Frederick III and William II

My friend Christina Croft (author of The Innocence of Kaiser Wilhelm II) has written an excellent rebuttal to the frequently regurgitated myth (common in discussions of 19th-century royal history) that "if only Kaiser Friedrich III (1831-1888) had lived longer, World War I would have been prevented." I think many years ago I used to believe this myself, as it is the impression one can get from some superficial reading, until I learned better. Writers in English on royal history have tended to be myopically pro-"Fritz" and anti-Wilhelm, determined to paint the former as a dovish liberal and the latter as a hawkish reactionary, when the truth was more complex. Of course, no counterfactual proposition (and I think about counterfactual history a lot) can ever be either proved or disproved, but there are substantial reasons _not_ to believe in this particular one. None of this is to deny that Frederick III's death at 56 from throat cancer after a reign of only 90 days was a personal tragedy for his family, especially his wife Victoria, but it is unrealistic and unhelpful to blame the events of 26 years later on it or on his son. With Christina's permission I reproduce her comments here.

"This is a complete myth for so many reasons and it stems from the usual thing of making Fritz into a hero and Wilhelm into a villain. Neither man was a saint and neither was a villain - they were both just doing what they thought was right. Here are just a few reasons why Fritz would not have prevented war:

Firstly, it suggests that kings/emperors were responsible for the war - they were not. The politicians and the press brought about the war.

Secondly, the King of Prussia might have been an autocrat but the German Emperor was not and so it would be impossible for a German Emperor to cause (or prevent) a war single-handedly.

Thirdly - there is a misconception that Fritz was far more liberal than Wilhelm was. This is not the case - Wilhelm was praised by socialists across Europe (including the extremely radical George Bernard Shaw and the Germano-phobic French socialists) because of his genuine concern for workers and their rights. Fritz, on the other hand, had no direct contact with workers as Wilhelm did and he was out of touch with them. A contemporary German diarist wrote of Fritz: "He intended to rule with and for the bourgeoisie, and is thrown into perplexity by the more rapid emergence of the workers."

Fourthly, Fritz fought in 3 wars. Wilhelm (who is wrongly labelled a warmonger) maintained peace for 25 years. [Added by TRH: in 1913 on the 25th anniversary of his accession, the New York Times, not exactly a bastion of monarchism, effusively praised Kaiser Wilhelm II for his then-seemingly-successful efforts to preserve the peace in Europe.]

Fifthly - People say Fritz would have maintained good relations with Britain. In fact, when Queen Victoria asked him to treat the defeated states in the Austro-Prussian War more leniently, Fritz basically said it was not Britain's business and he would always put Prussia first. Wilhelm, on the other hand, repeatedly tried to form an alliance with Britain.

Sixthly, Fritz was so Russophobic that he was asked not to go to the coronation of Tsar Alexander III for fear that he would make trouble. Wilhelm wanted to befriend the Tsar.

Seventhly, Fritz was an authoritarian. When the German states were reluctant to join the unification, he said they must be FORCED to join and he deceived Ludwig II of Bavaria about it (in fact the Bavarians hated him for it).

Eighthly, apart from anything else, Fritz would have been 83 in 1914.

I could go on..."

 

Wilhelm I 225

 Today is the 225th birthday of German Emperor Wilhelm I (1797-1888).

Queen Luise (1776-1810) with her sons, later Wilhelm I and Friedrich Wilhelm IV (1795-1861)

Emperor Wilhelm I

Four generations of Hohenzollerns in 1882

The Monuments Man and the Princess: More Articles

Back in May 2017 I blogged about this then-recent article (October 2016) on the unique story of American Monuments Man Clyde Harris (1918-1958), whose grave in Amarillo I later visited (June 2019), and Princess Cecilie of Prussia (1917-1975). It seems I am not the only one who finds this subject fascinating as new articles have continued to appear online: on January 18, 2021 (coincidentally the 150th anniversary of the German Empire) at Medium and on May 12, 2021 at Amarillo's Mix 94.1.

My photo of Clyde Harris's grave, Llano Cemetery, Amarillo, TX, June 26, 2019

Grand Duchess Elizabeth at Saint Thomas Church

I've been listening to the webcasts of New York's Saint Thomas Church for over 15 years, attending in person as often as possible between 2007 and 2019. I am pleased that today's Solemn Evensong, which you can watch and hear online, features a sermon on Grand Duchess St. Elizabeth of Russia (1864-1918), one of Westminster Abbey's ten Modern Martyrs, by Mo. Susan Hill of NYC's Church of the Holy Apostles. This sermon is part of Saint Thomas's Lenten series, "'A Grain of Wheat': Martyrs of Our Time." Mo. Hill skillfully links Elizabeth's holy life to the needs of our contemporary world.

Daughter of Grand Duke Louis IV of Hesse (1837-1892) and Queen Victoria's daughter Princess Alice of the United Kingdom (1843-1878), Elizabeth was considered one of the most beautiful princesses of her generation. In 1884, having rejected other suitors including the future Kaiser Wilhelm II, she married Grand Duke Sergei of Russia (1857-1905), at which occasion her younger sister Princess Alix (1872-1918) first met her future husband, Sergei's nephew who later became Tsar Nicholas II (1868-1918). Not required by Russian law to convert to Orthodoxy since her husband was not in direct line to the throne, she nevertheless did so voluntarily several years later. After her husband's assassination in 1905, she renounced her glittering royal lifestyle for one of heroic service to the poor of Moscow as a nun. She had little political influence on her sister or on subsequent events in Russia, but the Revolution showed her no mercy. In July 1918, the day after the more famous Ekaterinburg murders, she and her companion Sister Barbara and several other members of the imperial family (including Grand Duke Sergei Mikhailovich, a brother of the subject of my previous post) were murdered by the Bolsheviks in Alapayevsk, a location (now a monastery) which I visited in 2018 several days before the centennial. She was canonized in 1981 by the Russian Orthodox Church Abroad and in 1992 by the Moscow Patriarchate. 

I have no doubt that current events in her adopted homeland would grieve her deeply, but she would do what she always did and try to help those in need as much as she could.

Centennial of the death of Grand Duchess Anastasia Mikhailovna

One hundred years ago today, Grand Duchess Anastasia Mikhailovna of Russia, Grand Duchess of Mecklenburg-Strelitz (1860-1922), died in Cannes at the age of 61. She was the daughter of Nicholas I's youngest son Grand Duke Michael Nikolaevich (1832-1909) and his wife Cecilie (Sophie) of Baden (1839-1891). A vivacious and colourful personality, the Grand Duchess had never been happy in Mecklenburg (despite the obvious beauty of Schwerin Castle) or in her marriage to Grand Duke Friedrich Franz III (1851-1897), spent as much time as she could in southern France, and caused a scandal when she gave birth to a child several years after his death. (Her Wikipedia article used to be unusually long and thorough for a relatively obscure royal, but it has apparently been shortened due to copyright infringement.) She and her husband had three children, all of whom married well: Alexandrine (1879-1952) became Queen of Denmark as the wife of King Christian X (grandparents of the present Queen); Friedrich Franz IV (1882-1945), the last Grand Duke, married Princess Alexandra of Hanover; Cecilie (1886-1954) became Crown Princess of Germany as the wife of Crown Prince Wilhelm, and would have become Empress eventually if the German monarchy had survived. Kaiser Wilhelm II was initially hostile to his son's union with Cecilie as he had a low opinion of her mother, but eventually came to accept the match, which proved popular with the public though privately unhappy.  Here Anastasia is pictured with her three legitimate children. While unlike her more famous cousin of the same name she did survive the Revolution, being already out of Russia, her brothers were not so lucky: three of them, Grand Dukes Nicholas (1859-1919), George (1863-1919), and Serge (1869-1918) were murdered by the Bolsheviks. May they all rest in peace.

German Empire 150

Today is the 150th anniversary of the proclamation of Wilhelm I (1797-1888) as German Emperor at Versailles. I celebrated by wearing my new Wilhelm I shirt and German imperial flag mask and making brownies decorated to resemble the German imperial flag. 

I'm not entirely without sympathy for those who (whether at the time or later in hindsight) have regretted the smaller German states' loss of independence (though the Kingdom of Bavaria managed to retain some trappings of sovereignty, including its own military apparatus and consulates in foreign countries). However, at least unlike in Italy the local rulers (except for Hanover's) kept their thrones. I can't help admiring what Germany as a dynamic unified nation achieved between 1871 and 1914, and don't see why Germany should have been perpetually denied the cohesiveness that nations like Great Britain, France, Russia, and Spain had achieved much earlier. Changes in borders and of the balance of power between different monarchies are an inevitable aspect of History, with stronger states having overpowered weaker ones for as long as states have existed. What is intolerable however is the fact that Germany has not had any monarchies at all since 1918. Here is my new chart of all the rulers of the monarchical states of the German Empire and their wives and heirs at the time of its establishment 150 years ago today, in order of seniority. I haven't been able to find suitable images for all the individuals who were still fairly young at the time, especially heirs. Maybe I will eventually. This is why I tend to get more upset about Germany being a republic than some other countries: it wasn't just one monarchy that fell in 1918, but nearly two dozen. And all the adorable little ones, whose lineages and traditions went back to the Middle Ages, should not be forgotten.

History and Restoration

 

I don’t know why some people in online discussions think assertions of counterfactual history—which by definition no one can either prove or refute—constitute valid moral arguments.

“Hawaii would have been conquered by Japan eventually anyway”

 

You can’t prove that, and so what? The republican coup and US annexation were still wrong.

 

It is reasonable on the other hand to argue that the abolition of the German and Austro-Hungarian monarchies in 1918 paved the way for the rise of Nazism and the subsequent expansion of Communism. This can be demonstrated with facts and logic. Had the monarchies survived, their peoples might have been spared a great deal of suffering. But counterfactual scenarios, however enticing (and no one wishes 20th century European history had proceeded differently more than me), are not the core of the moral argument.

 

I believe that the abolition of an ancient monarchy, let alone dozens of them at once, is wrong in itself, regardless of consequences. It is an offence against obedience, tradition, patriotism, aesthetics, the foundation of all previous legality, and the divine order. And that is why restoration is a moral imperative even after the most obvious negative consequences have subsided. Modern Germany and Austria, and the other lands that once made up the Habsburg Empire, may be decent places to live in a narrow materialistic sense, though it took over three decades in the West and seven in the East after the falls of the monarchies for that to be the case, with unprecedented horrors along the way. But there is more to life than materialism.

 

We cannot bring the dead back to life. But when something wrong was done, no matter how long ago, that can be reversed, it must be. And that is why I will insist as long as I draw breath that the occupation of Germany, Austria, Hawaii, and other countries that used to be monarchies by republican regimes is intrinsically immoral, because it constitutes an injustice that though it could be has never been corrected.

Germany and the Hohenzollerns

CNN: Germany's ex-royals want their riches back, but past ties to Hitler stand in the way

To single out the royal family and deny them their property seized by the equally evil Communists when the ancestors of millions of ordinary Germans also supported Hitler in the beginning is grossly unfair. (The article does not mention that Crown Prince Wilhelm soured on Hitler after his friend Kurt von Schleicher was murdered in the Night of the Long Knives in 1934, before most people did.) Germans should be bowing to their Kaiser, not “negotiating” with him. But I want Prince Georg Friedrich to be given back his throne, not only his property. It is republicans, not the royal family, who should be blamed for the rise of Hitler, which was only possible in the context of the vacuum created by the stupid and evil abolition of the monarchies. Still, this is a more thorough and balanced article on the Hohenzollerns than one would normally see in the American media. (Be sure to watch the video, with beautiful footage of Hohenzollern Castle.)

I can’t stand the way that virtually all mainstream commentary on 20th century German history treats the 1918 fall of the monarchies and 1919 establishment of the Weimar Republic as a good thing that all Germans should have immediately embraced, as it those who didn’t were the problem. No. Republicanism is cancer and the Republic was and is the problem. Crown Prince Wilhelm had every right and even the duty to seek the restoration of the monarchy, though as he eventually realised himself he was wrong to put any trust in Hitler. No country has the right to abolish its monarchy, let alone multiple monarchies as happened in Germany in 1918, which with all due respect to 2020 remains the worst year in history. It is those who thought Germany could manage without kings and princes who are to blame for the rise of Hitler, for they created the vacuum that facilitated it. As C.S. Lewis put it, “spiritual nature, like bodily nature, will be served. Deny it food and it will gobble poison.”

 

  

Frustrated

It is really hard for me when even someone who maintains one of my favourite royalty pages feels the need to explicitly declare publicly that they are not advocating the restoration of the [German] Monarchy and privately that it will never happen. I am so tired of being told that my dreams are impossible and that I should instead accept the the way things are. Never. The way things are is an abomination, the infestation of Europe with illegitimate republics a far more egregious monstrosity than any of the things normie conservatives whine about. I will NEVER accept the loss of the German monarchies. If that means that the overwhelming majority of actual Germans today are my enemies, so be it. I curse and condemn the illegitimate Federal Republic of Germany and want the world to know that I am its enemy. I condemn Angela Merkel and Frank-Walter Steinmeier and all German politicians for their treasonous arrogance in refusing to bow to their Kaiser and the rightful other kings and dukes and princes. I demand that Europe be put back mostly the way it was in 1914 (Finland, Poland, and the Baltics can keep their independence), with the Portuguese and French monarchies restored too. And I am sick and tired of "conservative" Christianity not taking a stand. Republicanism is the true sin that cries out to Heaven for vengeance, far worse than anything anyone has ever done with anybody in a bedroom. I demand royal restorations, and I want republican Europeans Left and Right to know that I despise them and their precious republican values. I spit on the German republican constitution and I spit on its Basic Law. There is only one true form of government for Germany or any other country that has had a monarchical tradition. In Europe, Switzerland and San Marino are the only legitimate republics. Death to republicanism. Monarchy yesterday, Monarchy today, Monarchy forever!!!

Royal Encounters in Mexico

Last week I visited my brother William in Mexico, where he has been serving as concertmaster of the Orquestra Sinfónica Nacional in Mexico City. We did a lot of fairly typical Mexican sightseeing (including Chapultepec Castle where Emperor Maximilian and Empress Carlota lived) and eating, mostly beyond the scope of this blog post, but the evening of June 6 was far from typical: a performance for HI&RH Archduke Carlos Felipe, a grandson of Emperor Bl Karl of Austria-Hungary and great-great-grandnephew of Emperor Maximilian of Mexico, at his Mexico City home, for an audience that also included his wife, his two sons, and his cousin HRH Prince Alexander Margrave of Meissen, head of the Royal House of Saxony! While I have had many special experiences as a musician, it's hard to imagine that anything could top playing Bach, Kreisler, and the Kaiserhymne for such an audience. Afterwards (as well as the day before when we were getting ready) I had ample opportunities to talk to all the royalty present, who were impeccably gracious and appreciative: a monarchist musician's dream. I felt that my brother and I got to be the latest in a long line of musicians who have performed for members of the Habsburg dynasty over the centuries. Archduke Carlos Felipe has done a great deal to rehabilitate the image of Emperor Maximilian in Mexico and it was a tremendous honour to be his guest.

With Archduke Carlos Felipe and his wife Annie-Claire in front of a portrait of Emperor Maximilian, June 5

Portraits of Maximilian & Carlota, and their piano, at Chapultepec Castle

My brother and I with Prince Alexander of Saxony, Margrave of Meissen

With Archdukes Louis-Damien and Julian

With Archduke Carlos Felipe and a portrait of his ancestor Emperor Charles V

Altar of the Kings, Mexico City Metropolitan Cathedral, June 7

Grand Duke Adolf Friedrich VI of Mecklenburg Schwerin (1882-1918)

One hundred years ago today, Grand Duke Adolf Friedrich VI of Mecklenburg-Strelitz, 35, committed suicide, for reasons that have never really been satisfactorily explained, though given what happened to all the German monarchies later that year, it may appear in retrospect to have constituted an escape from defeat and revolution. His death plunged the grand duchy into confusion as not only was he childless, his only brother having been killed in a duel, but his only surviving non-morganatic heir, Carl Michael, had served in the enemy Russian forces and wished to renounce his rights to Mecklenburg-Strelitz. With no one to be Grand Duke, the other Mecklenburg Grand Duke, Friedrich Franz IV of Mecklenburg-Schwerin, acted as regent. The succession issue was not resolved until after the fall of the German monarchies, with Carl Michael adopting his hitherto morganatic cousin the Count of Carlow. As the Mecklenburg-Schwerin line eventually died out, ironically today it is that Carlow line that serves as the sole representative of the Mecklenburg family.

Adolf Friedrich VI as a boy

There have been so many depressing centennials, especially for monarchists, since June 28, 2014, and it's far from over. I liked it better when we were less than a century removed from my beloved Belle Époque Europe (1871-1914). Think of how much time has elapsed since summer 2014, all the things you've done, and imagine how horrifyingly endless that war would have seemed by "now," in February 1918, a hundred years ago. How many boys born in the 90s, so much younger than I am, had died. Perhaps that's what got to poor Grand Duke Adolf Friedrich VI, who as a grandson of Queen Victoria's cousin Princess Augusta of Cambridge (1822-1916) deeply loved England, where he had spent a good deal of time before the war. In December 2016 I marked the centennial of Grand Duchess Augusta's death; today I remember her grandson. Adolf Friedrich had been close to his formidable grandmother. She was not spared the war between the two nations she loved, but at least she was spared her grandson's death and the fall of the monarchy.

 

Modern Mecklenburgers paying their respects at the grave of Adolf Friedrich VI on the centennial of his death, 23 February 2018

A Christian EU?

As a monarchist who rejects the Italian, German, and French republics in principle, I'm not especially sympathetic to conservative arguments (though Metropolitan Hilarion has also made comments favorable to monarchy) that the European Project was founded by Devout Christians but only later went off track. Alcide De Gasperi, Theodor Heuss, Konrad Adenauer, and Robert Schuman were not acceptable substitutes for legitimate Christian kings. At a personal level, they remind me of the sort of people I used to argue with on Catholic forums who were dismissive of my monarchist beliefs. That they would probably be appalled by what the EU has become today doesn't mean their sort of "conservatism" wasn't part of the problem. That Western Europe, including its republics, was a superficially decent enough place to live during the second half of the 20th century (I'm not so sure about today) doesn't make the catastrophic political changes of the first half acceptable. France, Portugal, Germany, Austria, and Italy shouldn't _have_ presidents, no matter how "conservative" or "Christian." They should have kings. We can't bring the dead of the World Wars back to life. But we can rebuild buildings, and we can restore monarchies, and we should never give up on the real Europe which is Royal as much as it is Christian.

A month late: this year's July 4 thoughts

I was going to reproduce this July 5 Facebook post here, but forgot to do so until now. If anything, attending the "Enlightened Princesses" exhibit at Kensington Palace on Sunday strengthened my commitment to the Hanoverian succession.

Every year on July 4, online discussions of the American Revolution bring out not only Tories like me, but zealous internet reactionaries (one seldom encounters these people in real life) who after more than 300 years still stubbornly deny the legitimacy of the Hanoverian succession, forming a sort of unholy alliance with conventional republican defenders of the Revolution in denying that George III and his successors have been lawful monarchs at all. (A particularly extreme version I encountered yesterday rejects all English and British monarchs since Pope Pius V excommunicated Queen Elizabeth I in 1570.) Unsurprisingly I tend to get cross with these people (whose views are not required or even supported by actual Roman Catholic teaching), but not only because of my attachment to the present Queen.

I understand the appeal of the 18th century Jacobite cause, and as a member of the board of trustees of the [American] Society of King Charles the Martyr can hardly be considered an enemy of the Stuarts. I believe I would have sided with James II in 1688. But as my irritation with modern hardline Jacobites has grown, I've realised that I am utterly unwilling to concede that the British Monarchy as it has actually existed since 1714 is any kind of inherent disappointment or lesser evil. 

There is nothing wrong with fantasy. But I believe that monarchism necessarily involves supporting real monarchies, which from time to time (not only in 1688/1714) have undergone irregularities in succession. The truth is, I love the close relationship between British and Protestant German royalty that flourished for exactly 200 years (1714-1914), not coincidentally corresponding to the peak era of British power and achievements. That relationship is essentially the foundation of the modern royal genealogy I take pride in having memorised, and inseparable from traditional concepts of Britishness (as opposed to mere Englishness or Scottishness) now endangered on multiple fronts. I don't think it's hyperbole to assert that the agony of the 20th century, and the root of much of what is wrong with the modern world, is ultimately the breakdown of that Anglo-German relationship: the failure of the cozy Victorian dream in which courts all over Germany--Hanover, Prussia, Coburg, Hesse, Württemberg, Mecklenburg-Strelitz--maintained close family ties to the little old lady in Windsor Castle.

Obviously for some the West has been at least partially on the wrong track since 1517. But for me, as a pan-monarchist Tory Anglican, Britain lost her way not when she imported a sovereign from Hanover in 1714, but nearly two centuries later when in stark contrast to the brilliantly successful policies of the 18th and 19th centuries, she drifted away from Germany into the arms of the regicidal French Republic. I refuse to believe that this rupture was inevitable, and I mourn its consequences. And I will never apologise for my loyalty to King George III of the House of Hanover and his heirs and successors. 

🇬🇧

The Monuments Man and the Princess

Here is an interesting article from October I just found yesterday about "Monuments Man" Clyde Harris (1918-1958) of Oklahoma, who married Princess Cecilie of Prussia (1917-1975), a granddaughter of Kaiser Wilhelm II. 

Crown Prince Wilhelm (1882-1951), Princess Cecilie, Clyde Harris, Crown Princess Cecilie (1886-1954), and Amarillo mayor Lawrence Hagy (1899-1993) at Cecilie and Clyde's wedding at Hohenzollern Castle, 21 June 1949

Gone but not forgotten

This must be the saddest British Pathé newsreel ever. And they don't even include Albania, Serbia/Montenegro/Yugoslavia, or Bulgaria, not to mention all the regional German ones. (France, of course, the only major European monarchy of which no film footage exists, had fallen long before the 20th century.) Excellent old footage though, with more recent captions reflecting the perspective of no earlier than the 1970s. (At least one error in the narration: in the beginning of the Russian portion, it is the Tsar's mother, not his wife, on his arm in the procession; Russian protocol gave the Dowager Empress precedence. At the end of the segment, it is indeed Empress Alexandra who walks with her husband.) Beyond Europe, the second half of the 20th century would prove as disastrous for monarchy in Asia and Africa as the first half was for monarchy in Europe.

Remembering Grand Duchess Augusta (1822-1916)

One hundred years ago today, on December 5, 1916, Grand Duchess Augusta of Mecklenburg-Strelitz (1822-1916) (born Princess Augusta of Cambridge) died at the remarkable age of 94. One of my favourite royal personalities of the 19th century, she was known within the family for her strong opinions. Among the things she disapproved of were her cousin Queen Victoria's refusal to go inside St. Paul's Cathedral for her own Diamond Jubilee service in 1897 ("thanking God in the street?!") and the democratic origins of the new Norwegian monarchy in 1905 ("a Revolutionary Coronation!"; her niece the Princess of Wales wrote back, "it is strange, but these are very modern times.") (Sometimes when I disapprove of something I say to myself, "what would Grand Duchess Augusta say?")

During the preparations for the coronation of King Edward VII in 1902, 64 years after the last such ceremony, Grand Duchess Augusta was frequently consulted as she was one of the few living people who could remember the coronations of not only Victoria but also her uncle William IV. Born just two years after the death of her grandfather King George III, she lived through the reigns of George IV, William IV, Victoria, Edward VII, and into the reign of George V. Close to her niece Queen Mary, she regretted being too old to travel to London for their coronation in 1911. In the last years of her life, the Great War divided her from her beloved England. But as she wrote to Queen Mary (via neutral Sweden) not long before her death, "it is a stout English heart that beats beneath these old bones." Sadly, she had outlived her son Grand Duke Adolf Friedrich V (1848-1914), though she was spared the mysterious suicide of her grandson Adolf Friedrich VI (1882-1918). Grand Duchess Augusta was the longest-lived member of the British royal family ever until Princess Alice of Athlone (1883-1981) broke her record; she remains its second-longest-lived member by birth.

Germany in 1900

In honour of today's 145th anniversary of the proclamation of the German Empire, and to go with my new Taschen book, I've created a new page of my website on Germany in 1900. It is too often forgotten that Imperial Germany was not just the Kaisers but included some twenty other reigning monarchs--kings, grand dukes, dukes, and princes--who I rather enjoyed looking up to get their pictures and dates. My favourite of these rulers is probably Georg II of Saxe-Meiningen, the brilliantly artistic "Theatre Duke." Between Wikipedia and Die souveränen Fürstenhäuser Europas
I was able to find age-appropriate pictures of almost everyone, except for Alexander Prince of Lippe (who was mentally ill, reigning with a regency), and the morganatic second wife of Heinrich XXIV Prince Reuss.

It has long struck me as one of the greatest injustices of modern history that, whatever one thinks of the causes of World War I, surely the interior German monarchies cannot be blamed at all, yet they were all dragged down in the apocalypse of November 1918. May they never be forgotten, and somehow one day restored to their charming and occasionally eccentric glory.

Prince Friedrich Wilhelm of Prussia (1939-2015)

RIP Prince Friedrich Wilhelm of Prussia, who died yesterday at 76 after a long illness. The eldest son of Kaiser Wilhelm II's grandson Prince Louis Ferdinand (1907-1994) and Grand Duchess Kira of Russia (1909-1967), he would have succeeded him as head of the House of Hohenzollern had he not married a commoner. (Deposed royal families are often stricter about their marriage laws than reigning ones, since they have no way to change the rules that were in place during the monarchy. Had the German/Prussian monarchy endured, it's likely that the marriage requirements would have been weakened eventually.) A historian who specialized in his own family including Frederick the Great, he is survived by four children including Philipp, a Lutheran pastor, who has advocated the restoration of monarchy in Germany.

Kaiser Wilhelm II (1859-1941) holding his great-grandson Prince Friedrich Wilhelm (1939-2015)

I neglected to mention at this blog that his former sister-in-law Duchess Donata (née Countess of Castell-Rüdenhausen), married firstly to Friedrich Wilhelm's younger brother Prince Louis Ferdinand (1944-1977), with whom she had the actual current head of the family Prince Georg Friedrich, and secondly to their sister's ex-husband Duke Friedrich of Oldenburg, died on September 5 at 65. So the Prussian royal family is doubly bereaved this month. May they both rest in peace, and may the Monarchy they ought to have been able to serve one day rise again.

A Rant on Germany and Greece

I am sick and tired of hearing about Germany and Greece and their disgusting republics. Germany has not had a legitimate government since 1918, Greece since 1973 or arguably 1967. A plague on both their houses. Nations that abolish their monarchies are dead to me. Their miserable politicians should be forced to step down and do penance in monasteries or convents for the rest of their worthless lives. Republicanism and Democracy have failed utterly by their own standards. It is long past time for Europeans to repent of the monstrous errors of 1789-94 and 1917-18 and return to the only system that ever worked: the divinely ordained rule by hereditary Christian monarchs from the same families that built European civilization for more than a thousand years before the satanic darkness of modernity descended. Get down on your knees, Germans, and bow to Kaiser Georg Friedrich I and all the regional rulers as well. Get down on your knees, Greeks, and bow to King Constantine II. Nothing else is acceptable. Return to Altar and Throne, or suffer everlasting wrath.

Goebbels versus "Priests and Tsars"

Few persistent misconceptions are more irritating for real right-wingers (that is, reactionary monarchists) than the canard that the Nazis were "right-wing," that is, just sort of a more extreme version of the Tories. Daniel Hannan, with whom I strongly disagree on the English Civil War but who is correct about a lot of other things, sets the record straight:

"On 16 June 1941, as Hitler readied his forces for Operation Barbarossa, Josef Goebbels looked forward to the new order that the Nazis would impose on a conquered Russia. There would be no come-back, he wrote, for capitalists nor priests nor Tsars. Rather, in the place of debased, Jewish Bolshevism, the Wehrmacht would deliver “der echte Sozialismus”: real socialism."

A come-back for Priests and Tsars, of course, is exactly what all genuine right-wingers would demand for Russia! Accept no substitutes. Nazism, like all modern political evils, was basically a perversion of Leftism, as the great Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn long argued. The only true Right is the Right of Altar and Throne. There has been no legitimate German government since November 1918 and no legitimate Russian government since March 1917. Down with all republican regimes, "Right" or Left! Christian Monarchy Forever!!!