Thursday, 8 October 2009

Parliament constitutes itself and elects its presidium




Today the Norwegian Parliament constituted itself following the general election in September and elected its Presidium. As none of the members of the Presidium of the previous Parliament were candidates for re-election to Parliament, it fell to the longest-serving MP, Per-Kristian Foss (Conservative Party) to preside over this sitting of Parliament.
The members of the Presidium are elected by secret ballot, but who will have what position is determined by the size of the parties. The parties then select their candidates, who are in due course elected by Parliament in what is some sort of gentlemen’s agreement. Occasionally blank votes have been cast if there is a particularly controversial candidate, but today only one candidate was elected unanimously, which may be a sign of the increasing polarisation of Norwegian politics.
As Labour is the largest party, they have the right to fill the position of Speaker of Parliament and Third Vice-Speaker. Dag Terje Andersen, until recently Minister of Labour and Social Inclusion, was elected Speaker of Parliament with 163 votes out of a total 167 MPs present.
The First Vice-Speaker should come from the second largest party and Øyvind Korsberg from the Progress Party was elected to this position. Per-Kristian Foss from the Conservatives was chosen as Second Vice-Speaker – he was the only one who received a unanimous vote, something a light bulb celebrated by exploding, showering a newly elected MP with broken glass.
Marit Nybakk, Labour’s longest-serving MP, was elected Third Vice-Speaker. The most historic moment came when Inga Marte Thorkildsen, acting as parliamentary leader of the Socialist Left Party, proposed Akhtar Chaudhry for the position of Fourth Vice-Speaker. Chaudhry, who was born in Pakistan, is the first MP of multiethnic background to be elected to Parliament’s Presidium. Sadly he received only 153 votes against 14 blank votes. This may perhaps be seen in relation to a certain party’s opposition to immigration, but perhaps also to the fact that Chaudhry is in fact not an MP in his own right, but filling in for Kristin Halvorsen, who as Finance Minister cannot take her seat in Parliament. If she, or her first designated deputy Heidi Sørensen, currently State Secretary in the Ministry of Environment, resigns from their government positions, Chaudhry will have to leave Parliament.
The position as Fifth Vice-Speaker should by right go to the Centre Party, but was given to the Christian Democrat Party even though this party is smaller in size than the Centre Party. This is probably because the three government parties (Labour, the Socialist Left and the Centre Party) have a narrow majority in Parliament – thus it seems fairer if half the seats in the Presidium are filled by the government parties and the other half by the opposition. Line Henriette Holten Hjemdal was elected to this last seat in the Presidium. Her father, Odd Holten, was also a member of the Presidium between 2001 and 2005.
With two women and four men, the youngest member being 38 and the oldest 62, this Presidium is both younger and more balanced than the previous one, which was rather aged and consisted of five men and one woman. With many veteran MPs having left Parliament at the election, some other important positions have also been accorded to quite young MPs. The Conservative MP Ine Marie Eriksen Søreide was yesterday chosen to be leader of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and Defence and is at 33 the youngest ever leader of this committee. 30-year-old Torgeir Micaelsen (Labour) today also became the youngest ever leader of the Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs.
Having constituted itself, Parliament sends a message to the King informing him of this fact and asking him to let them know when it will suit him to open Parliament. This is of course only a formality as everyone knows that the State Opening of Parliament will take place at 1 p.m. tomorrow. The Parliament which will be opened tomorrow will be the 154th Norwegian Parliament, but the first unicameral because of the extensive constitutional changes which took effect on 1 October.
The first and second photos show the scene as MPs cast their votes; the third the acting Speaker waiting while Berit Moxness Vollmo from Parliament’s constitutional office counts the votes; and the fourth the new Speaker, Dag Terje Andersen, being congratulated by his fellow MPs Heikki Holmås and Inga Marte Thorkildsen.

Nobel Prize in Literature to Herta Müller

Peter Englund, the Secretary of the Swedish Academy, today announced that the Nobel Prize in Literature for 2009 has been awarded to Herta Müller. Müller is Romanian by birth, but belongs to the German minority of that country and has lived in Germany since fleeing the Communist dictatorship in 1987.

Press release: http://www.svenskaakademien.se/press_en.html

This year four women have been awarded Nobel Prizes, which is a record. The Nobel Peace Prize, the most prestigious of the Nobel prizes, indeed reckoned by some to be the most prestigious award in the world, will be announced at 11 a.m. tomorrow.

Wednesday, 7 October 2009

Royal attendance at State Opening of Parliament


At 1 p.m. on Friday the King of Norway will perform the State Opening of Parliament. This ceremony usually takes place on the second working day of October, but following a general election it will be a week later. With Britain and the Netherlands Norway is now among the few countries to do this ceremony with old-fashioned pomp and circumstance.
The King will be accompanied by the Queen and the Crown Prince, and at the blog “The Royal Twist” (see http://theroyaltwist.com/why-isnt-mette-marit-there) a question is raised why the Crown Princess does not attend, while all adult members of the royal houses in Denmark and Sweden attend the similar ceremony in those countries. A person commenting on that blog suggests it might be because the Crown Princess of Norway does not have a constitutional role, but neither does the Queen, who is (nearly) always present. The reason seems to be more prosaic.
Before the change of dynasty in 1905, all those members of the royal family who were in Norway at the time used to accompany the King to the State Opening of Parliament. The largest turn-outs were in 1845, when King Oscar I came accompanied by Queen Josephina and all their five children, and in 1868, when King Carl XV was accompanied by Queen Lovisa, their daughter Princess Lovisa with her fiancé the Crown Prince of Denmark, and Prince August and Princess Teresia. The last time a Crown Princess was present at the State Opening was in 1903.
Before 1905 the King would sit on the dais surrounded by the princes of the royal house – to name some examples Oscar II was flanked by his sons Carl and Eugen in 1891 and by Crown Prince Gustaf and Prince Eugen in 1895. The royal ladies would sit in the box to their right (now called the Diplomatic Box).
For his swearing-in in November 1905 King Haakon VII was accompanied only by Queen Maud, as his son Crown Prince Olav was still a child. The Queen then sat next to the King on the dais on a chair borrowed from the National Theatre for the occasion. For the State Opening in 1906 one of the princely chairs was turned into a throne chair for the Queen.
Queen Maud last attended the State Opening in 1922. By then Crown Prince Olav had come of age and was therefore able to accompany his father to the ceremony, which often took place at a time of the year when the Queen preferred to be in England.
When Crown Prince Olav married in 1929 it was 24 years since Norway had last had a Crown Princess and I guess it had simply been forgotten that the Crown Princess had been present before 1905. But the absence of the Queen after 1922 probably also made it seem less natural to include the Crown Princess in the ceremony, which then nearly became an “all male affair”.
It was only when King Harald V took the oath in 1991 that a royal lady again took her seat on the dais in the Parliament Chamber. Later that year Queen Sonja also accompanied the King to the State Opening, something she has done almost every year since then. Initially this met with some opposition from the then Speaker of Parliament, Jo Benkow, who, to the Queen’s fury, stated that he wished her to stay away as she had no constitutional role. The latter statement is indeed true, but Benkow was obviously ignorant of the fact that not only Queen Maud, but also Queen Sophia, Queen Lovisa and Queen Josephina had attended the State Openings in their days.
There were originally three princely chairs for use in Parliament, of which one is now used by the Queen and another by the Crown Prince. The third is stored away at the Museum of Cultural Heritage and could be restored if one should decide that the tradition of the Crown Princess attending should be taken up again, but this does not seem very likely.
The State Opening of Parliament is one of the King’s most important constitutional duties. If the King is unable to attend he will appoint a representative to open Parliament on his behalf. This representative will normally be the heir to the throne or, failing his attendance, the Prime Minister. The last time a Crown Prince read the Speech from the Throne was in 1990, when King Olav V was recovering from a stroke. The last time a Prime Minister did so was in 1905, during the interregnum between the deposal of Oscar II and the election of Haakon VII. Prime Minister Christian Michelsen then read the speech standing in front of the empty throne. In 1818 the Governor General (a position which existed until 1873, but was left vacant after 1856) opened Parliament on behalf of Carl XIII, unaware that the King had died in Stockholm the previous evening.
The first photo shows the King reading the Speech from the Throne last year, with the Speaker of Parliament standing in front of him. The second picture shows the King’s Throne flanked by the chairs for the Queen (to the left) and the Crown Prince (to the right) before the ceremony began.

Tuesday, 6 October 2009

What to see: Church of Santa Maria di Nazareth (Scalzi), Venice






The Church of Santa Maria di Nazareth is one of Venice’s best examples of Baroque churches. The popular name “Scalzi” refers to the Carmelite barefoot monks who established their order in Venice in 1633 and bought the plot of land facing the Grand Canal on which their church was built.
The architect Baldassare Longhena enlarged the church in 1654 and it was given its present appearance between 1660 and 1689 by Giuseppe Pozzo, who created the sumptuous interior seen in the first two pictures, and Giuseppe Sardi, who built the façade of Carrara marble. The church is a good example of how many Venetian churches have spent everything on the main façade and nothing on the side walls, as seen in the fourth photo. The vault originally had a fresco by Tiepolo, but this was unfortunately destroyed in a WWI air raid on Venice in 1915.
There are several side chapels on either side of the nave. In the Manin chapel (fifth photo) a simple stone slab marks the resting place of Ludovico Manin, the last Doge. It was he who, after the French invasion in 1797 brought down the millennial Republic, took of his ducal cornice and gave it to his servant with the words: “Take it away, I shall not be needing it again”. The text on the stone reads simply: “Manini cineres”, “the ashes of Manin”.

Monday, 5 October 2009

Swedish MP suggests changing King’s constitutional role

The Swedish MP Annicka Engblom (Conservative Party) last week presented a private member’s bill to the Swedish Parliament in which she suggest changing the King’s constitutional role so that the monarch in future will be the one who leads the process of finding a Prime Minister and suggests a candidate to Parliament.
This used to be the one of the King’s constitutional duties, but since the new Constitution came into force in 1975 it has been done by the Speaker of Parliament. Engblom compares Sweden to other monarchies and points out that Sweden is alone in allowing the Speaker to carry out this task, which in other monarchies is done by the monarch (or the governor-general in countries where the British Queen is monarch).
The bill may be read in its entirety at Annicka Engblom’s blog:
http://annickaengblom.blogspot.com/2009/10/motionen-manga-talar-om.html

Sunday, 4 October 2009

What to see: Prince Wilhelm’s grave, Flen Churchyard





Despite being the second son of King Gustaf V, Prince Wilhelm of Sweden is buried neither at the Royal Burial Ground at Haga nor in the Riddarholmen Church in Stockholm, but rather in a simple grave in the parish cemetery of the small town Flen. The poet-prince was Duke of Sudermania and therefore made his home at Stenhammar Palace in Flen, which the courtier Robert von Kraemer had left to the royal family to be made available to a prince – preferably a prince styled Duke of Sudermania.
The choice of the parish cemetery near Stenhammar also enabled Prince Wilhelm to be buried next to the great love of his life, Jeanne de Tramcourt. He had met Jeanne, the French-born ex-wife of the famous sculptor Christian Eriksson, just after his divorce from Grand Duchess Maria Pavlovna of Russia in 1914. Had he married her, he would have lost his succession rights, his royal titles, the use of Stenhammar and most of his income. When he proposed to her, she said she had no wish to become a Swedish Mrs Simpson.
After a turbulent beginning they eventually agreed to stay together for the rest of their lives, cohabiting at Stenhammar. Jeanne was euphemistically referred to as “Stenhammar’s hostess”, but her position as the unmarried companion of a royal prince was not easy. Wilhelm’s servants and his son also tended to be quite hostile to her.
In January 1952 Jeanne de Tramcourt was killed in a car accident. Prince Wilhelm was at the wheel and although the investigation concluded that it was not his fault, he could not stop blaming himself, even speaking of suicide. His despair is evident in the collection of poems he published in 1955, titled Verklighetens skuggbilder.
Prince Wilhelm died in 1965. He was not buried in the same grave as Jeanne, but next to her, creating a distance between them in death. In 1991 Wilhelm’s daughter-in-law, Countess Karin Bernadotte af Wisborg, was buried in his grave even though she was by then divorced from his son Lennart. This is in itself somewhat ironic, as Jeanne in life had been quite jealous of the young and beautiful Karin, who was adored by her father-in-law.

Saturday, 3 October 2009

At the road’s end: Alastair Aird (1931-2009), Queen Mother’s Private Secretary

Sir Alastair Aird, who was Queen Elizabeth the Queen Mother’s last Private Secretary, died on Wednesday. Born in India on 14 January 1931, Aird joined the Queen Mother’s Household as Assistant Private Secretary in 1964, becoming Comptroller a decade later. The Queen Mother was known for her unwillingness to allow her courtiers to retire - even if they grew old they tended to be much younger than her. She therefore kept on Sir Martin Gilliat as her Private Secretary even when his health left him unable to carry out his duties properly and it was only when Gilliat died in 1993 that Sir Alastair rose to the position of Private Secretary, which ke kept until the Queen Mother’s death in 2002. He was appointed to the honorary position as an Extra Equerry to Queen Elizabeth II the following year and had received the Grand Cross of the Royal Victorian Order (GCVO) in 1997.

The Daily Telegraph’s obituary:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/obituaries/royalty-obituaries/6252026/Sir-Alastair-Aird.html

Another interview with Frederik VII’s great-granddaughter

Yesterday Politiken had an article on Else Margrethe “Gete” Bondo Oldenborg Maaløe, the elderly Danish lady who in her recent memoirs reveals that King Frederik VII, always thought to have been childless, acknowledged her grandfather as his illegitimate son:

http://politiken.dk/kultur/article802125.ece

Friday, 2 October 2009

King awards first War Cross in sixty years

During the State Council held at the Royal Palace earlier today the King of Norway awarded the nation’s highest decoration, the War Cross, posthumously to Captain Eiliv Austlid, who was killed fighting the invading Germans on 15 April 1940. The War Cross was instituted by King Haakon VII on 23 May 1941 and awarded to 273 persons, 147 of them Norwegians, until 1949. It was decided in June that the King would again award the War Cross for military gallantry, both to people who took part in the Second World War (living or dead) but also to soldiers serving in the wars Norway has taken part in during the last decade.

Dagbladet reports on the story of Eiliv Austlid and how his deeds were later smeared by, among others, Foreign Minister Trygve Lie:
http://www.dagbladet.no/2009/10/02/nyheter/innenriks/den_andre_verdenskrig/historie/8384938/

The government’s press release about the decoration of Captain Austlid:
http://www.regjeringen.no/nn/dep/fd/pressesenter/Pressemeldingar/2009/krigskorset-utdeles-for-forste-gang-pa-6.html?id=578776

Wednesday, 30 September 2009

Dag Terje Andersen new Speaker of Parliament

The Norwegian Labour Party’s parliamentary group today decided that Dag Terje Andersen, at present Minister of Labour and Social Inclusion, will be the new Speaker of Parliament. He will be elected by the new Parliament when it constitutes itself on 8 October. Andersen will succeed Thorbjørn Jagland, who did not run for re-election, but who was elected Secretary-General of the Council of Europe yesterday.
As Labour is the biggest party in Parliament the position as Speaker of Parliament, second in rank only to the King, is filled by a Labour politician. They will also have one other seat in the Presidium and today nominated Marit Nybakk, one of the longest-serving MPs, to be one of the five Vice-Speakers.
Labour’s parliamentary group also decided that Helga Pedersen will be the party’s parliamentary leader. Pedersen is currently Minister of Fisheries and Coastal Affairs as well as Deputy Leader of the party and was elected to Parliament for the first time this autumn.
As the Constitution stipulates that one cannot sit in Parliament and be a member of the government at the same time, both Andersen and Pedersen will have to resign from the government before taking up their new positions in Parliament. This will probably happen at the State Council due to be held at the Royal Palace on Friday. As a major cabinet reshuffle is expected after the presentation of the fiscal budget on 13 October the two ministers will probably not be immediately replaced.

Labour’s press announcement:
http://arbeiderpartiet.no/Aktuelt/Nyhetsarkiv/Partiet/Helga-Pedersen-ny-parlamentarisk-leder

Tuesday, 29 September 2009

Thorbjørn Jagland to lead the Council of Europe

The Norwegian politician Thorbjørn Jagland was today elected Secretary-General of the Council of Europe by its parliamentary assembly, winning 165 votes out of a total of 245. The other candidate was Poland’s former Prime Minister Wlodzimierz Cimoszewicz, who won 80 votes.
Jagland, whose term as Speaker of the Norwegian Parliament expires tomorrow, was Prime Minister of Norway 1996-1997 and Foreign Minister 2000-2001, as well as leader of the Labour Party 1992-2002.
While earlier secretaries-general have come from the ranks of the Council of Europe’s parliamentary assembly it was now a clearly stated wish that the new one should have been prime minister or foreign minister in order to give the Council more weight. This displeased some of the assembly’s members to the extent that they postponed the election, which was to be held in June, to the end of September, apparently hoping that other candidates might emerge. This did however not happen, leaving them with the choice between two candidates who had both been prime minister as well as foreign minister.

Monday, 28 September 2009

President Obama to visit Denmark on Friday

The White House today announced that US President Barack Obama will make a brief visit to Copenhagen on Friday in order to promote his hometown Chicago at the IOC Congress. Chicago is one of the four cities which hopes to be awarded the Olympic Games in 2016, the others being Rio de Janeiro, Madrid and Tokyo. The King and Queen of Spain, the Crown Prince of Japan and that country’s new Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama and President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of Brazil will also come to Copenhagen to promote their countries’ candidates.
President Obama will spend five hours in Denmark, which only gives him time to meet the Queen and Prince Consort at Christiansborg Palace after the IOC Congress, followed by a meeting with Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen. The President will be accompanied by his wife Michelle, who arrives in Denmark already on Wednesday. Obama will be the third American President to visit Denmark, following Bill Clinton in 1997 and George W. Bush in 2005.
The IOC Congress is also expected to elect Crown Prince Frederik a member of the Committee.

Merkel continues, but in a new coalition

The results from yesterday’s election to the German Federal Parliament show that Chancellor Angela Merkel will be able to remain in office, but with a new coalition partner. For the past four years her conservative Christian Democratic party CDU and its twin CSU have been in a so-called “grand coalition” with the Social Democrats SPD. While CDU/CSU did not do particularly well in the election, SPD ended up with its worst result since the foundation of the Federal Republic sixty years ago, losing 1/3 of its voters since 2005 – most of them to the break-away party the Left and some to the Greens.
The liberal right-wing Free Democrats (FDP), Merkel’s preferred coalition partner, did very well in the election, meaning that CDU/CSU is now able to form a coalition government with FDP. Such a coalition will undoubtedly take Germany to the right. The German election results and Labour’s expected defeat in the next British general election may also signify the end of the so-called “Third Way” experiment which Tony Blair in Britain and Gerhard Schröder in Germany led their Social Democratic parties into.
The photo shows the Parliament building in Berlin last autumn.

The Guardian reports:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/sep/28/angela-merkel-germany-government-coalition

Sunday, 27 September 2009

Lost treasures: Bonde Mansion, Stockholm


Bonde Mansion at Rosenbad was, at least seen from the outside, one of the grandest patrician mansions in Stockholm. Situated at Strömgatan, overlooking the water (second photo), it would lead one’s thoughts towards St Petersburg and the Russian neoclassicism.
It was built on the orders of Count Carl Bonde, Marshal of the Realm, who himself made a rough sketch of his own ideas for his new town residence after the older, 17th-century Bonde Mansion had been sold to the city of Stockholm to serve as court house. The new mansion did, however, turn out quite differently from the Count’s sketch. Work began in 1789, but war and financial restraints meant that it was not completed until 1798, by which time Count Bonde had been dead for seven years.
The name of the architect is disputed. It is mostly attributed to the architect Erik Palmstedt (1741-1803), but the master bricklayer Johan Henrik Walmstedt later claimed authorship of the drawings. A member of the Bonde family itself has attributed it to Palmstedt, whose son also included it in his list of his father’s works.
It was a long, rectangular three-storey building with a rather simple façade. What made it stand out was its impressive temple front, which rose to a fourth storey with a triangular pediment carried by six columns of the Ionic order.
The problem when building Bonde Mansion was to adapt it to the adjacent Hildebrand House. To give it a unified façade towards the water and create the appearance that the palace covered the entire block, one side of Hildebrand House was incorporated into the mansion’s main façade (as seen clearly in photos 1 and 2). This meant that the mansion’s columned portico was placed in the middle of the block, but actually well to the left of the mansion’s actual centre. Another problem was that Hildebrand House was one storey higher, something the architect tried to hide by a mansard roof. It has been speculated that there might have been financial reasons for this and that one had hoped to be able to add another storey to Bonde Mansion when it could be afforded.
Bonde Mansion in many ways resembled Giacomo Quarenghi’s Ekaterina Institute in St Petersburg, which had a rather similar location by the Fontanka and a very similar façade with a raised centre section. However, this cannot have inspired the Bonde Mansion’s architect as the Ekaterina Institute was built only in 1804-1807.
Sadly Bonde Mansion had been badly built and with the passing of the years it started to sink, which led to cracks all over, a situation which was made worse when buildings nearby were demolished at the end of the 19th century. In the end Count Carl Carlsson Bonde received an offer he could not refuse from the Nordic Credit Bank, which bought the mansion and had it demolished in 1899. In its place came Ferdinand Boberg’s art-nouveau building Rosenbad (second photo), a complex which included a restaurant, a hotel and offices and today serves as Sweden’s main government building and seat of the Prime Minister. On its corner Strömgatan/Drottninggatan there is a stone relief by Joseph Anton Schmid depicting Bonde Mansion in a somewhat idealised manner (first photo). A photo of what it really looked like may be found at www.stockholmskallan.se (external link).

Friday, 25 September 2009

New books: Maria I, “mad” Queen of Portugal

At the end of July Templeton Press, a small publishing house in Chippenham, released the book The Madness of Queen Maria: The Remarkable Life of Maria I of Portugal by Jenifer Roberts.
Despite the book’s title the author argues that Queen Maria I was more than just the mad Queen of Portugal and that history has treated her unkindly. In the book’s introduction she points to “the 18th-century battle between church and state, between the old superstitions and the age of reason” as contradictions which Queen Maria embodied. “Pulled by her instincts towards the old religion, she understood at least some aspects of the Enlightenment and took a humanitarian approach to state affairs. A weak and fragile woman, she was unsuited for monarchy and the struggle for power between church and state helped to destroy her”.
This seems like an interesting approach to Queen Maria’s story, but the author fails to follow that thread. Instead she shies away from all politics, except the ups and downs in the Portuguese royal family’s relationship with the Marquis of Pombal. What she offers is rather a personal history of the life of this unfortunate sovereign.
Maria I came to the throne in 1777, as the first female sovereign of Portugal. As she was forbidden by law to marry a foreigner, she was married off to her uncle (later their eldest son was married off to his own aunt, twice his age, before he had reached puberty). Maria’s uncle/husband became King Consort under the name Pedro III, but it was clearly she who was the monarch and King Pedro had to play second fiddle.
In 1786 King Pedro died and two years later Queen Maria suffered the loss of another uncle, two of her three surviving children, a newborn grandchild, her son-in-law and her confessor, who was important to her, within a few months of each other. This apparently pushed her towards the brink and, in 1792, over it. She thought herself to be in hell and believed the devil had gotten inside her. What was then considered simply “madness” is by Jenifer Roberts described as “a rare and particularly severe form of bi-polar disease”.
Queen Maria’s mental agony would last the rest of her life, which ended only in 1816, when she died, aged 81, in Brazil, to where the Portuguese royal family had fled the events of the Napoleonic Wars in 1807. After 24 years with a mother believing herself to be in hell, her heir, João VI, postponed his enthronement ceremony for nearly two years, until he was certain his mother had left purgatory, something the priests could at first not quite agree about.
The book is well written and draws on both British and Portuguese sources, but gives a rather isolated view of Queen Maria, detached from the events of her time. The author apparently got “attracted” to the topic of this book through her earlier book about the Englishman William Stevens’ glass factory at Marinha Grande. For her previous book, Roberts failed to find an account of the Queen’s visit to the factory in 1788, but now she has found it and spends an entire chapter of nine pages as well as an appendix of fourteen pages on it. In a book of only 180 pages this is too much – a visit from a queen may be a chapter of its own in the history of a factory, but in the life of a monarch the visit to a factory is not a chapter of its own.

At the road’s end: Ada Madssen (1917-2009), sculptor

The Norwegian sculptor Ada Madssen died on Tuesday, aged 92. She was born on 9 February 1917 and was best known for her statue of Queen Maud, which was unveiled outside the Royal Palace in 1959. Four years ago a bronze copy of the statue was erected outside the Norwegian Ambassador’s residence in Queen Maud’s hometown London.

At the road’s end: Ertuğrul Osman (1912-2009), heir to the Ottoman Empire

Ertuğrul Osman, the 97-year-old head of the former imperial house of Osman, which ruled the Ottoman Empire from 1299 to 1922, died in a hospital in Istanbul on Wednesday. A grandson of Sultan Abdülhamid II, the former prince was born on 18 August 1912. He succeeded as head of the Ottoman dynasty when he became its eldest male member in 1994 and was at the time of his death the last member of the imperial dynasty to be born under the monarchy.
Having lived in a flat above a New York restaurant for decades, he was allowed to return to Turkey in August 1992 and was granted Turkish citizenship in 2004. During his first visit to Turkey he opted to take part in a guided tour of the Dolmabahce Palace, not wanting to make a fuss. He had no illusions about an Ottoman restoration. “I’m a very practical person. Democracy works well in Turkey”, he told The New York Times three years ago.
He is survived by his second wife Zeynep, a niece of King Amanullah of Afghanistan.

Thursday, 24 September 2009

Norwegian State Visit to South Africa in November

It has now been confirmed by the Royal Court that the King and Queen of Norway will pay a State Visit to South Africa this autumn (as I mentioned in April). The visit will take place between 24 and 26 November. The King and Queen last paid a State Visit to South Africa in 1998, when they were received by President Nelson Mandela. This time their host will be President Jacob Zuma, who was sworn in on 9 May following the ANC’s election victory in April. The Royal Court’s press annoucement:

http://www.kongehuset.no/c26950/artikkel/vis.html?tid=80522&strukt_tid=26950

Wednesday, 23 September 2009

New books: Herman Lindqvist on Carl XIV Johan

Among this autumn’s royal biographies is the well-known Swedish journalist Herman Lindqvist’s Jean Bernadotte – Mannen vi valde (“Jean Bernadotte: The Man We Elected”), published by Albert Bonniers förlag on 8 September. This is Lindqvist’s fiftieth book and his 51st can be expected already in November – it will be a book about Crown Princess Victoria, called Victoria – Drottning med tiden (“Victoria: Queen Some Day”).
Jean Bernadotte deals with the life of the future King Carl XIV Johan until the 1814 campaigns against France and Norway, followed by a brief summary dealing with his ascension to the thrones of Sweden and Norway in 1818 and his daily life until 1823, but hardly a word is said about his reign.
There are at least 30 biographies and many other books already written about King Carl Johan and one may wonder what the hyper-productive Lindqvist’s motivation for writing another one is. In an interview in the latest issue of the magazine Queen (no 6 – 2009) he explains that he thought no other author had “really understood who he was”. Having read the book, I can say that Lindqvist certainly comes no nearer than earlier biographers.
The people in Lindqvist’s books tend to be portrayed in an often quite flat, one-dimensional way, occasionally reducing them almost to caricatures. In this biography Lindqvist stresses how different Bernadotte always was from everyone else – he was taller than average, spoke French with a Béarnaise accent, he had a great temper etc. His temper was legendary and has often been referred to, while I would say his background was not much different from many of his contemporaries who rose from simple origins to become ministers and marshals in the Napoleonic age. Napoléon himself could serve as one example; the two rivals were probably more alike than any of them were comfortable acknowledging.
Another reason for writing a new biography of Carl XIV Johan could be if one had discovered unknown material. Lindqvist claims he has done “a lot” of research in the Bernadotte Family Archives, but obviously he has not been able to come up with much new. In fact I can find only one new piece of information in this book’s 455 pages: the author has come across a letter Bernadotte, when French Ambassador in Vienna, wrote to the Austrian Foreign Minister informing him that he intended to display a French flag outside the Embassy – an act which led to serious riots.
What Lindqvist considers his first great “discovery” is that Bernadotte was not actually named Jean-Baptiste but just Jean, but that he was called Jean-Baptiste to draw a distinction between him and his elder brother, who was also named Jean and was called Jean-Évangeliste. This is a well-known fact which should come as no surprise to anyone. Indeed it was first revealed 120 years ago by Fredrik Ulrik Wrangel in his book Från Jean Bernadottes ungdom, which is also listed among Lindqvist’s sources.
In an advance article in the history magazine Populär Historia (no 9 – 2009) Lindqvist announced that he had discovered a file of papers in the Bernadotte Archives showing that Bernadotte, when a general, had dreamed of and planned an expedition to India. This is in fact mentioned several times in the first volume of Torvald T:son Höjer’s official biography of King Carl Johan, published seventy years ago.
Lindqvist’s books are written in a very narrative way and mostly in an engaging manner, which make them easy to read and is probably much of the reason for his success as a bestselling author. However, this means that he rarely stops to discuss with himself or the reader. This becomes problematic as there are several episodes in the life of Carl XIV Johan where there are conflicting versions about what actually happened. It may seem that Lindqvist often just picks the best one. He also avoids some of the biggest and perhaps most difficult questions. One such is the question if Bernadotte, who changed sides, went against France and played an important part in Napoléon’s downfall by giving his enemies the key to the Emperor’s military strategy, could be said to have betrayed France. Lindqvist does not even touch on it.
On the other hand Herman Lindqvist does not abstain from making a good story better. For instance he tells how the fifteen-year-old Juliette de Récamier married a much older man, who “many years later” turned out to be her biological father. This was most likely not such a surprise; the accepted version is that Monsieur Récamier entered into a platonic marriage with his illegitimate daughter to make her his heir when he feared he would be executed.
This book is sadly polluted by Herman Lindqvist’s trademark sloppiness when it comes to historical facts. Names and titles are a mess throughout the book: Napoléon’s father was not named Carlos, but Carlo; Pauline Bonaparte was not Princess OF Borghese; Bernadotte’s wife spelt her name Désirée, not Desirée; he mixes the titles “prins” and “furste” constantly; Pauline Bonaparte’s first husband was named Victor Leclerc, not Charles Leclerc; George III was not Prince, but Elector of Hanover; a viceroy and a governor is not the same thing; in 1805 Davout held the rank of Marshal, not General; Elisa Bonaparte was Princess, not Grand Duchess, of Lucca; Archduke Karl of Austria is suddenly demoted to being a mere duke; Frederik VI of Denmark did not have a son named Fredrik Christian – in fact he had no son at all; Pontecorvo was a principality rather than a duchy; Murat was not both Grand Duke of Berg and Cleves and King of Naples at the same time; Napoléon’s elder brother was not titled “José Primero Buonaparte” when King of Spain (when did kings start to use surnames, and if so, why an Italian surname in Spain?); the man who was elected King of Norway in 1814 was Prince of Denmark, not of Oldenburg; the Norwegian Constituent Assembly in the spring of 1814 was not called a “storting”, this term only applies from the first extraordinary parliament which convened in the autumn; the Norwegians in 1814 did not insist on calling Carl XIII “Karl II”; the Duchy given to Denmark by the Congress of Vienna was called Lauenburg, not Lünenburg; Queen Désirée was the paternal, not maternal, grandmother of Oscar II; and so on.
Dates and years also seem to be a problem for Herman Lindqvist. The Battle of Waterloo took place on 18, not 19, June 1815; Franz II/I assumed the title Emperor of Austria already in 1804, not when the Holy Roman Empire was dissolved in 1806; 14 March is not the day before 15 April; Carlos IV of Spain was deposed in 1808, not 1809; 1794-1809 makes fifteen years, not fourteen; and in 1814 it was not 24 years since Louis XVI was toppled. One also wonders how Louis Bonaparte could have brought his wife to Italy in 1797 when he married only in 1802.
Lindqvist finds it hard to agree with himself – on one page Bernadotte’s income from the Principality of Pontecorvo is said to be quite good, on another page it was low; one place it is (correctly) said that Britain attacked Copenhagen in 1807, a hundred pages later we learn that it was Napoléon (!) who did so; the Treaty of Kiel was signed on 14 January 1814 on page 386, on 15 January thirteen pages later; and we learn that Carl Johan was the last of the allies to arrive in Paris in 1814, yet the Austrian Emperor arrives three days later on the following page.
But there are graver mistakes than these. For example he states that Bernadotte was elected Crown Prince by the four estates of Sweden, in contrast to Napoléon and his brothers, who, according to Lindqvist, “had become regents through the use of violence”. The fact is that Napoléon was elected Emperor by the French Senate, an election which was approved by an overwhelming majority in a plebiscite. But Lindqvist also seems confused as to what the estates of Sweden actually did. The election of Bernadotte did of course not mean that Carl XIII “should abdicate his throne to a stranger” – he remained king until his death. And it was when he was elected by the estates, not when he was adopted by Carl XIII, that Bernadotte became heir to the throne – the adoption was a mark of goodwill from the King, but held no constitutional significance.
Herman Lindqvist’s version of the events in Norway in 1814 is highly dubious and full of mistakes, and particularly his portrayal of King Christian Frederik shows that Lindqvist is unfamiliar with modern historiography – unless he simply chooses to ignore it to present Carl Johan and Sweden in a more glorious light. It could be pointed out that there is no evidence whatsoever to support Lindqvist’s claim that Frederik VI “naturally supported everything Kristian Fredrik [sic] now did” and that Denmark by the Treaty of Kiel ceded Norway not to Sweden, but to the King of Sweden, which is a significant difference. Lindqvist also gives the wrong number of inhabitants in Christiania in 1814 and his attempts at spelling in Norwegian are full of mistakes – the words “our king” are for instance not “vores kung” in Norwegian.
Despite, or maybe because of the fact that he has spent only a few of his so far 66 years in Sweden, Lindqvist has a grandly patriotic, almost national chauvinistic, approach to the history of Sweden – what used to be called “storsvensk” in Norway. As such it does not suit him that Norway and Sweden between 1814 and 1905 were two independent states in a personal union based on the principle of absolute equality.
In order to convince the reader that Norway was really a Swedish province, Lindqvist pompously tells us: “It was Sweden which had a governor general in Kristiania, not Norway in Stockholm”. This is rubbish. The governor general, who presided over the Norwegian cabinet when the King was not in residence in Christiania, was not a representative of Sweden, but of the King – i.e. the King of Norway, who happened also to be King of Sweden. He was a Norwegian official who was paid by the Norwegian state and who could be impeached by the Norwegian Parliament. He could be either Swedish or Norwegian, but it remains a fact that during the 59 years the position existed, it was held by Swedes for fifteen years, by Norwegians for nineteen and left vacant for twenty-six.
If one should read only one book about King Carl XIV Johan, it should certainly not be this one.

Frederik VII’s secret son revealed

A Danish friend has made me aware that Jyllands-Posten on Sunday had an article about an upcoming book of memoirs by an elderly lady called Gete Bondo Oldenborg Maaløe. In the book, which has the odd title Getes erindringer – Slægtshistorie, erindringer og beretning om et jævnt og (for det meste) muntert, (altid) virksomt liv (“Gete’s Memoirs: Family History, Memoirs and a Tale of an Even and (Mostly) Merry, (Always) Active Life”), Maaløe documents that King Frederik VII of Denmark was her great-grandfather.
Frederik VII, who died in 1863, was the last of the Oldenburg dynasty, which reigned over Denmark for more than 400 years. It has until now been believed that he was unable to beget children as he were married three times without begetting an heir and no illegitimate children have been known.
Mrs Maaløe says that her great-grandmother Elsa Maria Guldberg Poulsen probably met the Crown Prince in Copenhagen, but that the actual circumstances are unknown to her. The relationship resulted in a child who was given the Crown Prince’s full name, Frederik Carl Christian, and his mother’s surname. She quotes one of four letters in her possession from the Crown Prince to Miss Poulsen: “My own good Maria! Please accept my thanks for the son you have given me [...]. I look forward to giving him a father’s kiss when I come to Copenhagen. [...] Let me now see that you take good care of the lad, so that he will come to resemble his father and I can see my counterfeit in him. [...]”.
Maaløe adds that Frederik VII had intended to make his illegitimate son his private secretary, but died before he had completed his education. The King’s morganatic wife, Countess Danner, did however stay in touch with him and provided for him in her will.
Given that the letters are genuine and that Miss Poulsen did not have other relationships at the same time, this proves that Frederik VII was indeed capable of having children and that other explanations for the end of the Oldenburg dynasty must therefore be sought.
The story is mentioned in passing in Jan Møller’s biography Frederik 7. – En kongeskæbne (1994), where the author states that Marie Poulsen, as he calls her, was a servant at Christiansborg Palace and that the relationship was apparently a short-lived one. He gives the boy’s date of birth as 21 November 1843.
(The picture is a detail of Vilhelm Gerntner’s 1861 portrait of Frederik VII, which hangs at Rosenborg Castle in Copenhagen).