Monthly Archives: May 2012

Prince Charles’s Reputation and the History of the Royal Heir in the Press

by CarolynHarris | Leave a comment

Charles, Prince of Wales

As Canada prepares to host the Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall for their Diamond Jubilee visit, the Canadian press is debating the Prince’s merits as a future King. Both the Prince’s admirers and detractors focus almost exclusively on their perception of his character and activities. A recent article on cbc.ca summarized the debate as a question of whether Prince Charles is “A fuddy-duddy who talks to his plants, or a misunderstood visionary whose thoughtful views on everything from architecture to ecology and faith reflect a man whose values are important to Canadians?”

Canadians skeptical of Prince Charles cite a broad range of reasons including his role in the breakdown of his first marriage to the late Diana, Princess of Wales, the perceived eccentricity of his opinions, his willingness to share these opinions with the public, and the comparative popularity of his son and daughter-in-law, the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge.

In response to these concerns, journalist John Fraser eloquently defends the Prince of Wales as future King of Canada in his book, The Secret Of The Crown: Canada’s Affair With Royalty, stating, “[The Prince] has been subjected to more ridicule, innuendo, outright fabrication, and grotesque invasion of privacy than almost any other individual alive today. Part of the problem, of course, is that he has opinions that some people disagree with. An equal part of the problem is that the women of the House of Windsor live a long time, and he has been in the waiting line longer than any heir to the throne in history.” Fraser is alluding to a larger historical trend. Successful monarchs embody their position so effectively that the public often finds it difficult to imagine anyone else on the throne and therefore critiques the heir.

Portrait of the nineteen year old Queen Victoria on her coronation day in 1838.

There is an enormous difference between how most British monarchs were perceived at the time of their ascensions and the time of their deaths. Every King or Queen in the past couple centuries has faced some degree of public skepticism when he or she became the reigning monarch. Observers of Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth II questioned whether the august duties of Head of State could be successfully discharged by a young woman. When Queen Victoria was crowned in 1838, at the age of nineteen, the author Thomas Carlyle remarked, “Poor little Queen! She is at an age at which a girl can hardly be trusted to choose a bonnet for herself, yet a task is laid upon her from which an archangel might shrink.”

Although the twenty-five year old Elizabeth II was the recipient of widespread popular goodwill when she became Queen in 1952, Prince William has suggested that she faced similar skepticism, explaining to author Robert Hardman in Our Queen“Back then, there was a very different attitude toward women. Being a young lady at twenty-five – and stepping into a job which many men thought they could probably do better – it must have been very daunting. And I think there was extra pressure for her to perform.” Both Victoria and Elizabeth II rose to the challenge, becoming successful monarchs who presided over the longest reigns in English history.

Edward VII at his coronation in 1902

Since Queen Victoria reigned for sixty-three years, it was difficult for her subjects to imagine her eldest son, Albert Edward, as King after her death in 1901. Like Prince Charles, Albert Edward’s reputation was the subject of popular debate during his long tenure as Prince of Wales. His admirers praised his sociability and good intentions while his detractors noted his  gambling, womanizing, and testimony in two separate divorce cases. As King Edward VII, Albert Edward gained widespread admiration as a diplomat and peacemaker in foreign affairs, far exceeding the mixed expectations he faced when he ascended the throne.

Both George V and George VI were second sons who had been educated for the navy instead of kingship. Like Edward VII, they both exceeded comparatively low popular expectations to become respected sovereigns. When George V died in 1936, the public viewed him as the model of domestic respectability, but his first act as King in 1910 had been to initiate legal proceedings against a journalist who accused him of bigamy with both Queen Mary and an admiral’s daughter. King George noted in his diary, “The whole story is a damnable lie and has been in existence now for over twenty years. I trust that this will settle it once and for all.” The journalist was sentenced to twelve months in jail for criminal libel. As dramatized in The King’s Speech, George VI overcame his difficulties with public speaking to become an effective leader during the Second World War.

The precedents set by past monarchs suggest that popular critiques of Prince Charles in the media do not capture his potential as the future King. His immediate predecessors all overcame the skepticism they faced as royal heirs to become successful and popular monarchs.

 

Television Appearances to Discuss Prince Charles in Canada this Weekend

by CarolynHarris | Leave a comment

I will be interviewed this weekend about the upcoming visit of the Prince of Wales and Duchess of Cornwall to Canada for the Diamond Jubilee. Tune in on the Sun News Network on Friday May 18 at 9:40am EST and on CBC News Toronto on Monday May 21 at 6pm for discussion of this historically significant royal tour.

The Diamond Jubilee Lunch and the Queen’s Role as an Impartial Constitutional Monarch

by CarolynHarris | Leave a comment

Queen Elizabeth II and Prince Philip, Duke of Edinburgh at the 2009 Trooping of the Colour Celebrations.

Queen Elizabeth II has invited the crowned heads of the world to lunch at Windsor Castle this Friday, May 18 to celebrate her Diamond Jubilee. Although the guest list will not be publicly announced until the day, the Queen’s guests are presumed to include the crowned heads of Denmark, Sweden, Belgium, Luxembourg, Monaco, the Netherlands and Norway  as well as the Emperor and Empress of Japan and the new King of Tonga. While the Queen will host the Jubilee Lunch, Prince Charles will invite the visiting royalty to a dinner in his mother’s honour the same day, serving locally sourced organic food to the visiting royalty.

Sheikh Hamad Bin Isa Al Khalifa, King of Bahrain

The royal family has courted controversy by extending an invitation to the festivities to Sheikh Hamad bin Isa Al Khalifa of Bahrain. The King of Bahrain has been condemned worldwide for crushing pro-democracy protests by force in 2011, resulting in injuries and fatalities among his own people. Sheikh Hamad, however, has maintained a friendly relationship with the British government, meeting with Prime Minister David Cameron at 10 Downing Street last December. An unnamed palace source reputedly told the Daily Mail newspaper, “It was the Queen’s decision to host the lunch and her decision to invite every world sovereign. It would have been very rude to have left anyone off the list and the Queen would never want to offend anyone.”

The friendly relationship between Prime Minister Cameron, and Sheikh Hamad suggests that the Queen’s invitation is not simply an attempt to be inclusive of all the world’s monarchs. Throughout her reign, the Queen has taken her role as an impartial Head of State seriously, entertaining world leaders who are friends of the British government regardless of her personal feelings toward their activities.

The former King Constantine II and Queen Anne-Marie at the 2010 wedding of Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden.

This commitment to supporting the United Kingdom’s elected government impartially helps explain why Sheikh Hamad received an invitation while the former King Constantine of Greece, Prince Philip’s cousin and godfather to the Duke of Cambridge, is reputed to have been left off the list. Cameron also seeks to maintain a friendly relationship with the Greek government, which refuses to grant the exiled King citizenship and a passport because of his continued use of his royal title.

Since Queen Elizabeth II has reigned for sixty years, the impartiality of the constitutional monarch appears to be a longstanding custom. Her approach is actually a departure from the reigns of her predecessors, who were known to oppose their government’s relations with foreign powers. While Queen Anne’s Whig ministers courted the House of Hanover after the 1701 Act of Settlement entailed the throne to the descendants of Electress Sophia, the monarch refused to allow Sophia or her son, the future King George I to visit England. In the late nineteenth century, Queen Victoria’s widowhood provided her with a pretense to avoid meetings with difficult world leaders, leaving the reception of these visitors to her son, the future King Edward VII.

Emperor Nicholas II of Russia and King George V of England in German dress uniforms, attending the wedding of Kaiser Wilhelm's daughter, Princess Viktoria, in 1913

In 1929, Elizabeth II’s grandfather, King George V pleaded illness when the new Soviet Ambassador arrived at Buckingham Palace to present his credentials, following his longstanding policy of refusing to shake hands with representatives of a regime that he considered responsible for the murder of his cousin, Emperor Nicholas II, in 1918. This stance placed the King in opposition to Ramsay MacDonald’s Labour government (1924 and1929-1935), which attempted to normalize relations with the Soviet Union. MacDonald wrote, “The King was rather excited over Russia, and talked a lot of man-in-the-bus nonsense about Bolsheviks etc.” In contrast to his granddaughter, George V did not see any contradiction between his open disagreement with his Prime Minister’s foreign policy and his office as a constitutional monarch.

The 2012 Jubilee lunch is ostensibly an informal gathering of the world’s monarchs to celebrate Elizabeth II’s sixty years on the throne. Like every other reception hosted by the Queen, however, the luncheon is also a political statement, reflecting the monarch’s commitment to supporting her elected government impartially. The Queen has invited world leaders who enjoy friendly relations with her government to celebrate the Diamond Jubilee at Windsor Castle.


The Proposed Changes to the Royal Marriages Act

by CarolynHarris | 3 Comments

When the BBC filmed the documentary A Year with the Queen or The Monarchy: The Royal Family at Work chronicling the activities of the royal family over the course of 2007, the filmakers captured a moment of the monarch fulfilling her responsibilities under the Royal Marriages Act of 1772. The Queen received a request from her distant cousin, Amelia Beaumont, for permission to marry Simon Murray. The Queen granted her assent in writing, ensuring that their marriage would be legal in the United Kingdom. Prime Minister David Cameron has proposed that this royal permission only be necessary for the first six people in the line of succession, as part of a broader reform of royal succession and marriage law in this year’s session of parliament.

The Earl of Athlone (seated right) with the Allied leaders at the Quebec Conferences.

Amelia Beaumont is the great-great granddaughter of Prince Leopold, Duke of Albany, Queen Victoria’s fourth and youngest son. Her great-grandparents, the Earl and Countess of Athlone served as the Vice-Regal couple in Canada during the Second World War, presiding over the 1943 and 1944 Quebec Conferences where Prime Minister Winston Churchill of the United Kingdom, President Franklin Roosevelt of the United States and Prime Minister William Lyon Mackenzie King of Canada planned the Allied strategies for victory over Germany and Japan. Beaumont’s grandmother, Lady May Abel Smith (nee Cambridge) was a bridesmaid to the future King George VI and Queen Elizabeth.

Despite this illustrious lineage, it is highly unlikely that Amelia Beaumont will ever succeed to the throne. A list of the descendants of Sophia of Hanover compiled on January 1, 2011 estimated that Beaumont was 432nd in the line of succession at that time, below the King of Norway (a descendant of King Edward VII), and senior members of the exiled Russian Imperial Family and exiled Romanian and Yugoslavian royal families (descendants of Prince Alfred, Duke of Edinburgh).

Portrait of King George II by Thomas Hudson, painted in 1744. The Royal Marriages Act applies to all his descendants regardless of their place in the line of succession.

Despite Beaumont’s remote claim the throne, her marriage to Murray would not be legal without the sovereign’s express permission. According to the Royal Marriages Act of 1772, “No descendant of the body of his late Majesty King George the Second, male or female, (other than the issue of princesses who have married, or may hereafter marry into foreign families,) shall be capable of contracting matrimony without the previous consent of his Majesty, his heirs or successors, signified under the great seal, and declared in council (which consent, to preserve the memory thereof, is hereby directed to be set out in the licence and register of marriage, and to be entered in the books of the Privy Council); and that every marriage, or matrimonial contract, of any such descendant, without such consent first had and obtained, shall be null and void to all intents and purposes whatsoever.” An exception was granted to members of the royal family over the age of twenty-five who could marry the person of their choice after giving a year’s notice to the Privy Council, provided both Houses of Parliament did not express disapproval.

Maria Fitzherbert, who illegally married the future King George IV in 1785. Although the ceremony was considered valid according to Roman Catholic canonical law, it was illegal under the Royal Marriages Act because King George III had not granted permission.

The Royal Marriages Act reflected both the eighteenth century perception of suitable royal matches and King George III’s attempts to exert control over his fractious extended family. Royalty of the period were expected to marry other royalty. George III had dutifully given up hope of marrying his first love, Lady Sarah Lennox, sister of the Duke of Richmond for a dynastic marriage to Princess Charlotte of Mecklenburg-Strelitz. Lennox served as one of the ten bridesmaids at the royal wedding.

King George proposed the Act in 1771 when his two surviving brothers contracted marriages to commoners. The legislation affected generations of royal couples, most notably the future King George IV, whose first wedding  to a Roman Catholic widow, Maria Fitzherbert, took place in 1785 without King George III’s consent and was therefore not legally valid. (George IV went on to have a spectacularly unhappy legal marriage to Princess Caroline of Brunswick.) While the Act was originally drafted to control the actions of King George III’s siblings and children, its provisions now apply to hundreds of people.

In his recent work, Our Queen, Robert Hardman researched how the Royal Marriages Act is currently received by the sovereign’s distant relatives. He writes, “Most couples with a royal ancestor are, of course, thrilled, to get their union personally blessed by the Monarch but the Privy Council Office is aware of some exceptions. They need not fear a knock on the door from the royal wedding police, however. ‘We don’t go looking for them,’ says one of the team. ‘We take a pragmatic view. It’s a case of don’t ask, don’t tell (157).” This interview indicates that the Royal Marriages Act is no longer being enforced for more remote cousins of the royal family.

Prime Minister Cameron’s proposal that only the first six people in the line of succession should require the sovereign’s consent to marry reflects the current circumstances of the monarchy. George III’s concerns about the narrow suitability of royal marriage partners appears antiquated in the twenty-first century, when the Duchess of Cornwall is a divorcee, the Duchess of Cambridge comes from a middle class family, and both their weddings took place with the Queen’s permission. The changes to the Royal Marriages Act will deny thousands of people a souvenir of their royal ancestry but reflect the reality of the present day monarchy.

Guest Post About Canada and the Monarchy on “The Royal Universe” website

by CarolynHarris | 2 Comments

I have written a guest post for the Royal Universe website about the recent Renaissance of the Canadian monarchy. The article discusses the Diamond Jubilee tour of Canada by Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall, the impact of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge’s 2011 tour, Queen Victoria’s significance to Canadian history and changing attitudes toward the monarchy in Canada. I encourage you all to visit the royal universe and read this piece and the other fascinating royal themed blog posts by other contributors to the site.

 

The State Opening of Parliament and the Reform of the Royal Succession

by CarolynHarris | 7 Comments

Queen Elizabeth II reading the throne speech at the State Opening of Parliament, May 9, 2012

Queen Elizabeth II opened parliament at Westminster on Wednesday May 9, delivering a throne speech that promises to improve the lives of ordinary families. The Queen outlined the proposed Children and Families Bill, which will allow mothers and fathers to share parental leave, overhaul support for children with special educational needs and speed the adoption process.

The Queen also discussed reforms that will have a profound effect on her own family, stating, “My government will continue to work with the fifteen other Commonwealth realms, to take forward reform of the rules governing succession to the Crown.”

Engraving of Sophia of Hanover, granddaughter of King James I, created around the time of the Act of Settlement. The Act restricts the succession to her descendants.

The royal succession is currently governed by a number of pieces of legislation including English common law pertaining to inheritance and the 1689 Bill of Rights. The most influential piece of succession legislation is the 1701 Act of Settlement, which restricts eligibility to succeed to the throne to the descendants of Sophia of Hanover, the mother of King George I. Roman Catholics and dynasts married to Roman Catholics are excluded from the line of succession, reflecting the political and religious attitudes of the early eighteenth century. As recently as 2008, Autumn Kelly converted from Roman Catholicism to the Church of England so that her fiance, the Queen’s grandson Peter Phillips, would retain his place in the line of succession.

The Act of Settlement also followed English common law of the period, enshrining succession by male preference primogeniture. Under the current version of the Act, a woman may only succeed to the throne if she does not have any brothers. The current Queen succeeded King George VI in 1952 because she was the elder of two daughters. If a monarch has a daughter and then son, however, the prince takes precedence over his elder sister. Queen Victoria was succeeded by her eldest son, King Edward VII, in 1901, instead of her eldest child, the Dowager Empress Victoria of Germany.

The Duchess of Cornwall, Prince William and Prince Harry at the 2009 Trooping of the Colour Parade.

The current proposed reform of the royal succession will change the terms of the Act of Settlement, allowing members of the royal family to marry Roman Catholics and retain their eligibility to succeed to the throne. Roman Catholic members of the royal family will still be ineligible become King or Queen because this position also entails becoming Defender of the Church of England. The reforms will also establish absolute primogeniture for the future children of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, ensuring that their eldest child will succeed to the throne, regardless of gender. The same changes will apply to the status of any future children of Prince Harry.

The flags of the Commonwealth Nations on Horse Guards Road, next to the Foreign and Commonwealth Office in London

These changes to the royal succession will continue the process begun in October, 2011, when the Queen presided over the Commonwealth leaders meeting in Perth, Australia. The reference to the United Kingdom and the fifteen other Commonwealth nations in the throne speech is significant as the Queen takes her role as Head of the Commonwealth seriously and is committed to its unity. The agreement of all the nations that have the Queen as their Head of State is essential to ensure that the same child of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge is eventually acclaimed as sovereign by all these monarchies. In Perth, the Commonwealth Heads of Government all agreed to the reforms, which should assist with the ratification of the reforms in both the parliament at Westminster and the individual commonwealth legislatures.

Crown Princess Victoria of Sweden and Daniel Westling on their wedding day in 2010.

The reform of the British and Commonwealth royal succession follows the larger trend toward absolute primogeniture among Europe’s constitutional monarchies. The Swedish Parliament made the change in 1980 after the births of King Carl XVI Gustav’s two eldest children.

Despite the King of Sweden’s objections to his son losing the title of Crown Prince that he had already received, his eldest child Victoria became Crown Princess. The Netherlands adopted absolute primogeniture in 1983, followed by Norway in 1990, Belgium in 1991 and Denmark in 2009.  The current impetus to reform the Act of Settlement may have been the marriage of the Duke and Duchess of Cambridge. The Queen and her government appear eager to complete the process of succession reform before the Duke and Duchess start a family, avoiding the complications that occurred in Sweden.

The reform of the Act of Settlement will have a profound impact on the British and commonwealth monarchies. There is the potential for the spouse of a sovereign to be Roman Catholic, a situation that has not existed since the Glorious Revolution of 1688. There have only been six uncontested Queens Regnant in English history and the introduction of absolute primogeniture will bring gender equality to the monarchies of sixteen nations.

Tomorrow: Abolishing the Royal Marriages Act

The Best Royal History Books for Mother’s Day

by CarolynHarris | Leave a comment

In recent years, there has been an outpouring of popular and scholarly history books looking at the relationships between royal mothers and their children. If you are looking for a change from flowers, chocolate and bubble bath, here are books about royal mothers that make great gifts!

The influence of powerful royal mothers on their daughters and granddaughters in the key theme in the works of popular historian Julia Gelardi. In Triumph’s Wake: Royal Mothers, Tragic Daughters, and the Price They Paid for Glorycompares three royal mothers and daughters in European history, Queen Isabella of Castile and her daughter, Catherine of Aragon, Queen of England; Empress Maria Theresa of the Hapsburg Empire and her fifteenth child Marie Antoinette, Queen of France, and Queen Victoria of Great Britain and her eldest child Victoria, Crown Princess of Prussia.

The difficulties experienced by Catherine, Marie Antoinette and the younger Victoria demonstrated that the lessons learned from their powerful mothers were not always effective at a foreign court. Gelardi provides an excellent introduction to some of the most famous royal women of the sixteenth, eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Her other works, Born to Rule: Five Reigning Consorts, Granddaughters of Queen Victoria and From Splendor to Revolution: The Romanov Women, 1847-1928are also composite biographies of powerful royal matriarchs and their descendants.

Born to Rule looks at the influence of Queen Victoria over the five of her granddaughters who became the consorts of rulers while From Splendor to Revolution presents the last decades of Imperial Russia through the experiences of four Romanov matriarchs. Both are well written and provide a fresh perspective on the influence of powerful women over their families.

One of the most powerful mother figures to preside over the English court was Margaret Beaufort “My Lady, the King’s Mother” to Henry VII, the subject of Elizabeth Norton’s well written and well researched biography, Margaret Beaufort: Mother of the Tudor Dynasty. Margaret gave birth to the future King when she was only thirteen years old and was instrumental to his triumph in the Wars of the Roses. She remained an influential cultural patron and political advisor after Henry ascended to the throne in 1485, surviving into the reign of King Henry VIII as “My Lady, the King’s Grandmam.” For historical fiction enthusiasts, Margaret Beaufort’s life has recently been dramatized in Philippa Gregory’s The Red Queen.

One of the best scholarly works on the relationships between ruling and non-ruling royal women in the sixteenth century is Sharon Jansen’s The Monstrous Regiment of Women: Female Rulers in Early Modern Europe. Dynastic circumstances of the period resulted in an unusual number of female rulers and regents including Elizabeth I, Mary, Queen of Scots, Catherine de Medici and Margaret of Parma. These women served as examples for other elite women of the sixteenth century and often mentored younger female relatives at their courts. While most history books provide royal family trees that focus on the male line, Jansen includes genealogical charts that emphasize the relationships between the women of Europe’s royal houses and the opportunities they had to influence successive generations.

For an introduction to the powerful Queens of England in the Middle Ages, two excellent choices are Lisa Hilton’s Queens Consort: England’s Medieval Queens and Helen Castor’s She-Wolves: The Women Who Ruled England Before Elizabeth. Both works demonstrate that medieval English Queens had plenty of opportunities to exert political, religious and cultural influence through their roles as consorts and mothers of rulers. Hilton argues that the Queen’s influence actually declined between 1066 and 1509 as the Norman Queens had greater opportunities for independent action than the Consorts of the Yorkist and Tudor Kings. Castor looks at the ways that medieval female rulers negotiated their position in an environment where power was associated with masculinity. Both authors demonstrate that royal mothers wielded considerable power in England throughout the Middle Ages.

Prince Harry Goes to Washington, A Welcoming Place for a Prince!

by CarolynHarris | Leave a comment

Prince Harry delivering a speech at the official press launch of Walking with the Wounded in March, 2010

Prince Harry visited Washington D.C. this week to receive the Distinguished Humanitarian Leadership Award, presented by former Secretary of State Colin Powell during the Atlantic Council 2012 Annual Awards Dinner on May 7, 2012. The Prince was recognized for the work that he and his older brother, the Duke of Cambridge, have undertaken as patrons of charities that support injured British and American servicemen and women. These organizations include Walking with the Wounded, a British charity that retrains veterans for new careers, and Help for Heroes, which helps wounded members of the armed forces.

Prince Harry received an enthusiastic welcome from his American admirers. Powell joked at the awards dinner “We have a record number of young, single women attending this year.” The Associated Press noted that “a bevy of young female admirers” were gathered outside the Ritz-Carleton hotel where the gala took place. Although the United States severed political ties with the British monarchy during the American Revolutionary War of the late eighteenth century, the country has always given a warm welcome to traveling Princes.

Prince Albert Edward, the future King Edward VII visiting Niagara Falls in 1860.

The theme of young, unmarried Princes being pursued by admiring American women has been constant in the popular press since the mid nineteenth century. Journalists hoped to be able to report a Cinderella story if a romance took place between a visiting prince and an American woman. When Prince Albert Edward, the nineteen year old eldest son of Queen Victoria visited the United States for a month in 1860, following a successful tour of British North America, the New York Herald urged every young American woman to “put on her most bewitching smile” for “to catch a prince is no common achievement.” When the Herald learned that the Prince enjoyed dancing, it urged its female readers to “be prepared, armed at all points, [to] show the Prince of Wales that they can dance better than the damsels of the British Provinces” encouraging some friendly competition with the Prince’s Canadian admirers. For more accounts of Prince Albert Edward and his American admirers in the press, see Ian Radforth, Royal Spectacle: The 1860 Visit of the Prince of Wales to Canada and the United States, p. 330-335.

The American press was equally interested twenty years later when Albert Edward’s younger brother, Prince Leopold traveled to Niagara Falls and Chicago with his sister Princess Louise, the wife of the Governor General of Canada, in 1880. The press dubbed the siblings “Vic’s Chicks” and took a close interest in their travels, and Leopold’s marriage prospects. Neither Queen Victoria nor Louise’s husband, Lord Lorne, were impressed by the coverage of the tour by American journalists. Lorne wrote to his father indignantly, “the vulgarity of the Yankee press about them surpasses belief.” Louise returned to the United Kingdom with Leopold at the end of their travels.

General George Custer and Grand Duke Alexei in Topeka after their buffalo hunt.

The press coverage of the 1871 American tour by Grand Duke Alexei Alexandrovich, fourth son of Emperor Alexander II of Russia demonstrated that interest in royalty in the United States extended to members of the other ruling houses of Europe. When the Grand Duke’s ship, Svetlana, sailed into New York harbour, the Imperial visitor received a reception that included a parade down Broadway with marching bands and military regiments, and the bells of local churches chiming “God Save the Tsar.” According to Russian historian Zoia Belyakova in The Grand Dukes, “Public curiosity was intense. The myth of Alexis the lady-killer spread. Young women were most interested in his Imperial Highness . . . In Cleveland and Detroit he was literally besieged by admiring young women.” The Grand Duke enjoyed his travels, which included a buffalo hunt with Lieutenant Custer and Buffalo Bill Cody, and was pleasantly surprised by the warmth of his welcome in a democratic republic.

The warm welcome that Prince Harry  received this week in Washington D.C. is similar to the accolades received by Prince Albert Edward, Prince Leopold and Grand Duke Alexei. The American press is always interested in a traveling European Prince and the potential for a Cinderella story involving a heroine from the United States.

The King’s Mistress by Claudia Gold (Book Review)

by CarolynHarris | Leave a comment

When the Elector of Hanover succeeded to the British throne as King George I in 1714, he was not accompanied by a Queen but by two women whom the English public presumed to be his mistresses. Sophia Charlotte von Platen and Melusine von der Shulenburg were cruelly dubbed “The Elephant” and “The Maypole” because of their physiques while the King’s former wife, Sophia Dorothea of Celle, was pitied for her long imprisonment in spite of her known adultery.

Although eighteenth century women were expected to be faithful to their husbands, whose lives were not governed by the same constraints, observers throughout Europe judged Sophia Dorothea to be the innocent party because George had “preferred two hideous mistresses to a beautiful, innocent wife.” In The King’s Mistress: The True and Scandalous Story of the Woman Who Stole the Heart of George I., Claudia Gold reminds her readers that Sophia Charlotte “the Elephant” von Platen was actually King George’s much loved half sister and attempts to rehabilitate Melusine “the Maypole” von der Schulenburg as his unofficial consort.

The reconstruction of Melusine’s life was a difficult task for the author. Although the eighteenth century was a golden age of correspondence among European elites, George and Melusine never wrote personal letters to each other, leaving Gold to speculate about key aspects of the relationship. Noblewomen such as Melusine were expected to make strategic marriages rather than accept the socially inferior position of mistress. Gold speculates that Melusine may have fallen in love with the young, married Elector, suggesting that his character was closer to the sympathetic portrayal by his recent biographer Ragnhild Hatton in George I than the unflattering traditional depiction.

Despite the absence of key sources, Gold successfully reconstructs Melusine’s significance to George’s life and reign. Since the majority of the book covers the period after George ascended to the throne, Melusine’s significance to British politics and culture is particularly well analyzed. In contrast to George, Melusine spoke fluent English and became a mediator between the King and his ministers, developing a particularly successful working relationship with Prime Minister Horace Walpole. Melusine had less success to her attempts to act as peacemaker within George I’s fractious family. The future George II never forgave his father for the imprisonment of his mother and quarreled repeatedly with George I until his own ascension to the throne.

Melusine shared George I’s interest in Italian opera and the music of George Frederic Handel and the couple had a profound influence on English high culture in the early eighteenth century. Handel’s Water Music was written for George’s and Melusine’s journeys on the Thames and had the added benefit of drowning out scurrilous remarks made by the river’s “foul mouthed boatmen.” George I’s ascension to the British throne had been highly controversial because there was widespread support for the legitimacy of James Edward Stuart “The Old Pretender.” Attacks on Melusine “the Maypole” were an effective way for Jacobites to attack Hanoverian rule over the British Isles, particularly as she became involved in the South Sea Bubble, and developed a reputation for corruption.

Gold is understandably sympathetic to Melusine’s situation as the unofficial royal consort. Her narrative, however often shows the same disproportionate hostility toward George’s repudiated wife, Sophia Dorothea, that previous authors displayed toward Melusine. While Melusine is depicted as a gentle woman who found true love with George I, Gold dismisses Sophia Dorothea as “a silly woman” because of the high expectations she brought to her marriage. The author argues that her indiscreet correspondence with her admirer, Count Konigsmark, made her the author of her own fate. Since European public opinion nearly unanimously sided with Sophia Dorothea despite her adultery, her contemporaries clearly did not agree that it was silly for her to be affronted by Melusine’s residence at the Hanoverian court.

The King’s Mistress: The True and Scandalous Story of the Woman Who Stole the Heart of George I illuminates the historical significance of an obscure royal mistress. Claudia Gold demonstrates that Melusine von der Schulenburg was not simply “the Maypole” who replaced King George I’s Queen but a political actor and cultural patron during the first decades of Hanoverian rule over the British Isles.

 

“You Will Not Be Received at Court!” Royal References in Downton Abbey

by CarolynHarris | Leave a comment

Warning: This article contains plot spoilers from both Season 1 and Season 2

In the ITV/PBS series Downton Abbey, about the aristocratic Crawley family, their middle class relations, and their servants, royal personages have not yet made an appearance at the stately home in Seasons 1 (1912-1914) and 2 (1916-1920). It remains to be seen in the upcoming Season 3 (1920-1922) whether the Earl of Grantham’s daughters will be personally invited to any fashionable parties by the future King Edward VIII or entertain a mysterious foreign dinner guest who suddenly claims to be the lost Grand Duchess Anastasia. Although royalty remains off screen, the perceived values of King George V and Queen Mary have a profound influence on characters from all social backgrounds. When nobility and servants alike discuss European politics surrounding the First World War, the view the conflict through the activities of the continent’s royal families.

Downton Abbey is set in Highclere Castle, home of the Earls of Carnarvon since 1679. In the series, it is implied that the Earls of Grantham have held the estate even longer as the name “Downton Abbey” suggests that the lands belonged to the church before King Henry VIII  dissolved the monasteries and convents and granted their properties to the nobility in the sixteenth century. When the Earl describes himself as a custodian of the estate instead of his owner, he is alluding to five centuries of his ancestors building up the family patrimony.

Prior to the First World War, the Earl and Countess of Grantham schedule their year according to the timing of the London season, which includes the presentation of debutantes to the King and Queen. The couple’s youngest daughter, Lady Sybil is eligible to be presented during the 1914 season, a circumstance complicated by her political activism. When Sybil expresses an interest in canvassing for politicians who share her enthusiasm for women’s suffrage, her grandmother, the Dowager Countess, is quick to note that she will soon be presented at court.

Queen Mary’s well known disapproval of the more militant tactics employed by suffragists undoubtedly informs the Dowager Countess’s incisive obervation that one cannot be arrested in riot in May then presented in June. When Emily Davison threw herself in front of King George V’s horse at the 1913 Epsom Derby, the Queen commisserated with the jockey, describing Davison’s death as a ““sad accident caused through the abominable conduct of a brutal lunatic woman.” Sybil’s political activism not only jeopardizes her safety but has the potential to invite royal disapproval.

The influence of the royal example on the Dowager Countess’s conceptions of appropriate behaviour are confirmed in the second season when Sybil expresses an interest in becoming a wartime nurse. The aristocratic Dowager Countess and the middle class Mrs. Crawley experience a rare moment of agreement when they support Sybil’s decision to join the war effort. While Mrs. Crawley’s support is inspired by broader ideals of public service, the Dowager Countess observes, “You cannot pretend it is not respectable. Every day we are treated to pictures of Queens and Princesses in Red Cross uniform.” The leadership roles played by royal women in the First World War created opportunities for women of the aristocracy to adopt new roles and the Dowager Countess’s support for Sybil’s nursing reflects this changing worldview.

As World War One draws to a close with the collapse of the Russian, German and Austrian monarchies, Downton Abbey, presents a broader range of opinion about the significance of royalty. The continued traditional outlook of the Earl of Grantham and his butler, Carson, is expressed through their unquestioning support for the influence of royalty. When Lady Sybil announces that she intends to marry Branson the Irish socialist chauffeur, her father attempts to dissuade her by reminding her that “you will not be received at court!” mirroring the concerns her grandmother expressed prior to the war.

In the servants’ quarters, Carson challenges Branson’s argument that monarchy has had its day in Europe, telling him that “monarchy is the lifeblood of Europe.” Branson’s acceptance of the 1918 murder of the Russian Imperial family as a necessary sacrifice for the greater revolution, despite his earlier belief that they would not harmed, demonstrates that he not only belongs to a difference social class than Sybil’s family but holds an entirely different set of political views than the Earl of Grantham.

Royal personages never call at Downton Abbey but their attitudes and activities offscreen profoundly influence the Crawley family and their servants. Although the presentation of debutantes at court continued until 1958, the Earl of Grantham’s attempt to influence Sybil’s choices by reminding her that she will not be received at court as the chauffeur’s wife sounds old fashioned in the context of the series by 1918 while Branson’s acceptance of the Romanov murders appears to foreshadow his direct involvement in militant Irish republicanism during the 1920s.