Greg, I am a medieval historian whose area of specialty is the British Isles and Ireland. I so totally agree with you--and ironically got slammed by a bunch of Anglophiles on Heather Cox Richardson's site for saying the British monarchy needs to end. But you missed a few: Monaco, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden and Spain (kinda) all have monarchies (or the equivalent in the form of Grand Duchies), which were retained either because of their ability to withstand invasion from Napoleon, or because their royals were propped up by Britain, Germany, Austria, or Russia. There are royalists who want to reinstall the kings of France (give me strength!) whose party is connected to the neofascists that Marine le Pen leads. So monarchy is not dead yet in Europe.
You didn't mention that Philip was a "prince" because of the Battenberg family (German-Danish) that was foisted on Greece by Britain and Germany as the price for their support in freeing Greece from Ottoman rule in the 19th century. Although born on Corfu, he never bothered to learn Greek, even though his family had "ruled" Greece for about 70 years. Even the Norman conquerors of England learned English within a century after 1066--and they spent most of their time in France, not England, until John lost most of their territory. Philip has been lauded as a "conservationist" while his racism has been underplayed in the many obits. They were equally generous about his mum, who saved a Greek-Jewish family from the Nazis and has been virtually canonized as a result.
Elizabeth and Philip were execrable parents, even though I would venture that Elizabeth actually had a couple of parents who were more sensitive to their daughters than the usual royals, probably because they never expected to be sitting on the hot seat. Philip terrorized his eldest son while indulging the others. The only ones who managed to make their own way in the world, Ann and Edward, did so by removing themselves from the royal orbit and not capitalizing on their family ties--and refusing titles for their kids. The next generation seems to be equally feckless.
So yes: get rid of the monarchy. Get rid of all the monarchies. We might appreciate that the King of Sweden takes the metro to work every day but he's still a king . . .
And as an historian I have to correct some stuff: Henry V (ruled 1414-1422) was king for a tiny portion of the Hundred Years War, begun by Edward III in 1337--it ended in 1453 (so clearly the historians who named it the Hundred Years War couldn't count). And Joan of Arc was active not in his reign but in that of his schizophrenic (really: another problem of intermarriage among the Capetian royal family branches) son, Henry VI, who became king at the age of about 9 months old, so he was super effective for the first 20 years of his reign . . .
I had an experience in 2016 I'd like to ask you about. I was on a Seine River cruise during the time of bombing threats in Paris and to avoid possible problems, the cruise leaders changed the final day's outing to a large country estate that was the original "model" for Versailles. It was newly opened as a tourist destination because its owners needed money to remodel the vast place. So, on the day after Christmas, hundreds of tourists (mostly French - they were avoiding cities due to the bombing threats) crowded into the castle and grounds to be toured by the four current owners of the place - said to be dukes of the former French aristocracy. I had no knowledge that such "aristocracy" still existed in France, nor that they were intent on preserving their on "blood lines!" I wonder if this was just a tale spun for gullible tourists, or if it is true that France continues to harbor a silent , but stubborn group of people who consider themselves to this day to be "royal"? That's my question for you.
Ellen, not only are there people who still want to see a revival of the Bourbon monarchy, there are still people in France who are titled nobility, which was not completely disbanded by the French Revolution, although they no longer have political power such as exists still in the UK, who use their titles and still have hereditary estates. The wonderful historian Elizabeth Macknight's book, Aristocratic Families in Republican France, 1870-1940 (Manchester U Press, 2012), describes a world most people think was destroyed in the Reign of Terror. It was not. And it still does exist in France.
Linda.... I once got a book on the French Revolution and when I read (in the beginning of the book) that the same royalty families were still in power after the revolution, I was so disgusted.... I’m sorry, I trashed it. This was into the beginning of the Trump era so I was a bit over sensitive I think. But the only other book that went in the bin was Paul Ryan. So tell me..... is it true? And does THIS help their kids get into the good schools there?
Well, state-funded schools in France are generally excellent, so it is likely that they are sending their kids to finishing schools in Switzerland and fancy "public" (meaning private) schools in England. But yes: the Bourbons re-established the monarchy after the Napoleonic era and fought it out with the Bonapartes for much of the 19th century. They were finally decommissioned in the Third Republic but the aristocracy was never really altered. There is also a family, which goes by the name St. Croix, that claims direct descent from the Merovingian kings of Frankia (the first post-Roman monarchy founded by Clovis around 500 CE) and according to a popular conspiracy theory they are hankering to become the "real" kings of France. Which is extremely silly.
I was considering changing my first name to Marchioness de Bermo, and then hyphenating my middle and last name. I think, now that I live in the UK, this would engender some very amusing behaviour from my fellow country-persons. Having been born in America I have found the reverence the royal’s are looked at with in the UK astonishing. Curtsy? Why? Their stoicism/glamor hides the fact that they are just folks and put their underwear on one leg at a time, just like everyone else. No better, no worse, just human beings.
I had a friend who married an Italian guy with a last name of De... something. SHe worked like hell to have it changed to “small d” claiming his family was from near to France and could easily have been a small “d.” Now I get it. 😳.........
So how do we reconcile our disgust with the Monarchy (s) and at the same time, a fascination with how they live and behave? Is it a sick curiosity to see the variety of behaviors we can’t participate in? Is it the same as America’s fascination (on some level) with celebrity?
Kind of like Luann, the New York "Housewife" who was married to a minor French noble and when they divorced demanded that she get to keep the title Countess de Lesseps?
Okay, well, as a lifelong Anglophile I have to admit to a fascination with everything royal/British... and yet, I see your point. Clearly.
*That clip from Hamilton*!!! It's my favorite scene and never fails to make me laugh out loud. So thank you for making my morning coffee hour pensive + giggle-worthy. :D
I'm fascinated, too. In fact I have a cool mug on my desk with faces of all the British monarchs on it. But that doesn't mean it isn't silly and wrong.
<nodding> Absolutely. Perhaps if they took away all their frivolous control and left them as token British "celebrities" (and made them make their own money)?!
They had the usual string of ho-hum royals until Louis XIV, a rare example of a dynastic monarch who was actually good at the job, but by the time of Louis XVI, it was jack and jill went up a hill to catch a pail of water, Jack fell down and broke his crown, and Jill came tumbling after, where Jack and Jill are Louis and Marie Antoinette, beheaded nine months later. Napoleon, who came from nothing, completely upended the map of Europe, and of North America, and I'd argue that the Napoleonic Wars were the beginning of the modern era. France kept going from democracy to despot to democracy to despot...it took them a while to figure it out.
Late to the party I am, as usual. Loved this diatribe. And agree with every word. You're such a good writer. Really.
Also: The Monarchy is Dead. Long live the Monarchy. Not.
Elagabalus was new to me, though, so I investigated. Among the usual deviant/sex scandal/religious controversy accusations, I found something interesting:
Of course, Matty G. is not interested in upsetting "the gender, cultural and religious norms" of American society. I think deviant, decadent, and sex scandal-monger are good labels for him! I also hope he is just the first in a long, non-hereditary line of traitors who meet their just desserts.
I just discovered I can post HERE for these mind blowing articles; and hell, if people admire the crown... get all dressed up, but on a hat. Disgusting people assume superiority like this. We need to focus on Jersey Island a lot more and demystify knowing how to use difficult to get products makes people sophisticated and smart.
I was disgusted to find out Maria Antoinette was a child of Maria Theresa... Hapsburg people....forced into marriage..then beheaded? We humans are so perverted. Wasn’t it the Danes who ate their Prime Minister because they were so angry? 🤮 Greg, are we sure our “insurrection” incompetency didn’t make us the laughing stock of the world....?
You are mah spirit animal ♥️ This is superb—Worth the subscription all by itself.
There IS, however, exactly one thing i appreciate about the English royal family: its history of lusty women with, let's say, uncommon sexual agency.
Just in the last decade, studies of Tudor DNA have uncovered three or four "infidelity surprises" in the bloodline—each most likely the offspring of a hot-blooded royal woman and a strapping young tradesman. Mmmmm.
The royals can thank all their uninhibited, unfaithful foremothers for saving them from becoming total inbreds.
Super screed, Greg! Really enjoyed this and now have the Stones stuck in my noggin:
I watched with glee
While your kings and queens
Fought for ten decades
For the gods they made
(Hundred years war made famous by Henry V was mostly about who would rule France. Joan of Arc was involved, sadly)
Mad props 👍
Mick Jagger was not wrong. Thanks!
The Polish pretender was shot out a cannon (corporeal remains) towards his homeland IIRC ... A tidbit token for amusement
I forgot about that! Yes! Ha!
Greg, I am a medieval historian whose area of specialty is the British Isles and Ireland. I so totally agree with you--and ironically got slammed by a bunch of Anglophiles on Heather Cox Richardson's site for saying the British monarchy needs to end. But you missed a few: Monaco, Luxembourg, The Netherlands, Denmark, Sweden and Spain (kinda) all have monarchies (or the equivalent in the form of Grand Duchies), which were retained either because of their ability to withstand invasion from Napoleon, or because their royals were propped up by Britain, Germany, Austria, or Russia. There are royalists who want to reinstall the kings of France (give me strength!) whose party is connected to the neofascists that Marine le Pen leads. So monarchy is not dead yet in Europe.
You didn't mention that Philip was a "prince" because of the Battenberg family (German-Danish) that was foisted on Greece by Britain and Germany as the price for their support in freeing Greece from Ottoman rule in the 19th century. Although born on Corfu, he never bothered to learn Greek, even though his family had "ruled" Greece for about 70 years. Even the Norman conquerors of England learned English within a century after 1066--and they spent most of their time in France, not England, until John lost most of their territory. Philip has been lauded as a "conservationist" while his racism has been underplayed in the many obits. They were equally generous about his mum, who saved a Greek-Jewish family from the Nazis and has been virtually canonized as a result.
Elizabeth and Philip were execrable parents, even though I would venture that Elizabeth actually had a couple of parents who were more sensitive to their daughters than the usual royals, probably because they never expected to be sitting on the hot seat. Philip terrorized his eldest son while indulging the others. The only ones who managed to make their own way in the world, Ann and Edward, did so by removing themselves from the royal orbit and not capitalizing on their family ties--and refusing titles for their kids. The next generation seems to be equally feckless.
So yes: get rid of the monarchy. Get rid of all the monarchies. We might appreciate that the King of Sweden takes the metro to work every day but he's still a king . . .
And as an historian I have to correct some stuff: Henry V (ruled 1414-1422) was king for a tiny portion of the Hundred Years War, begun by Edward III in 1337--it ended in 1453 (so clearly the historians who named it the Hundred Years War couldn't count). And Joan of Arc was active not in his reign but in that of his schizophrenic (really: another problem of intermarriage among the Capetian royal family branches) son, Henry VI, who became king at the age of about 9 months old, so he was super effective for the first 20 years of his reign . . .
Thank you, Linda! I had to hold back...there's so much out there. I love this stuff. Thanks for all these historical morsels!
Not arguing as Historian, because I'm a Shakespeare buff and pop-cultural follower. Of course you are spot-on correct
I had an experience in 2016 I'd like to ask you about. I was on a Seine River cruise during the time of bombing threats in Paris and to avoid possible problems, the cruise leaders changed the final day's outing to a large country estate that was the original "model" for Versailles. It was newly opened as a tourist destination because its owners needed money to remodel the vast place. So, on the day after Christmas, hundreds of tourists (mostly French - they were avoiding cities due to the bombing threats) crowded into the castle and grounds to be toured by the four current owners of the place - said to be dukes of the former French aristocracy. I had no knowledge that such "aristocracy" still existed in France, nor that they were intent on preserving their on "blood lines!" I wonder if this was just a tale spun for gullible tourists, or if it is true that France continues to harbor a silent , but stubborn group of people who consider themselves to this day to be "royal"? That's my question for you.
Ellen, not only are there people who still want to see a revival of the Bourbon monarchy, there are still people in France who are titled nobility, which was not completely disbanded by the French Revolution, although they no longer have political power such as exists still in the UK, who use their titles and still have hereditary estates. The wonderful historian Elizabeth Macknight's book, Aristocratic Families in Republican France, 1870-1940 (Manchester U Press, 2012), describes a world most people think was destroyed in the Reign of Terror. It was not. And it still does exist in France.
Thank you! It was a lovely estate and clearly very much like Versailles. I wish I could remember its name.
Linda.... I once got a book on the French Revolution and when I read (in the beginning of the book) that the same royalty families were still in power after the revolution, I was so disgusted.... I’m sorry, I trashed it. This was into the beginning of the Trump era so I was a bit over sensitive I think. But the only other book that went in the bin was Paul Ryan. So tell me..... is it true? And does THIS help their kids get into the good schools there?
Well, state-funded schools in France are generally excellent, so it is likely that they are sending their kids to finishing schools in Switzerland and fancy "public" (meaning private) schools in England. But yes: the Bourbons re-established the monarchy after the Napoleonic era and fought it out with the Bonapartes for much of the 19th century. They were finally decommissioned in the Third Republic but the aristocracy was never really altered. There is also a family, which goes by the name St. Croix, that claims direct descent from the Merovingian kings of Frankia (the first post-Roman monarchy founded by Clovis around 500 CE) and according to a popular conspiracy theory they are hankering to become the "real" kings of France. Which is extremely silly.
To be fair, if I was from some noble family, I'd at least enjoy letting the information slip at parties.
😉
I was considering changing my first name to Marchioness de Bermo, and then hyphenating my middle and last name. I think, now that I live in the UK, this would engender some very amusing behaviour from my fellow country-persons. Having been born in America I have found the reverence the royal’s are looked at with in the UK astonishing. Curtsy? Why? Their stoicism/glamor hides the fact that they are just folks and put their underwear on one leg at a time, just like everyone else. No better, no worse, just human beings.
I had a friend who married an Italian guy with a last name of De... something. SHe worked like hell to have it changed to “small d” claiming his family was from near to France and could easily have been a small “d.” Now I get it. 😳.........
So how do we reconcile our disgust with the Monarchy (s) and at the same time, a fascination with how they live and behave? Is it a sick curiosity to see the variety of behaviors we can’t participate in? Is it the same as America’s fascination (on some level) with celebrity?
Kind of like Luann, the New York "Housewife" who was married to a minor French noble and when they divorced demanded that she get to keep the title Countess de Lesseps?
Wow! Thank You!
Nooooo, kings in France? Le Pen? Good god. But what would Madame Figaro do for readers?
Okay, well, as a lifelong Anglophile I have to admit to a fascination with everything royal/British... and yet, I see your point. Clearly.
*That clip from Hamilton*!!! It's my favorite scene and never fails to make me laugh out loud. So thank you for making my morning coffee hour pensive + giggle-worthy. :D
I'm fascinated, too. In fact I have a cool mug on my desk with faces of all the British monarchs on it. But that doesn't mean it isn't silly and wrong.
<nodding> Absolutely. Perhaps if they took away all their frivolous control and left them as token British "celebrities" (and made them make their own money)?!
Thank you so much for this unvarnished historical perspective! My sentiments exactly (expletive deleted).
Love it!
How does the French Revolution factor into the history of Monarchy?
They had the usual string of ho-hum royals until Louis XIV, a rare example of a dynastic monarch who was actually good at the job, but by the time of Louis XVI, it was jack and jill went up a hill to catch a pail of water, Jack fell down and broke his crown, and Jill came tumbling after, where Jack and Jill are Louis and Marie Antoinette, beheaded nine months later. Napoleon, who came from nothing, completely upended the map of Europe, and of North America, and I'd argue that the Napoleonic Wars were the beginning of the modern era. France kept going from democracy to despot to democracy to despot...it took them a while to figure it out.
Late to the party I am, as usual. Loved this diatribe. And agree with every word. You're such a good writer. Really.
Also: The Monarchy is Dead. Long live the Monarchy. Not.
Elagabalus was new to me, though, so I investigated. Among the usual deviant/sex scandal/religious controversy accusations, I found something interesting:
https://outhistory.org/exhibits/show/tgi-bios/elagabalus
Of course, Matty G. is not interested in upsetting "the gender, cultural and religious norms" of American society. I think deviant, decadent, and sex scandal-monger are good labels for him! I also hope he is just the first in a long, non-hereditary line of traitors who meet their just desserts.
I probably shouldn't have picked on poor Elagabalus, who only wanted to have fun parties and get his ya-yas out.
Ha ha! Yeah, poor girl/guy!
I just discovered I can post HERE for these mind blowing articles; and hell, if people admire the crown... get all dressed up, but on a hat. Disgusting people assume superiority like this. We need to focus on Jersey Island a lot more and demystify knowing how to use difficult to get products makes people sophisticated and smart.
Welcome to the comment board!
I was disgusted to find out Maria Antoinette was a child of Maria Theresa... Hapsburg people....forced into marriage..then beheaded? We humans are so perverted. Wasn’t it the Danes who ate their Prime Minister because they were so angry? 🤮 Greg, are we sure our “insurrection” incompetency didn’t make us the laughing stock of the world....?
So "Let them eat Danish?" lol
..... 😂..... I like it.....the revenge to gov’t “eating one’s own.” ☕️
You are mah spirit animal ♥️ This is superb—Worth the subscription all by itself.
There IS, however, exactly one thing i appreciate about the English royal family: its history of lusty women with, let's say, uncommon sexual agency.
Just in the last decade, studies of Tudor DNA have uncovered three or four "infidelity surprises" in the bloodline—each most likely the offspring of a hot-blooded royal woman and a strapping young tradesman. Mmmmm.
The royals can thank all their uninhibited, unfaithful foremothers for saving them from becoming total inbreds.
Ha! The same thing happened in Russia, when Catherine got there. The Romanovs aren't Romanovs.
i do have one objection: Should be the trash bin of history (or, even better, the incinerators of history).
Not the recycle bin!
Creating new products out of this archaic—and maximally unjust—relic of the bad old days is the last thing we wana do.