http://internationale.monarchiste.com/?l=gb&membres
Friday, February 26, 2010
Demonstrations in Nepal
NEPAL: On February 22d 2010, thousands of Nepalese monarchists poured into Kathmandu following the appeal of the Monarchist Parliamentary Party « Rastrya Prajatantra Party Nepal »(RPP-N). Demonstrators, boasting a popular petition that gathered about two million signatures demanding a constitutional referendum, occupied the centre of the Nepalese capital, almost paralyzing the city.There were reportedly several incidents, although we don’t have precise information in that regard. But it seems, according to our sources, that the police forces arrested about half a thousand citizens. Among the people under arrest are to be found the leaders and representatives of the RPP-N.
In front of the magnitude of repression, the exiled sovereign, H.M Gyanedra met the Indian authorities who stated that they were highly concerned about the home affairs situation of Nepal. Less than two years after the Republic was proclaimed, Nepal seems to be on the verge of another Revolution, this time in favour of a return of Monarchy. This reversal of situation is taking place after a rapid social and economic deterioration of the country. This illustrating the incapacity of Maoist revolutionaries and their moderate republican allies to handle with the situation.
Since 09:00 a.m this morning, thousands of Rastrya Prajatantra Party Nepal (RPP-N) are pacifically blocking the accesses to Singha Durbar and before Padmodaya School Putalisadak, Anamnagar and Maithigar, demanding constitutional monarchy to be integrated to the new Constitution. During the demonstrations, executives of the RPP-N were wounded by the authorities and there were numerous arrests.
Source: The International Monarchist Conference
Titles: Duke and Duchess
Duke is the highest of the five grades of the peerage. For guidance on how to address the three royal dukes (York, Gloucester and Kent) see Other Royals section).Duke is the highest of the five ranks of the peerage, standing above the ranks of marquess, earl, viscount and baron.
The title duke is derived from the Latin dux, a leader. The title originally signified Sovereign status, for example William the Conqueror was Duke of Normandy, and it was not adopted as a peerage title until 1337, when King Edward III conferred the Dukedom of Cornwall upon his eldest son, the Black Prince.
Dukedoms were created in Parliament by the fastening of a ceremonial sword to a belt or girdle (cincture). This ceremony was traditionally used until 1615, when it was replaced by the conferring of letters patent under the Great Seal (peerage patents are always created by letters patent under the Great Seal, which represents the Sovereign's authority).
The first subject to receive a dukedom who was not a member of the royal family, nor one nearly related, was Sir William de la Pole, Marquess of Suffolk, who was created Duke of Suffolk in 1448. A Prince of the Royal Blood is usually created a duke either shortly after coming of age or upon his marriage. The Queen's second son, Prince Andrew, was created Duke of York upon his marriage in 1986.
The Queen's youngest son, Prince Edward, broke with royal tradition when he chose the title of Earl of Wessex upon his marriage in 1999. Buckingham Palace announced that the Earl of Wessex will be granted the dukedom of Edinburgh when the title reverts to The Crown (the title will only revert to The Crown on both the death of the current Duke of Edinburgh, and the succession of the Prince of Wales to the throne). The other royal dukes are The Queen's first cousins, the Duke of Gloucester and the Duke of Kent (both grandsons of King George V).
The first subject to receive a dukedom who was not a member of the royal family, nor one nearly related, was Sir William de la Pole, Marquess of Suffolk, who was created Duke of Suffolk in 1448. A Prince of the Royal Blood is usually created a duke either shortly after coming of age or upon his marriage. The Queen's second son, Prince Andrew, was created Duke of York upon his marriage in 1986.
The Queen's youngest son, Prince Edward, broke with royal tradition when he chose the title of Earl of Wessex upon his marriage in 1999. Buckingham Palace announced that the Earl of Wessex will be granted the dukedom of Edinburgh when the title reverts to The Crown (the title will only revert to The Crown on both the death of the current Duke of Edinburgh, and the succession of the Prince of Wales to the throne). The other royal dukes are The Queen's first cousins, the Duke of Gloucester and the Duke of Kent (both grandsons of King George V).
At present there are 24 dukes (not including royal dukes). The premier duke and earl of England is the Duke of Norfolk. His ancestor John Howard was created Duke of Norfolk in 1483, but because he inherited his dukedom through his mother, Margaret Mowbray, the duke's precedence (ie his seniority in terms of the antiquity of his title) is dated 1397, which is when Margaret Mowbray's father was created Duke of Norfolk.
The premier peer of Scotland is the Duke of Hamilton and Brandon (created 1643). The premier duke, marquess and earl of Ireland is the Duke of Leinster (created 1766). The most recent (non-royal) dukedom to be created is Westminster in 1874.
Since 1989 only one dukedom has become extinct, Portland (in 1990), but the Earldom of Portland continues and is currently held by Timothy Bentinck, who plays David Archer in BBC Radio 4's drama series 'The Archers'
A duke is always so described, unlike the lower ranks of the peerage. If reference is made to only one duke he may be called 'the Duke' but if distinction is necessary, or on introduction, he should be referred to as 'the Duke of …..'.
Ecclesiastical, ambassadorial and armed forces ranks precede the ducal rank. For example, Major-General the Duke of …..'.
When a duke is also a privy counsellor or has received a knighthood he may use the appropriate post-nominal letters.
The wife of a duke is always described as the Duchess, or the Duchess of ….. if distinction is required or on introduction.
In official documents the style of The Most Noble ….. should still be used for both a duke and duchess.
How to address a Duke and DuchessThe recommended (social) style of address for all non-royal dukes is as follows:
Beginning of letter: Dear Duke/Duchess
End of letter: Yours sincerely
Envelope :The Duke/Duchess of Norfolk
Verbal Communication: Duke/Duchess
Invitation* & joint form of address: The Duke and Duchess of Norfolk
Description in conversation: The Duke/Duchess of Norfolk
List of Directors or Patrons: The Duke/Duchess of Norfolk
Place Card: The Duke/Duchess of Norfolk
Legal document: The Most Noble Edward William Duke of Norfolk, The Most Noble Georgina Susan Duchess of Norfolk
*Note that, traditionally, invitations to a married couple, when sent to their home address, are addressed to the wife alone, with both names being inscribed on the invitation card. It has become increasingly acceptable, however, to address the envelope with both names.
Widow of the Duke
Officially the widow of a duke is known as 'The Dowager Duchess of Norfolk' (unless there is already a dowager duchess in that family still living in which case the widow of the junior duke is known by her forename, eg Anne, Duchess of Norfolk).
In practice, many widows prefer to use their forename in place of 'Dowager'. If in doubt, use of the forename is recommended.
If the present holder of the dukedom is unmarried, the widow of the previous duke does not use the term of either The Dowager Duchess of Norfolk, or Anne, Duchess of Norfolk, but continues to be known as The Duchess of Norfolk.
How to address the Widow of a DukeThe recommended (social) style of address is as follows:
Beginning of letter Dear Duchess
End of letter Yours sincerely
Envelope The Dowager (or Anne) Duchess of Norfolk
Verbal communication Duchess
Invitation The Dowager (or Anne) Duchess of Norfolk
Description in conversation The Duchess of Norfolk
List of Directors or Patrons The Dowager (or Anne) Duchess of Norfolk
Place card The Dowager (or Anne) Duchess of Norfolk
Legal document The Most Noble Anne Mary Teresa Duchess of Norfolk
Former wife of Duke
If a marriage between a duke and duchess has been dissolved, the former wife (although no longer a peeress) may continue to use her title as a duke's wife, preceded by her forename (unless she remarries*).
How to address the Former Wife of a DukeThe recommended (social) style of address is as follows:
Beginning of letter Dear Duchess
End of letter Yours sincerely
Envelope Jillian, Duchess of Hamilton
Verbal communication Duchess
Invitation Jillian, Duchess of Hamilton
Description in conversation The Duchess of Hamilton
List of Directors or Patrons Jillian, Duchess of Hamilton
Place card Jillian, Duchess of Hamilton
Legal document Jillian Duchess of Hamilton
*If the former wife of a duke subsequently remarries she adopts her style of address from her present husband. Thus if Jillian, Duchess of Hamilton, marries Mr Cuthbert Robinson she becomes Mrs Cuthbert Robinson.
Sons of a Duke
Eldest Son of a DukeThe eldest (or only) son of a duke will use one of his father's lesser peerage titles. For example, the son and heir apparent of the Duke of Rutland is known as the Marquess of Granby and the appropriate forms of address for a Marquess by courtesy therefore apply to him and his family.
If the duke is of the peerage of Scotland please refer to Scottish Title of Master
See Peerages by Courtesy
Younger Sons of a DukeThe younger sons of a duke have the courtesy title of 'Lord' before their forename and surname.
Prefixes such as His Excellency, Major General, The Rt Rev, The Rt Hon etc. precede his courtesy title.
How to address the Younger Son of a DukeThe recommended (social) style of address is as follows:
Beginning of letter Dear Lord Edward
End of letter Yours sincerely
Envelope Lord Edward Fitzgerald
Verbal communication Lord Edward
Invitation* Lord Edward Fitzgerald
Description in conversation Lord Edward
List of Directors or Patrons Lord Edward Fitzgerald
Place card Lord Edward Fitzgerald
Legal document Edward Fitzgerald commonly called Lord Edward Fitzgerald
*Note that, traditionally, invitations to a married couple, when sent to their home address, are addressed to the wife alone, with both names being inscribed on the invitation card. It has become increasingly acceptable, however, to address the envelope with both names.
Wife of the Younger Son of a DukeThe wife of the younger son of a duke has the courtesy title of 'Lady' followed by her husband's forename and surname (unless herself the daughter of a duke or marquess *).
How to address the Wife of a Younger Son of a DukeThe recommended (social) style of address is as follows:
Beginning of letter Dear Lady Edward
End of letter Yours sincerely
Envelope Lady Edward Fitzgerald
Verbal address Lady Edward
Invitation Lady Edward Fitzgerald
Description in conversation Lady Edward
List of Directors or Patrons Lady Edward Fitzgerald
Place card Lady Edward Fitzgerald
Legal document Helen Fitzgerald commonly called Lady Edward Fitzgerald
*If she is the daughter of a duke, marquess or earl, she may continue to use her own title instead of that of her husband. This style should only be used if it known to be the preferred form of address.
Widow of the Younger Son of a Duke
Her style in widowhood does not change, except on remarriage, when she adopts the style from her new husband.
Daughters of a Duke
A daughter of a duke has the style of 'Lady' before her forename and surname, eg the elder daughter of the Duke of Norfolk is Lady Rachel Fitzalan Howard.
On marriage she continues to use the same style, with her husband's surname, ie when Lady Rose FitzRoy married Mr Guy Monson, she became Lady Rose Monson.
Should she marry a peer she adopts his title.
How to address the Daughters of a DukeThe recommended (social) style of address is as follows:
Beginning of letter Dear Lady Rose
End of letter Yours sincerely
Envelope Lady Rose Monson
Joint form of address Mr Guy and Lady Rose Monson
Verbal communication Lady Rose (on introduction, Lady Rose Monson)
Invitation Lady Rose Monson
Invitation* to husband & wife Mr Guy and Lady Rose Monson
Description in conversation Lady Rose
List of Directors or Patrons Lady Rose Monson
Place card Lady Rose Monson
Legal document Olivia Rose Mildred Monson commonly called Lady Rose Monson
*Note that, traditionally, invitations to a married couple, when sent to their home address, are addressed to the wife alone, with both names being inscribed on the invitation card. It has become increasingly acceptable, however, to address the envelope with both names.
Exceptions
If she marries a courtesy peer, and the precedence she derives from this is lower than that she derives from her father, she has the option of:
(a) adopting the usual style of the wife of a courtesy peer, eg Countess of Twickenham, or
(b) continuing her own style followed by the courtesy title, eg Lady Mary Twickenham.
In practice very few ladies now adopt course (b) unless the marriage has been dissolved.
If the daughter of a duke marries the younger son of a duke or marquess, again she has the option of:
(a) adopting the usual style of the wife of a younger son of a duke or marquess, eg Lady Charles Manners, or
(b) continuing her own style followed by her surname, eg Lady Mary Manners
The premier peer of Scotland is the Duke of Hamilton and Brandon (created 1643). The premier duke, marquess and earl of Ireland is the Duke of Leinster (created 1766). The most recent (non-royal) dukedom to be created is Westminster in 1874.
Since 1989 only one dukedom has become extinct, Portland (in 1990), but the Earldom of Portland continues and is currently held by Timothy Bentinck, who plays David Archer in BBC Radio 4's drama series 'The Archers'
A duke is always so described, unlike the lower ranks of the peerage. If reference is made to only one duke he may be called 'the Duke' but if distinction is necessary, or on introduction, he should be referred to as 'the Duke of …..'.
Ecclesiastical, ambassadorial and armed forces ranks precede the ducal rank. For example, Major-General the Duke of …..'.
When a duke is also a privy counsellor or has received a knighthood he may use the appropriate post-nominal letters.
The wife of a duke is always described as the Duchess, or the Duchess of ….. if distinction is required or on introduction.
In official documents the style of The Most Noble ….. should still be used for both a duke and duchess.
How to address a Duke and DuchessThe recommended (social) style of address for all non-royal dukes is as follows:
Beginning of letter: Dear Duke/Duchess
End of letter: Yours sincerely
Envelope :The Duke/Duchess of Norfolk
Verbal Communication: Duke/Duchess
Invitation* & joint form of address: The Duke and Duchess of Norfolk
Description in conversation: The Duke/Duchess of Norfolk
List of Directors or Patrons: The Duke/Duchess of Norfolk
Place Card: The Duke/Duchess of Norfolk
Legal document: The Most Noble Edward William Duke of Norfolk, The Most Noble Georgina Susan Duchess of Norfolk
*Note that, traditionally, invitations to a married couple, when sent to their home address, are addressed to the wife alone, with both names being inscribed on the invitation card. It has become increasingly acceptable, however, to address the envelope with both names.
Widow of the Duke
Officially the widow of a duke is known as 'The Dowager Duchess of Norfolk' (unless there is already a dowager duchess in that family still living in which case the widow of the junior duke is known by her forename, eg Anne, Duchess of Norfolk).
In practice, many widows prefer to use their forename in place of 'Dowager'. If in doubt, use of the forename is recommended.
If the present holder of the dukedom is unmarried, the widow of the previous duke does not use the term of either The Dowager Duchess of Norfolk, or Anne, Duchess of Norfolk, but continues to be known as The Duchess of Norfolk.
How to address the Widow of a DukeThe recommended (social) style of address is as follows:
Beginning of letter Dear Duchess
End of letter Yours sincerely
Envelope The Dowager (or Anne) Duchess of Norfolk
Verbal communication Duchess
Invitation The Dowager (or Anne) Duchess of Norfolk
Description in conversation The Duchess of Norfolk
List of Directors or Patrons The Dowager (or Anne) Duchess of Norfolk
Place card The Dowager (or Anne) Duchess of Norfolk
Legal document The Most Noble Anne Mary Teresa Duchess of Norfolk
Former wife of Duke
If a marriage between a duke and duchess has been dissolved, the former wife (although no longer a peeress) may continue to use her title as a duke's wife, preceded by her forename (unless she remarries*).
How to address the Former Wife of a DukeThe recommended (social) style of address is as follows:
Beginning of letter Dear Duchess
End of letter Yours sincerely
Envelope Jillian, Duchess of Hamilton
Verbal communication Duchess
Invitation Jillian, Duchess of Hamilton
Description in conversation The Duchess of Hamilton
List of Directors or Patrons Jillian, Duchess of Hamilton
Place card Jillian, Duchess of Hamilton
Legal document Jillian Duchess of Hamilton
*If the former wife of a duke subsequently remarries she adopts her style of address from her present husband. Thus if Jillian, Duchess of Hamilton, marries Mr Cuthbert Robinson she becomes Mrs Cuthbert Robinson.
Sons of a Duke
Eldest Son of a DukeThe eldest (or only) son of a duke will use one of his father's lesser peerage titles. For example, the son and heir apparent of the Duke of Rutland is known as the Marquess of Granby and the appropriate forms of address for a Marquess by courtesy therefore apply to him and his family.
If the duke is of the peerage of Scotland please refer to Scottish Title of Master
See Peerages by Courtesy
Younger Sons of a DukeThe younger sons of a duke have the courtesy title of 'Lord' before their forename and surname.
Prefixes such as His Excellency, Major General, The Rt Rev, The Rt Hon etc. precede his courtesy title.
How to address the Younger Son of a DukeThe recommended (social) style of address is as follows:
Beginning of letter Dear Lord Edward
End of letter Yours sincerely
Envelope Lord Edward Fitzgerald
Verbal communication Lord Edward
Invitation* Lord Edward Fitzgerald
Description in conversation Lord Edward
List of Directors or Patrons Lord Edward Fitzgerald
Place card Lord Edward Fitzgerald
Legal document Edward Fitzgerald commonly called Lord Edward Fitzgerald
*Note that, traditionally, invitations to a married couple, when sent to their home address, are addressed to the wife alone, with both names being inscribed on the invitation card. It has become increasingly acceptable, however, to address the envelope with both names.
Wife of the Younger Son of a DukeThe wife of the younger son of a duke has the courtesy title of 'Lady' followed by her husband's forename and surname (unless herself the daughter of a duke or marquess *).
How to address the Wife of a Younger Son of a DukeThe recommended (social) style of address is as follows:
Beginning of letter Dear Lady Edward
End of letter Yours sincerely
Envelope Lady Edward Fitzgerald
Verbal address Lady Edward
Invitation Lady Edward Fitzgerald
Description in conversation Lady Edward
List of Directors or Patrons Lady Edward Fitzgerald
Place card Lady Edward Fitzgerald
Legal document Helen Fitzgerald commonly called Lady Edward Fitzgerald
*If she is the daughter of a duke, marquess or earl, she may continue to use her own title instead of that of her husband. This style should only be used if it known to be the preferred form of address.
Widow of the Younger Son of a Duke
Her style in widowhood does not change, except on remarriage, when she adopts the style from her new husband.
Daughters of a Duke
A daughter of a duke has the style of 'Lady' before her forename and surname, eg the elder daughter of the Duke of Norfolk is Lady Rachel Fitzalan Howard.
On marriage she continues to use the same style, with her husband's surname, ie when Lady Rose FitzRoy married Mr Guy Monson, she became Lady Rose Monson.
Should she marry a peer she adopts his title.
How to address the Daughters of a DukeThe recommended (social) style of address is as follows:
Beginning of letter Dear Lady Rose
End of letter Yours sincerely
Envelope Lady Rose Monson
Joint form of address Mr Guy and Lady Rose Monson
Verbal communication Lady Rose (on introduction, Lady Rose Monson)
Invitation Lady Rose Monson
Invitation* to husband & wife Mr Guy and Lady Rose Monson
Description in conversation Lady Rose
List of Directors or Patrons Lady Rose Monson
Place card Lady Rose Monson
Legal document Olivia Rose Mildred Monson commonly called Lady Rose Monson
*Note that, traditionally, invitations to a married couple, when sent to their home address, are addressed to the wife alone, with both names being inscribed on the invitation card. It has become increasingly acceptable, however, to address the envelope with both names.
Exceptions
If she marries a courtesy peer, and the precedence she derives from this is lower than that she derives from her father, she has the option of:
(a) adopting the usual style of the wife of a courtesy peer, eg Countess of Twickenham, or
(b) continuing her own style followed by the courtesy title, eg Lady Mary Twickenham.
In practice very few ladies now adopt course (b) unless the marriage has been dissolved.
If the daughter of a duke marries the younger son of a duke or marquess, again she has the option of:
(a) adopting the usual style of the wife of a younger son of a duke or marquess, eg Lady Charles Manners, or
(b) continuing her own style followed by her surname, eg Lady Mary Manners
Debrett's People of Today 2010 now available
This definitive guide to Britain's meritocracy is the major biographical study of the UK's most influential and successful people. Debrett's People of Today recognises the achievements of over 25,000 people drawn from every sector of society - from academics to writers, business leaders to sportsmen, civil servants to pop stars, clergy to politicians.Typically over 650 new entrants are hand-picked by Debrett's team of expert editors each year, in addition to over 20,000 amendments made to existing entries. Not all entrants are guaranteed a place in Debrett's People of Today for life, unlike certain other reference works.
Who's Included?Debrett's People of Today provides the widest possible coverage of any biographical reference book in the UK. Leading figures include chairmen, chief executives & managing directors of leading companies; members of the medical profession; directors of banks and financial institutions; architects, designers and engineers; artists, composers & musicians; members of the legal profession; directors of marketing & advertising agencies; film, theatre & television actors; editors, publishers and journalists; scientists, academics & educationalists; leading literary figures; sportsmen & sportswomen; bishops and church leaders; MPs, MEPs, MSPs, MLAs and AMs.
What's Included?For each entrant a full biographical resume is presented - the person's correct title and decorations, date of birth, family history and education, recent position, achievements, career, recreations and clubs, preferred style of address and contact details.
Quite simply, no other publication brings this breadth and depth of information together in one place to provide a snapshot of those high achievers pre-eminent in their fields.
Additional IndicesDebrett's People of Today also includes several indices to complement the biographies and act as an invaluable comprehensive reference source in their own right. These cover business, charities, civil service, clubs, education establishments, embassies, law, politics and other professional fields. Detailed contact information is provided for each of the above.
The 2010 edition is now available (published December 2009).
We aim to deliver all orders to UK addresses within 7-10 working days, although you should allow up to 28 days in exceptional circumstances.
Available on www.debretts.com
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Burke`s Peerage & Gentry new digital edition now available
Burke’s Peerage is delighted to announce our new digital edition of the definitive study of the extant Orders of Knighthood and merit of every state.World Orders of Knighthood & Merit is widely accepted as one of the most important works ever produced on the subject and will remain the definitive guide for many years to come. This 2,100 page full-colour book is of great interest to academics, historians, collectors, monarchists, heraldry enthusiasts and those who are members of any of the numerous international, noble and state Orders.
Frederik and Mary of Denmark throw open the doors of their modern new palace
24 FEBRUARY 2010After five years waiting for your new house to be ready, most people would be wanting to leap inside immediately.
But Denmark's Crown Prince Frederik and Crown Princess Mary have decided to postpone their big move in order to allow the public to view their future royal residence for a limited time.
The newly renovated Frederik VIII Palace in the Amalienborg royal complex in Copenhagen, where Queen Margrethe and Prince Henrik also reside, will be open to visitors from February 27 to May 30.
Those paying the modest €5 entrance fee will be able to admire the transformed ground and first floors of the 18th-century building, which will be used for official receptions.
Every detail of the £26 million refurbishment was decided in conjunction with the prince and princess and includes the renovation of painted ceilings, canvas-clad walls and pine, marble and mosaic-covered floors.
Meanwhile, artworks by a host of contemporary Scandinavian artists add modern touches to the classic interiors.
The 1,660 square-metre gardens have also been remodelled by landscape gardener Jacob Fischery, who has added new plants, a 1,300 square-metre lawn and a 40-metre swimming pool.
Also known as the Brockdorff Palace, the building was the home of Frederik's grandparents, King Frederik IX and Queen Ingrid, but has remained empty since Ingrid died in 2000.
By moving into the palace, a former military academy, Frederik and Mary will be continuing the tradition of Denmark's heirs and regents living around Amalienborg's four royal residences.
House of Romanovs wants royal remains to be re-examined
Moscow, February 24, Interfax - The House of Romanovs has said it wants to re-examine what is thought to be the remains of the last Russian Tsar Nicholas II and his family found in Yekaterinburg.
"Unfortunately, there is too much confusion in this case and some serious errors were made when the Yekaterinburg remains were being identified," Prince Georgy Mikhailovich, the son of the Romanovs' House head Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna, told Interfax on Wednesday.
"Many of the facts uncovered suggest that the Commission was staging a political show for a date, rather than working to establish the truth," Romanov said.
The remains were buried in St. Petersburg in 1998 in haste and in defiance of the opinion of the Russian Orthodox Church and the House of Romanovs, he said.
"No satisfactory answers have been provided to the ten questions, formulated by independent scholars and referred to the Commission back in 1998 by the late Russian Orthodox Patriarch Alexy II. Meanwhile, those were questions, which interested not only experts, but also people and millions of believers. The Church needed to console these people instead of leaving them with a feeling of having been deceived. The Commission did not care. There was a farce instead of an act of repentance and purification," he said.
The remains' authenticity must be further studied, Romanov said.
"Unfortunately, there is too much confusion in this case and some serious errors were made when the Yekaterinburg remains were being identified," Prince Georgy Mikhailovich, the son of the Romanovs' House head Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna, told Interfax on Wednesday.
"Many of the facts uncovered suggest that the Commission was staging a political show for a date, rather than working to establish the truth," Romanov said.
The remains were buried in St. Petersburg in 1998 in haste and in defiance of the opinion of the Russian Orthodox Church and the House of Romanovs, he said.
"No satisfactory answers have been provided to the ten questions, formulated by independent scholars and referred to the Commission back in 1998 by the late Russian Orthodox Patriarch Alexy II. Meanwhile, those were questions, which interested not only experts, but also people and millions of believers. The Church needed to console these people instead of leaving them with a feeling of having been deceived. The Commission did not care. There was a farce instead of an act of repentance and purification," he said.
The remains' authenticity must be further studied, Romanov said.
Grand Duke of Russia gave an interview to a newspaper "The Tomorrow"
Lev Tikhomirov, in his work "monarchical state," written in the early twentieth century and which gave a theoretical justification of the monarchical principle, wrote the following: "Humanity is not always correctly guess what it is. History of Greece, the general opinion of all her political life and civil, has been a process of democratic development. And yet, it actually finished a world monarchy of Alexander of Macedon, who was the representative of cultural affairs, prepared by the preceding period of development of democracy. This exodus of the Greeks did not expect to do nothing with Themistocles, Pericles. Do not imagine, and the gallant Republicans Rome since the Punic wars of the future appearance of Caesar and Augustus "
According to opinion polls, about 20% of the citizens of modern Russia are ready to support the revival of the monarchy. It is possible however, that each of the respondents understood monarchy as something of their own. The spread of opinion in this matter is extremely wide. For some preferred a constitutional monarchy, it is decorative: as a kind of symbol that can stabilize the political life in the country and to emphasize the historical continuity of epochs. Others, conversely, looking forward to the autocratic system await full power of Caesar, which will provide the necessary centralization of power, clean Augean stables "democracy", restore the international status of Russia, arranged inside the country a semblance of the kingdom of justice.
I remember, the hero of the novel by Mikhail Bulgakov, watching crimes of bandits during the civil war, and cried in their hearts: "I am - a monarchist by conviction. But at the moment the Bolsheviks are required ..." Now you can hear something else: "I am - a socialist by conviction, but without the wise and strong king of Russia did not get out of the quagmire ... "
Editor of portal Pravaya.ru, historian Alexander Eliseev wrote once in his article "The Tsar and the Soviets!" ("Tomorrow" № 47, 2007) wrote this: "... autocracy and self-government - this is the formula of the dialectical synthesis, through which you can restore the age-old Russian rule at the next level."
Today's monarchist movement is contradictory and heterogeneous. It is the projection of the mysteries and paradoxes of denial, of what happened in March 1917. The religious meaning of the termination and restoration of the monarchy in Russia is obvious to so many Orthodox believers, though not universally accepted.
Ideological, spiritual and political nuances of monarchical consciousness superimposed on the unresolved questions about a possible way to establish a monarchy in Russia.
Modern Russia's monarchists are divided into two main groups: the so-called "Cathedral Folk" and "Legitimists." That is, the supporters of the election at the Council a new tsar, unrelated to any dynastic preferences, and supporters of the Romanov dynasty.
The first group in the early 90-ies took shape as a very powerful movement, supporting the new All-Russia Convention (Zemsky Sobor), which should elect the next tsar. Main of this movement was a monarchist and populist Vyacheslav Klykov. He urged the arrival of the new ruling dynasty, namely -the descendants of Soviet Marshal Georgy Zhukov. Public euphoria ended after Gaidar's reforms and shootings in 1993 and the activities of the cathedral monarchists came to nothing.
Regarding "Legitimists", here we see several trends, targeting various competing branches of the Romanov dynasty, whose representatives were born and live outside Russia." But today, the European monarchs and representatives of the ruling houses, who lost their thrones, recognize the inheritance right only Kirillovichi, which is well known and we have.
The heir to the throne of Russia, son of Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna, and Prince Franz-Wilhelm of Prussia Hohenzollern, the Grand Duke George of Russia - the youngest of Kirillovich. He was born in 1981 in Madrid. From his father side, he is the great grandson of german Emperor Wilhelm II, from his mother – great-great-great grandson of Russian Emperor Alexander II. Native language of George - French, although he readily speaks and reads Spanish, English and Russian.
Prince George for their incomplete thirty years had to learn in Oxford, to work in the European Parliament, and then the agency of the European Commission on Nuclear Safety in Luxembourg. Since 2008 he works as Advisor to CEO, Norilsk Nickel, Russia, introducing this corporation in the Nickel Institute (Brussels, Belgium).
Grand Duke George has kindly agreed to talk with representatives of the newspaper “Tomorrow". Personality and perceptions of the Romanov heir, of course, will be of interest to most of our readers.
Tomorrow. Your Highness, being heir to the Imperial House, do you see yourself as a potential monarch?
Grand Duke Georgy Mikhailovich. Status of Imperial House head, which is now my mother, Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna and her heir, of course, contains within itself the possibility sometime in the future to lead not only the dynasty, but also country. Of course, this can only happen if Russian people would again support the monarchical principle. If the day will come when I called to this duty, I do not turn from it. But in the present, as all the sovereigns of our home in exile: My great-grandfather, grandfather and my mother - I try to live according to the well-known principle of "Do what you must, and whether that will happen." It would be foolish to sit and dream: "And what will I do if I will ascend to the throne? I try to be useful to my Motherland in my today’s position, helping my mother in her duty and accumulating professional experience and knowledge that will be useful in any case.
Tomorrow. How, in your opinion, monarchist idea could be implemented in contemporary situation?
GD It is necessary freely expressed will of a nation-wide for the monarchy’ restoration. I'm sure if people will get honest and objective information, they will make the right conclusions and choose one that fits its genuine national interests. History shows that people mechanical majority often make mistakes. But if people feel not like "mass" and "population", but as individuals, united by common values, respect of their ancestors and themselves and willing that following generations will respect them - then people would not make mistakes. Revival of the monarchy after the Troubles of XVII century, 400 years since the end of which we will celebrate soon, clearly illustrates my words.
Tomorrow. Could the Russian monarchy be restored not as the Empire, but in the frames of the local "national state"?
GD In the foreseeable future, I do not see any prerequisites that Russia has lost its multinational character, regardless of type of its political state. But if you talk in theory ... This Empire - this is not a system of oppression of one nation by the others, but the family of fraternal peoples, united by common goals and interests, which keep the unity in diversity. Russia had originally been a multinational state and throughout its history has sought to integrate people into a single empire. But along with this, in our past there were periods when dominated by centrifugal forces. In its time to revive a central state was able to Muscovy, initially very small and even smaller than that in the impact of other similar "local national states." The reason for this, in my opinion, lies in the fact that Muscovy, on the one hand, managed to defend the hard monarchical principle, and on the other - their policy was sufficiently flexible and modern. Yes, they were able to compromise, and without betraying the principal and over several generations strategically preparing the union and the liberation of their country. Nowadays, Russia, indeed, because of the severe consequences of several revolutions of the twentieth century, thrown far back. But, I repeat, I am confident that before the "local national state" we do not ever sunk. On the contrary, I believe that Russia has a chance not only to maintain its current territorial integrity, but also attract the fraternal peoples of the former Russia Empire by the updated forms of integration. Perfectly aware that it will not pre-revolutionary Empire and the Soviet Union. However, an appeal to the best examples from the past will enable us to preserve, at least, a single cultural space.
Tomorrow. Many of the current conservative models start with the obligatory defamation of the Soviet period. How do you see the restoration of the monarchy in Russia? Political revenge or a kind of vanguard project for the Russian future? Restoration or attempt to unite the nation with consideration of the Soviet experience?
GD Very serious question. Restoration of the monarchy in any case can’t be revenge. Emperor Nicholas II abdicated it in the hope of reconciling and preventing fratricide. Imperial House of Russia did not participate in the Civil War, when it still broke. We are not "red" and not "white", and we can’t have revenge sentiments. Revolution is a terrible national tragedy. Our Dynasty greatly suffered from it. But our entire nation suffered a lot, including the direct creators and participants of the revolution from both sides. If our thoughts and desires towards the future, we must stop to reopen old wounds and remember each other offenses. My mother always called compatriots seek not what divides but what unites all of us. If we want to return Russia to its place in the world, we should not continue to blame each other, and learn to forgive and ask forgiveness. And to go forward with goodwill and solidarity, not with hatred and revenge.
Monarchy - is the idea of true national unity. Being a legitimate and hereditary, that is continuous in historical time, it brings together the country's citizens, not only for the sake of some short-term goals, but for centuries-old traditions in the name of the present and for the future. The monarchy is obliged to take into account any experience - both positive and negative. We should not forget anything to avoid a repetition of evil. Need to give moral and legal appraisal of the past. For example, nothing can justify the violent nature of the God-fighting totalitarian regimes and its class or racial genocide, when millions of people were wiped out for what they could not change under any circumstances - for their national or social origin. But in condemning the crimes and errors, with the dirty water does not have to splash out a child. There were a lot of bright and heroic in our people life in the Soviet period. My great-grandfather Emperor Kirill and my grandfather, Emperor Vladimir Kirillovich always called for a clear distinction between the godless and inhuman Marxist-Leninist ideology and the creation of the national spirit, which breaks all the shackles.
Imperial House of Russia believes that the monarchy - is a modern and progressive system of government, which has a future. It is able to synthesize the positive experiences of all periods of our history, including the Soviet one. Even my great-grandfather in one of his hits made a very correct idea: "No need to destroy any facilities, life caused, but we need to turn away from those who desecrate the human soul." I fully share this view. That is my position.
Tomorrow. Monarchic project must necessarily rely on a layer of "sovereign people". From which strata of society, in your opinion, they should come? The oligarchs, the army, the intelligentsia, etc.
GD Monarchy - a national idea. It can’t rely on some specific classes and social groups. One major advantage of the legitimate hereditary monarchy is that in this system, the head of state is not obliged to his authority to anyone but God. And therefore it can be a true arbiter, the Father of the nation, for whom all the members of his family are precious. The monarchy must have support at all levels of society. Of course, the state is unthinkable without a hierarchical structure. Another thing is that the ruling class should be continuously updated with the best representatives of all social strata and groups. And these very strata and groups should be allowed to occupy its worthy place in a legal state and civil society, possessing all the necessary rights and responsibilities.
Tomorrow. Your ancestors - the tsars and emperors. Do you feel any particular, involvement in the history of your family, figuratively speaking: Do you have dreams you about dynasty’ past?
GD Dreams ... not dream, but the involvement, of course, I feel like probably everyone feels a connection with their ancestors. Even if he does not think there is, after all, it is genetics. Our ancestors have left this world, but some small part of them continues to live in us, to influence our character, temperament, and, consequently, our actions. The feeling of belonging to the family inspires self-discipline. We must try to behave so as not to disgrace our ancestors and our descendants to not be ashamed of us.
Tomorrow. Is the role of the House Heir the burden to you, does you status bother you in your life?
GD Yeah ... A negative answer to your question would imply frivolity, and the positive - excessive pride. In fact, any position dealing with people trust to you and their hopes is a difficult burden. But at the same time, it inspires and allows you to survive in difficult life situations. I can’t say that my situation bothers me. But I understand that this is a big responsibility. I have the right to privacy, especially because now I have no public duties. But I still can’t do much of what any other individuals could do. My mother and grandparents raising me put in my mind kind of traffic light. If there is even a thought: "Why me, in the end, should do or not do so-and-so?" Then suddenly red light lit. Sometimes it's a human being annoyed that maybe missed some opportunities, but then, over time and common sense, I am convinced that self-restraint in most cases was correct and useful. God brought our world so that everything in life is balanced, so to complain about the fate of never worth it.
Tomorrow. Do you have any preferences in Russian history, favorite heroes or anti-heroes?
GD Calm and confident style of the reign of Alexander III is close to me. During his reign Russia was a real superpower, whose power was based not on fear and dislike, but in sincere respect. When he died, even geopolitical enemies of our country paid tribute to him, because he was the guardian of international equilibrium. I think undeservedly overlooked John III, who in 1480 was destined to a peaceful end of foreign domination. And in fact he is the father of the sovereignty of our country. Such rulers as John III, maybe not famous for great battles and grandiose reforms, but really they have done more for the country than many brilliant rulers. In general, the main hero of Russian history, of course, is our people. They are often sacrificed for the sake of supposed "public interest". But what are these interests and whose are they, if for the sake of them millions of people being sacrificed? The true heroes are not those who spectacularly won the struggle for power, to bump off their fellow citizens, without counting, but those who have had successes, saving people lives. And when it really is a threat to national existence, our nation does not need to be convinced to make sacrifices. An example of this - all the wars from the campaigns of Oleg and Svyatoslav to the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945.
Interview by Andrey Smirnov and Andrey Fefelov
According to opinion polls, about 20% of the citizens of modern Russia are ready to support the revival of the monarchy. It is possible however, that each of the respondents understood monarchy as something of their own. The spread of opinion in this matter is extremely wide. For some preferred a constitutional monarchy, it is decorative: as a kind of symbol that can stabilize the political life in the country and to emphasize the historical continuity of epochs. Others, conversely, looking forward to the autocratic system await full power of Caesar, which will provide the necessary centralization of power, clean Augean stables "democracy", restore the international status of Russia, arranged inside the country a semblance of the kingdom of justice.
I remember, the hero of the novel by Mikhail Bulgakov, watching crimes of bandits during the civil war, and cried in their hearts: "I am - a monarchist by conviction. But at the moment the Bolsheviks are required ..." Now you can hear something else: "I am - a socialist by conviction, but without the wise and strong king of Russia did not get out of the quagmire ... "
Editor of portal Pravaya.ru, historian Alexander Eliseev wrote once in his article "The Tsar and the Soviets!" ("Tomorrow" № 47, 2007) wrote this: "... autocracy and self-government - this is the formula of the dialectical synthesis, through which you can restore the age-old Russian rule at the next level."
Today's monarchist movement is contradictory and heterogeneous. It is the projection of the mysteries and paradoxes of denial, of what happened in March 1917. The religious meaning of the termination and restoration of the monarchy in Russia is obvious to so many Orthodox believers, though not universally accepted.
Ideological, spiritual and political nuances of monarchical consciousness superimposed on the unresolved questions about a possible way to establish a monarchy in Russia.
Modern Russia's monarchists are divided into two main groups: the so-called "Cathedral Folk" and "Legitimists." That is, the supporters of the election at the Council a new tsar, unrelated to any dynastic preferences, and supporters of the Romanov dynasty.
The first group in the early 90-ies took shape as a very powerful movement, supporting the new All-Russia Convention (Zemsky Sobor), which should elect the next tsar. Main of this movement was a monarchist and populist Vyacheslav Klykov. He urged the arrival of the new ruling dynasty, namely -the descendants of Soviet Marshal Georgy Zhukov. Public euphoria ended after Gaidar's reforms and shootings in 1993 and the activities of the cathedral monarchists came to nothing.
Regarding "Legitimists", here we see several trends, targeting various competing branches of the Romanov dynasty, whose representatives were born and live outside Russia." But today, the European monarchs and representatives of the ruling houses, who lost their thrones, recognize the inheritance right only Kirillovichi, which is well known and we have.
The heir to the throne of Russia, son of Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna, and Prince Franz-Wilhelm of Prussia Hohenzollern, the Grand Duke George of Russia - the youngest of Kirillovich. He was born in 1981 in Madrid. From his father side, he is the great grandson of german Emperor Wilhelm II, from his mother – great-great-great grandson of Russian Emperor Alexander II. Native language of George - French, although he readily speaks and reads Spanish, English and Russian.
Prince George for their incomplete thirty years had to learn in Oxford, to work in the European Parliament, and then the agency of the European Commission on Nuclear Safety in Luxembourg. Since 2008 he works as Advisor to CEO, Norilsk Nickel, Russia, introducing this corporation in the Nickel Institute (Brussels, Belgium).
Grand Duke George has kindly agreed to talk with representatives of the newspaper “Tomorrow". Personality and perceptions of the Romanov heir, of course, will be of interest to most of our readers.
Tomorrow. Your Highness, being heir to the Imperial House, do you see yourself as a potential monarch?
Grand Duke Georgy Mikhailovich. Status of Imperial House head, which is now my mother, Grand Duchess Maria Vladimirovna and her heir, of course, contains within itself the possibility sometime in the future to lead not only the dynasty, but also country. Of course, this can only happen if Russian people would again support the monarchical principle. If the day will come when I called to this duty, I do not turn from it. But in the present, as all the sovereigns of our home in exile: My great-grandfather, grandfather and my mother - I try to live according to the well-known principle of "Do what you must, and whether that will happen." It would be foolish to sit and dream: "And what will I do if I will ascend to the throne? I try to be useful to my Motherland in my today’s position, helping my mother in her duty and accumulating professional experience and knowledge that will be useful in any case.
Tomorrow. How, in your opinion, monarchist idea could be implemented in contemporary situation?
GD It is necessary freely expressed will of a nation-wide for the monarchy’ restoration. I'm sure if people will get honest and objective information, they will make the right conclusions and choose one that fits its genuine national interests. History shows that people mechanical majority often make mistakes. But if people feel not like "mass" and "population", but as individuals, united by common values, respect of their ancestors and themselves and willing that following generations will respect them - then people would not make mistakes. Revival of the monarchy after the Troubles of XVII century, 400 years since the end of which we will celebrate soon, clearly illustrates my words.
Tomorrow. Could the Russian monarchy be restored not as the Empire, but in the frames of the local "national state"?
GD In the foreseeable future, I do not see any prerequisites that Russia has lost its multinational character, regardless of type of its political state. But if you talk in theory ... This Empire - this is not a system of oppression of one nation by the others, but the family of fraternal peoples, united by common goals and interests, which keep the unity in diversity. Russia had originally been a multinational state and throughout its history has sought to integrate people into a single empire. But along with this, in our past there were periods when dominated by centrifugal forces. In its time to revive a central state was able to Muscovy, initially very small and even smaller than that in the impact of other similar "local national states." The reason for this, in my opinion, lies in the fact that Muscovy, on the one hand, managed to defend the hard monarchical principle, and on the other - their policy was sufficiently flexible and modern. Yes, they were able to compromise, and without betraying the principal and over several generations strategically preparing the union and the liberation of their country. Nowadays, Russia, indeed, because of the severe consequences of several revolutions of the twentieth century, thrown far back. But, I repeat, I am confident that before the "local national state" we do not ever sunk. On the contrary, I believe that Russia has a chance not only to maintain its current territorial integrity, but also attract the fraternal peoples of the former Russia Empire by the updated forms of integration. Perfectly aware that it will not pre-revolutionary Empire and the Soviet Union. However, an appeal to the best examples from the past will enable us to preserve, at least, a single cultural space.
Tomorrow. Many of the current conservative models start with the obligatory defamation of the Soviet period. How do you see the restoration of the monarchy in Russia? Political revenge or a kind of vanguard project for the Russian future? Restoration or attempt to unite the nation with consideration of the Soviet experience?
GD Very serious question. Restoration of the monarchy in any case can’t be revenge. Emperor Nicholas II abdicated it in the hope of reconciling and preventing fratricide. Imperial House of Russia did not participate in the Civil War, when it still broke. We are not "red" and not "white", and we can’t have revenge sentiments. Revolution is a terrible national tragedy. Our Dynasty greatly suffered from it. But our entire nation suffered a lot, including the direct creators and participants of the revolution from both sides. If our thoughts and desires towards the future, we must stop to reopen old wounds and remember each other offenses. My mother always called compatriots seek not what divides but what unites all of us. If we want to return Russia to its place in the world, we should not continue to blame each other, and learn to forgive and ask forgiveness. And to go forward with goodwill and solidarity, not with hatred and revenge.
Monarchy - is the idea of true national unity. Being a legitimate and hereditary, that is continuous in historical time, it brings together the country's citizens, not only for the sake of some short-term goals, but for centuries-old traditions in the name of the present and for the future. The monarchy is obliged to take into account any experience - both positive and negative. We should not forget anything to avoid a repetition of evil. Need to give moral and legal appraisal of the past. For example, nothing can justify the violent nature of the God-fighting totalitarian regimes and its class or racial genocide, when millions of people were wiped out for what they could not change under any circumstances - for their national or social origin. But in condemning the crimes and errors, with the dirty water does not have to splash out a child. There were a lot of bright and heroic in our people life in the Soviet period. My great-grandfather Emperor Kirill and my grandfather, Emperor Vladimir Kirillovich always called for a clear distinction between the godless and inhuman Marxist-Leninist ideology and the creation of the national spirit, which breaks all the shackles.
Imperial House of Russia believes that the monarchy - is a modern and progressive system of government, which has a future. It is able to synthesize the positive experiences of all periods of our history, including the Soviet one. Even my great-grandfather in one of his hits made a very correct idea: "No need to destroy any facilities, life caused, but we need to turn away from those who desecrate the human soul." I fully share this view. That is my position.
Tomorrow. Monarchic project must necessarily rely on a layer of "sovereign people". From which strata of society, in your opinion, they should come? The oligarchs, the army, the intelligentsia, etc.
GD Monarchy - a national idea. It can’t rely on some specific classes and social groups. One major advantage of the legitimate hereditary monarchy is that in this system, the head of state is not obliged to his authority to anyone but God. And therefore it can be a true arbiter, the Father of the nation, for whom all the members of his family are precious. The monarchy must have support at all levels of society. Of course, the state is unthinkable without a hierarchical structure. Another thing is that the ruling class should be continuously updated with the best representatives of all social strata and groups. And these very strata and groups should be allowed to occupy its worthy place in a legal state and civil society, possessing all the necessary rights and responsibilities.
Tomorrow. Your ancestors - the tsars and emperors. Do you feel any particular, involvement in the history of your family, figuratively speaking: Do you have dreams you about dynasty’ past?
GD Dreams ... not dream, but the involvement, of course, I feel like probably everyone feels a connection with their ancestors. Even if he does not think there is, after all, it is genetics. Our ancestors have left this world, but some small part of them continues to live in us, to influence our character, temperament, and, consequently, our actions. The feeling of belonging to the family inspires self-discipline. We must try to behave so as not to disgrace our ancestors and our descendants to not be ashamed of us.
Tomorrow. Is the role of the House Heir the burden to you, does you status bother you in your life?
GD Yeah ... A negative answer to your question would imply frivolity, and the positive - excessive pride. In fact, any position dealing with people trust to you and their hopes is a difficult burden. But at the same time, it inspires and allows you to survive in difficult life situations. I can’t say that my situation bothers me. But I understand that this is a big responsibility. I have the right to privacy, especially because now I have no public duties. But I still can’t do much of what any other individuals could do. My mother and grandparents raising me put in my mind kind of traffic light. If there is even a thought: "Why me, in the end, should do or not do so-and-so?" Then suddenly red light lit. Sometimes it's a human being annoyed that maybe missed some opportunities, but then, over time and common sense, I am convinced that self-restraint in most cases was correct and useful. God brought our world so that everything in life is balanced, so to complain about the fate of never worth it.
Tomorrow. Do you have any preferences in Russian history, favorite heroes or anti-heroes?
GD Calm and confident style of the reign of Alexander III is close to me. During his reign Russia was a real superpower, whose power was based not on fear and dislike, but in sincere respect. When he died, even geopolitical enemies of our country paid tribute to him, because he was the guardian of international equilibrium. I think undeservedly overlooked John III, who in 1480 was destined to a peaceful end of foreign domination. And in fact he is the father of the sovereignty of our country. Such rulers as John III, maybe not famous for great battles and grandiose reforms, but really they have done more for the country than many brilliant rulers. In general, the main hero of Russian history, of course, is our people. They are often sacrificed for the sake of supposed "public interest". But what are these interests and whose are they, if for the sake of them millions of people being sacrificed? The true heroes are not those who spectacularly won the struggle for power, to bump off their fellow citizens, without counting, but those who have had successes, saving people lives. And when it really is a threat to national existence, our nation does not need to be convinced to make sacrifices. An example of this - all the wars from the campaigns of Oleg and Svyatoslav to the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945.
Interview by Andrey Smirnov and Andrey Fefelov
Saturday, February 20, 2010
In Honour of the Heir of Imperial Russia
On occasion of the official visit to Moscow of His IMPERIAL Highness Grand Duke GEORGIY MIKHAYLOVICH a big reception was done on 31 January 2010 in the Pilgrims’ Centre of the Moscow Patriarchy.In the beginning of the reception Grand Duke on behalf of His Mother a Head of the Russian IMPERIAL House Grand Duchess MARIA VLADIMIROVNA presented several loyal to the House people with IMPERIAL orders.
Then during the party guests had possibility to talk with Grand Duke. There were a chairman of the Central Electoral Commission of the Russian Federation Sir Vladimir Churoff, representatives of the Russian Parliament, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the Ministry of Defence of the Russian Federation, foreign diplomats and representatives of the Orthodox Church among the guests of the reception as well as the delegation of the Russian Imperial Union-Order.
Chancellery of the Commander of the RIU-O
Friday, February 19, 2010
Swedish King and Queen and Crown Princess attend first official dinner of the year
The Swedish King and Queen hosted the year's first official dinner on Tuesday 11 February.Guests included representatives from the diplomatic corps, the Swedish parliament, the government, counties and authorities, as well as representatives from the Swedish business community, science, culture and sport.
The guests, who numbered approximately 150, were received and greeted by The King, The Queen and The Crown Princess in the "Vita Havet" assembly rooms. The dinner was held in Karl XI's Gallery.
Seating arrangements
The King accompanied the wife of the Speaker, psychiatrist Ylwa Westerberg, to the table. Minister Christina Husmark Pehrsson was seated on The King's left. The Queen was accompanied to the table by Speaker Per Westerberg, and Minister Mats Odell, who accompanied Princess Christina to the table, was seated on her other side. The Crown Princess was accompanied to the table by Minister Andreas Carlgren. Speaker Per Westerberg was seated on Crown Princess Victoria's right.
Menu
The menu comprised a medium rare fillet of veal with sardine dressing; deep-fried beef and “jungfru" salad with mature parmesan; grilled fillet of monkfish with creamy puy lentils, red wine sauce made from oxtail and lobster-filled raviolo; grilled fillet of beef with fried duck liver from free-range ducks, accompanied by a truffle gravy and spinach garnish; and for dessert, a creation featuring beetroot with chocolate and blood orange.
Italian aristocrat cousins fight over defunct throne
The family of Italy's last king are locked in a bitter court feud over who has the right to lay claim to the country's defunct throne more than 60 years after the monarchy was abolished.The battle pitches Prince Victor Emmanuel, the son of Umberto II, against his third cousin, Duke Amadeo of Aosta, both of whom are descended from the 19th century king of Italy, Umberto I.
The dispute has reached court after four years of public bickering which divided the country's small but ardent band of monarchists.
It began when the duke declared he, rather than his cousin, was the real head of the House of Savoy, the name of the Italian royals until the monarchy was abolished by referendum at the end of the Second World War.
The duke, 66, argued that his cousin was no longer eligible to call himself Prince of Savoy because he had failed to secure the legally-required permission of his father, king-in-exile Umberto II, to marry a Swiss biscuit manufacturer heiress and champion water skier, Marina Doria, in 1971.
The duke also argued that the prince forfeited his right to the dynastic title because in order to be allowed to return to Italy from exile in 2002, Victor Emmanuel had to formally recognise the Italian republic as the country's legitimate government.
The feud even erupted into violence when Victor Emmanuel was accused of punching the duke twice in the face following a dinner held by King Juan Carlos I of Spain in honour of the wedding of his son.
But now a court in Tuscany has finally ruled the 73-year-old prince is the true heir to the dynasty, which has its roots in the north-east of Italy and ruled the whole country after it was unified in 1861.
It ruled the Savoy royal title can now only be used by Prince Victor Emmanuel and his son, Prince Emmanuel Filiberto, who is best known to Italians as the recent winner of a reality television show, Dancing with the Stars.
It also ordered the Duke of Aosta to pay his cousin £43,000 in compensation as well as the costs of the trial.
The court pointed out that the "dynastic squabbles underlying this affair" had no legal relevance to the modern Italian state because the monarchy had been abolished more than 60 years ago.
It also highlighted the fact the prince was descended from the last king of Italy while the duke came from only a "junior branch" of the royal family.
The court ruled that the duke's use of the Savoy name had been "unmerited" and ordered him to bring his "harmful conduct" to an immediate end.
Prince Emmanuel, who has been embroiled in a series of scandals including an incident in which he fatally shot a German tourist who climbed aboard his yacht off Corsica in 1978 and, more recently, charges of recruiting prostitutes for clients at a Swiss casino, praised the court's decision.
"The judge understood the vile and harmful action that Duke Amadeo had construed against me, my son and the Royal House of Savoy, an action which has been rightly punished," he said.
But a furious Duke Amadeo vowed to fight on. "I respect the judgment but naturally I don't agree with it and I'm going to appeal," he said.
It was not just the claim to a long defunct royal line that was at stake. The Savoy name also confers the control of various charitable institutions and entitles the holder to call himself prince of Venice and Piedmont – although the positions are purely titular.
Mystery of Prince Michael's £800,000 cash injection
When Prince Michael of Kent and his two siblings raised £2.1 million at Christie's in November from the sale of more than 300 heirlooms from their late parents' estate, it was widely assumed that the 67-year-old cousin of the Queen was in need of the windfall. Now, however, Mandrake can disclose how precarious Prince and Princess Michael's finances really are.
The couple, who this year must make their first annual payment of £120,000 to the Queen for the rental of their apartment at Kensington Palace, accumulated losses of almost £800,000 with Cantium Services, the umbrella firm for their commercial activities.
So dire are the latest accounts filed at Companies House that the directors of the consultancy firm felt the need to warn that its losses would "indicate a significant doubt about the company's ability to continue as a going concern".
The directors say they do not advise that it should be shut down only because a total of £800,000 in share capital has been pumped into the firm.
The couple have undertaken to keep supporting the company, which lost a further £39,806 in the year ending March 31 2009. They declare in the accounts that they will "continue to provide the necessary finance, either by way of additional share capital or by personal loans, to enable the company to continue".
Simon Astaire, their spokesman, declines to shed any light on how the firm accrued such heavy losses, or where the £800,000 came from. "We have a policy of never commenting on the Prince and Princess's finances," he tells me.
A friend of the couple, whose son, Lord Frederick Windsor, married the actress Sophie Winkleman in September, insists, however: "Don't you worry about their being hard up. Michael makes an awful lot of money in Russia."
The Prince and Princess sold their 18th century Gloucestershire retreat, Nether Lypiatt, for £5.75 million in 2006 to Lord Drayson, the Science Minister, whose company PowderJect was awarded a £32 million government contract for smallpox vaccine without competition in 2002, shortly after he donated £50,000 to the Labour Party. A Parliamentary inquiry identified no improper activity.
For the past seven years, the Queen paid the £10,000-a-month rental bill on the Prince and Princess's London apartment. The five-bedroom property had been a wedding gift from the monarch. However, in 2002, after protests from republican Labour MPs, Buckingham Palace announced that a commercial rent would be paid on the flat.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
