surprise of many the Turks proved to be quite rugged and tenacious fighters, inflicting a number of defeats on the British. However, early on it was easy to see that the cards were stacked against the Ottoman Empire. How involved Sultan Mehmed V was in all of this is hard to say given his position of nominally great but effectively very little power. Like most of the monarchs in Europe Mehmed V went along with the war reluctantly, in fact almost against his will; he had wanted the Empire to remain non-belligerent.

However, there was one way, it was decided, that the Sultan could be of great value to the war effort and that was in his capacity as Caliph of Islam. The British monarch actually had more Muslim subjects than any other monarch on earth and, it was reasoned, if these populations could be inspired to rise up against the British out of Islamic solidarity Britain would surely be defeated. So it was that on November 11, 1914 Sultan Mehmed V, as Caliph of Islam, formally declared a jihad, a holy war, against the Allies. It was to be the last time a jihad was legitimately declared by someone with the authority to do so.

Unfortunately for the Turks, there was little response from the wider Muslim world. Some Muslim soldiers of the British Indian army in Singapore did mutiny at the thought of fighting their brothers in the faith but on the whole the Sultan was ignored or what minor outbreaks of violence occurred were easily dealt with by the British with no real effect on their war effort. The Germans were very disappointed having expected more from the many Muslims living in French and British colonies across Africa and Asia. In fact, some Muslims within the Ottoman Empire took up arms alongside the British against their Ottoman rulers such as in the Arab Revolt in 1916.

During the war the Ottoman Empire was dominated by Enver Pasha, Talat Pasha and Kemal Pasha while Sultan Mehmed V was left with mostly ceremonial duties such as hosting a visit by Kaiser Wilhelm II in Constantinople on October 15, 1917. The Kaiser made him a Field Marshal in the Prussian and later Imperial German armies, an honor returned by the Sultan. By that time of course the war was going very much against the Turks but Sultan Mehmed V would not live to see the final, disastrous end. He died on July 3, 1918 in Constantinople at the age of 73. He was succeeded by his brother Mehmed VI as Sultan but within 6 months the war would be over and Constantinople itself would be under Allied occupation with the Ottoman Empire carved up into mandates under France and Britain.

Ethiopian Anniversary

On this day in 1930 Ras Tafari Makonnen was formally proclaimed as 'His Imperial Majesty Haile Selassie I, King of kings, Lord of lords, Conquering Lion of the Tribe of Judah and Elect of God' or Emperor of Ethiopia. During his reign Haile Selassie, who would prove to be the last Emperor of Ethiopia, presided over new efforts to modernize the country as well as dealing with the Italian invasion and the incorporation of Ethiopia into Italian East Africa with the King in Rome proclaimed Emperor in his place. In time the Allies drove out the Italians and Haile Selassie was restored and tried to make Ethiopia a moral leader for the other newly independent nations of Africa. In the end he was overthrown by communist revolutionaries in 1974 and died a year later, most likely murdered by his political enemies. April 2, 1930 would be the last time (to date) that Ethiopia acknowledged a new Emperor. Hopefully, that record will not stand and the day will come when the Solomonic dynasty is restored to its rightful place on the imperial throne.

Consort Profile: Infanta Maria Ana of Portugal

HRH Infanta Maria Ana of Portugal was born on July 13, 1861 at Schloss Bronnbach, the fifth daughter of HM King Miguel I of Portugal (who had previously been deposed) and Adelaide of Lowenstein-Wertheim-Rosenberg. Despite living in exile, mostly in Germany, the former Portuguese monarch saw to it that his daughters were raised as princesses, given the best that he was able to provide for them and did his utmost to see them married well.

Infanta Maria Ana was married to Hereditary Prince Guillaume of Luxembourg, son and heir of HRH Grand Duke Adolphe of Luxembourg, on June 21, 1893 at Schloss Fischhorn, Zell am See. Some eyebrows were raised at the prospect of a mixed marriage between the Protestant Guillaume and Catholic Maria Ana, however, as Luxembourg was a Catholic country Prince Guillaume had already decided that when he became Grand Duke his children would be raised Catholic so that the people and their royals could be of the same faith. After the marriage the Infanta adopted the French version of her name Marie Anne.

On November 17, 1905, with the passing of his father, the young prince became Grand Duke Guillaume IV of Luxembourg with Marie Anne as his consort. From 1894 to 1902 the couple had six daughters; Marie-Adelaide (who never married), Charlotte who married her cousin Prince Felix of Bourbon-Parma, Hilda Sophie who married Prince Adolph zu Schwarzenberg, Antoinette who married Crown Prince Rupprecht of Bavaria, Elizabeth Marie who married Prince Ludwig Philip of Thurn und Taxis and Sophie Caroline who married Prince Ernst Heinrich of Saxony.

Because of the decision of Grand Duke Guillaume IV to unite the people and monarchy in religion Grand Duchess Marie Anne oversaw the Catholic upbringing of her children and as the Grand Duke was the last male heir of the House of Nassau he enacted a change in the succession to allow for his daughters to succeed him and on July 10, 1907 made Hereditary Grand Duchess Marie Adelaide his successor. She was later succeeded by her sister who became the Grand Duchess Charlotte. Not long after the Grand Duke fell ill and Grand Duchess Marie Anne stepped in to serve as regent of Luxembourg on his behalf until he finally passed away in 1912. She also served as regent for about 3 months more on behalf of her daughter until she came of age.

During World War II the Grand Ducal Family of Luxembourg was forced to go into exile with the invasion of Nazi Germany. It was in New York City, New York that the Dowager Grand Duchess Marie Anne died on July 31, 1942.

Portuguese Monarchists Strike Again

The flag waving monarchists of Portugal struck again on March 26 when the people of Lisbon awoke to find a large national flag from the era of the Kingdom of Portugal (blue and white) flying low at the Edward VII park in place of the green and red flag of the Portuguese republic. Claiming responsibility for this harmless act of monarchist defiance was the group "Carbonara - Monarchist Movement for the Masses" in recognition of the birthday of the 14-year-old heir apparent Infante Dom Afonso. The police say they intent to pursue criminal charges against those responsible -which seems rather absurd as this display of political protest hurt nothing and no one (especially when liberal revolutionary types are usually the first to cry about their own rights to protest). However, this is not the first time Portuguese monarchists have used the symbolism of the royalist flag to show their opposition to the republican regime. Readers will remember last August when Portuguese monarchists took down and carried off the national flag from the city hall in Lisbon and replaced it with the Kingdom of Portugal flag (they returned the republican national flag unharmed). The authorities are especially sensitive about royal flags appearing while the Portuguese republic is celebrating its 100th anniversary. They will overreact but that is all the more reason to salute the gallant monarchists of Portugal who are showing where their allegiance is in a dignified but striking way. Vivo Portugal!

The Birthday of Prince Bismarck

It was on this day in 1815 that Prince Otto von Bismarck, the primary force behind the unification of Germany under Prussia was born. In recognition of that, we have a list of some of the more memorable phrases of the "Iron Chancellor":

Laws are like sausages. It is better not to see them being made.

Preventative war is like committing suicide out of fear of death.

Universal suffrage is like the government of a house by its nursery.

I have seen three kaisers in their nakedness and the sight was not inspiring.

With a gentleman I am always a gentleman and a half, and when I have to do with a pirate I try to be a pirate and a half.

Your map of Africa is really quite nice. But my map of Africa lies in Europe. Here is Russia, and here... is France, and we're in the middle — that's my map of Africa.

He who has his thumb on the purse has the power.

Let us lift Germany, so to speak, into the saddle. It will certainly be able to ride.

Politics is not an exact science, it is the art of the impossible.

A conquering army on the border will not be stopped by eloquence.

Not by speeches and votes of the majority, are the great questions of the time decided — that was the error of 1848 and 1849 — but by iron and blood.