by Adelin Remy, Editor, ALMANACH
DE BRUXELLES
|
Adelin
Remy wrote this article at the request of Professor
C. E. LINDGREN, DEd, DLitt, Vice Director and Professor
at the Scuola di Genealogia, Araldica e Scienze Documentarie,
Director of The Institute for Educational and Historical
Research (Oxford), Professor at the American Military
University, President of the American Academy for Medieval
and Chivalric Research, Deputy Chairman of the International
Institute for the Study of Chivalric Orders, Commissioner/Member
of the Inernational Commission for Orders of Chivalry
(ICOC), American Delegate Member of the Unione Della
Nobilta' Napoleonica (Union of Napoleonic Nobility)
under the Honorary Presidency of HH Prince Murat, USA
Editor of CW Chivalric World (Web Edition) of Il Mondo
del Cavaliere, Vice Director of Il Mondo del Cavaliere,
Rivista Internazionale sugli Ordini Cavallereschi. Dr
Lindgren is a corresponding member of Almanach de Bruxelles.
www.geocities.com/chivalric2
|
1-
MONARCHY IN FIGURES
Albert
II King of the Belgians and
Queen Paola |
Out
of 190 countries members of the United Nations, 45 are monarchies :
Andorra, Antigua & Barbuda, Australia, The Bahamas, Bahrain,
Barbados, Belgium, Belize, Bhutan, Brunei, Cambodia, Canada,
Denmark, Grenada, Jamaica, Japan, Jordan, Kuwait, Lesotho,
Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Monaco, Morocco, Nepal,
The Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Oman, Papua New Guinea,
Qatar, St Kitts & Nevis, St Lucia, St Vincent & the
Grenadines, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Solomon Islands, Spain, Swaziland,
Sweden, Thailand, Tonga, Tuvalu, the United Arab Emirates,
the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
Out
of these 190 countries, at least 10 republics recognise some
form of hereditary rule : Botswana, The Gambia, Ghana,
Indonesia, Malawi, Namibia, Nigeria, South Africa, Uganda,
Zimbabwe...
Siri
Kula Sudha Ira Siyaaka Saasthura Audha Keerithi Katthiri
Bavana (Hassan Nooreddine II) King of Twelve Thousand
Isles and Sultan of the Maldives (1933- 1944) |
Two
countries have recalled their king, by elections or in international
negotiations, in 2001: Bulgaria and Afghanistan.
Monarchy
as a form of executive or non-executive government concerns
947 million people or 16% of the world's population: 143 million
people in Europe, 372 million executive government and 432
million non-executive government in other continents.
Non-executive
government refers to countries registered as republics but
recognising some form of hereditary rule in the country (the
House of Chiefs of Botswana, The Gambia, Ghana, the Sultanates
of Indonesia, Malawi, the Council of Traditional Leaders of
Namibia, the Houses of Chiefs of Nigeria, the Council and
the Houses of Traditional Leaders of South Africa, the 4 federated
kingdoms of Uganda, the 10 traditional chiefs in the House
of Assembly of Zimbabwe....
In summary, monarchys' figures are :
| Number
of Countries |
|
|
| |
Executive |
45/190
|
or
|
23.6%
|
| |
Non-executive |
10/190
|
or
|
5.2%
|
| Population |
|
|
| |
|
947
million/5,927 million
|
or
|
16%
|
| |
Europe
|
143
million/508 million
|
or
|
28.2%
|
| |
Out
of Europe
|
|
|
| |
Executive
|
372
million
|
|
|
| |
Non-executive
|
432
million
|
|
|
|
From
these figures, it appears that if most of the world’s countries
have adopted today a status of republic, monarchy represents
more than 20% of the countries of the UN, 28% of the countries
of Europe’s population, 7 out of 15 European Union’s countries.
Akihito,
Emperor of Japan |
The
richest country (Luxembourg) is a monarchy. Among the
10 richest countries of the world, 7 are monarchies. 15 of
the 20 richest countries are monarchies. 23 of the 30 richest
countries.
Per
capita income of the 45 monarchies average $17,000, to compare
with the average $7,200 world per capita income. Per capita
income of their dependencies (Anguilla, Aruba, Bermuda, etc)
average $18,600, a very decent outcome for Caribbean and Pacific
Ocean countries that did not achieve independence.
2-
WHY SO MANY RICH MONARCHIES AND FEWER MONARCHIES THAN REPUBLICS ?
It
is likely that most of the people do not understand the true
nature of monarchy :
The
word « king » will be used hereafter as a synonym
of monarch.
3-
THERE IS NO REAL DEMOCRACY WITHOUT TRADITION
Beatrix,
Queen of the Netherlands |
The
tradition of the United States of America, of Switzerland
and of Singapore (the 2nd, 4th and 5th
richest countries of the world) is not compatible with monarchy :
their history is the conquest of democratic values from foreign
monarchs, when monarchy was the only system of government
available in the world (USA and Switzerland) or in the region
(Singapore).
But
for the monarchies, the tradition is the source of all democratic
values : the king was or is still deriving his powers
by the Grace of God or by the Will of the People.
By
the Grace of God » is very often misinterpreted as a
symbol of absolute power when this style, still used by the
British Queen and by the Grand Duke of Luxembourg, was
more a guarantee that the king should respect the moral and
religious values commanded by the religion, at a time when
the human rights were not yet invented.
4-
TOTAL DEMOCRACY IS BETTER ACHIEVED WITH MONARCHY WHEN TRADITION
COMMANDS IT
Zaher
Shah, King of Afghanistan. His exile threw Afghanistan
into mayhem ending with the barbaric regime known as
the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan. The King is now
back in Kabul and peace seems to prevail |
The
world has known an evolution from absolute power to representative
democracy in the 19th and the 20th centuries
and from representative democracy to direct democracy since
the end of the 20th century. The
debate here is not on representative vs direct democracy but
in countries with a tradition of monarchy on how the king
may facilitate the unavoidable evolution of democratic values,
such as the one from representative democracy to direct democracy.
The
king is by definition above all political parties, above all
ethnic and religious differences, even when he is belonging
traditionally to the ethnic or religious majority. His rôle
is to advise the politicians on how to avoid any political
action that may divide the people. King Leka of Albania, when
siding with one political party, was definitely thrown out
of any restoration scheme.
Moreover,
the king will very often be the only one to advocate reconciliation,
whereas politicians tend to divide the people according to
the issues they are defending. Both King Louis XVIII of France
(1814-1824) and King Juan Carlos of Spain (since 1975) were
excellent at reconciling the various factions existing when
they took over.
Sihanouk,
King of Cambodia. Restored after years of republican
turmoil. |
The
king also has a longer term view of the interests of the country :
his mandate is not due for reelection in 4-5 years or less.
He is mandated in trust not only for him but also for his
descendants and therefore has no interest in precipitating
the country in a deep crisis.
The
king also legitimates all the actions of the government :
in most monarchies, the king is signing, as nominal head of
the executive, all the regulations taken in application of
the laws voted by the legislative : in the 21st
century, it is impossible to imagine that a king would lend
his signature to regulations violating the basic human rights
of his people. It took only 5 days for the Savoy Duke of Spoleto,
designated King Tomislav II of Croatia, to refuse the crown
of this Nazi sponsored puppet state in 1941. Unfortunately,
recent examples are showing that politicians in this region
have not been immune recently to that kind of violations.
The
legitimacy has interestingly a long life : even China,
one of the communist countries that were so keen on erasing
history, managed to find a spot for deceased Emperor Pu Yi
in the Hall of the Heroes of the Revolution in 1979. Communist
Montenegro built a huge mausoleum and rapatriated in 1989,
before the fall of the Berlin Wall, the body of the
king with 150,000 people attending the celebration (or one
fourth of total population, that is presumably all families
represented, out of a population of 600,000).
The
king is also the only last recourse when a political situation
is blocked : everybody has still in mind the image of
Thai politicians on their knees with King Bhumibol and the
ensuing resolution of the government’s crisis.
In
summary, the king is better placed than anyone in the country
to encourage the evolution of traditional moral and ethical
values : he is the symbol of the tradition. Tradition
today is democracy and respect of human rights. No wonder
that King Albert I of Belgium was the first to defend equal
suffrage after World War I.
5-
THE HEREDITY OF MONARCHY IS NOT UNDEMOCRATIC
Rama
IX, King of Thailand |
At
first look, the king is the only government person in the
country who is not elected : this is a bother for
most left wing people but also for the new right wing people
who advocate direct democracy, at all levels of the political
life.
Is
really the king the only one to transmit hereditarily important
responsibilities in the public life ? All the hereditary
offices in Europe have been abolished at the end of the Ancien
Régime. Why not the king’s office ?
The
king does not own the country anymore : he cannot dispose
of a portion of the country for his own benefit.
The
king owns his mandate in trust : he can not do anything
more than what is permitted by the constitution of the country.
This trust responsibility is transferred to his heir, with
the assent of the legislative. In order to avoid any problem,
the rule of succession is generally written in the constitution
of the country or in any equivalent document, which means
that the succession has been decided by the people.
The Yang di Pertuan Agong
(Paramount Ruler) of Malaysia. Elected by an electoral
college of hereditary monarchs |
Other
people in the public life can inherit such important responsibilities :
the heir of Bill Gates, for example, will receive, one day,
something that is larger than the GDPs of most of the countries
of the world. This transfer will be governed only by the inheritance
rules of the USA, without any intervention by the US government
or any other political authority, except the reporting of
Microsoft shares in due time at the Securities and Exchange
Commission.
In
this respect, the king, however restricted, is the symbol
of one of the basic human rights, the right to own, not a
real asset in this case, but a moral asset : the wealth
of the people.
What
if, do we hear very often, the heir is not able to perform
his job ? What if he is terminally ill, if he is crazy,
etc ? The constitution or equivalent document is providing
the solution : procedures of impeachment are existing
everywhere. Even in African dynasties, a council of wise men
has the responsibility not only to approve the choice of the
successor but also to impeach him if needed.
The
story goes very often that dynasts, because of frequent intermarriages,
at least in the past, have developed some genetical defaults
that increase the risk of making them unfit to assume their
supreme responsibilities : this story is obvious nonsense
for elementary genealogists, since most ordinary people have
been or are still engaged in family intermarriages, due in
the past to the difficulty of traveling. There should be some
mathematical explanation to why the population of France has
grown from 8 million in 800AD (Charlemagne) to 58 million
today, when a population of 58 million today with 2
parents, 4 grandparents, 8 grand-grandparents, 16 grand-grand-grandparents
etc should result in a population of billions of people in
800AD. The royal families are therefore not different from
ordinary families : actually they were at all times much
more able to travel than ordinary people, as witnessed by
the union of King Henri I of France with Princess Anne of
Kiev in 1049/1051.
Hence,
the king is also the symbol of the father of the country :
in Belgium, where King Albert II is of German
stock and Queen Paola is Italian, they both share common ancestors
(in the female line) with many Belgian families, including
a majority of non aristocratic ones. One more story goes away,
that in many European countries, the king is a stranger to
his people (King Simeon II of Bulgaria as Prime Minister
is named Mr Saxe Coburg and Gotha by his opponents): this
story is a total misconception of the numerous contributions
of the female lines.
No
surprise that the royal family’s life is sensed by most of
their people as a close relationship. Witness RTL’s Place
Royale and VTM’s Royalty, two of the most popular
TV weekly series in Belgium.
Qaboos
ibn Said, Sultan of Oman |
The
king is costing a lot of money to the taxpayers, do we hear
very often. This assumption is worth some development. The
king receives generally an allowance from his country in order
to perform his duties : with this allowance, he
has to pay the salaries of his staff. Unlike the president
of any republic, he does not earn a salary. Therefore, the
amount of the allowance has to be compared with the total
cost of a president’s cabinet, and in some countries, of the
vice-president(s)’s cabinet(s). A comparison that, in most
of the countries, is certainly in favour of the king’s household.
More
important is the fact that, at each election of a new president,
a republic should bear the huge expenses of the election,
every 4, 5 or 7 years, if the president is directly elected,
whereas that kind of expenses do not exist when changing the
king. When changing president, directly elected or not, republics
shall also support the expenses of changing the cabinet.
The
symbols of kingship, the throne, the scepter, the ceremonial,
may give the impression that the king is well above the people
and entertain the idea of privilege : all these belong
to the country, that is to the people, and are surely amply
matched by touristic revenues. The crazy castles of King Louis
II of Bavaria have been a huge source of revenues for Bavaria
since then. The ceremonies of the British royal family are
a worldwide media success.
6-
THE CURRENT DEBATES OF MONARCHY
It
is interesting to take at least three examples of debates
on monarchy :
France :
the Republic has created, in schools and elsewhere, a
myth according which the monarchy is synonym of the Ancien
Régime which in turn is synonym of absolute power, in
order to legitimate the foundements of the Republic, after
the terror of the French Revolution.
There
is no evidence that the rights achieved after the French Revolution
would not have been obtained by the continuation of monarchy,
like in England.
Ionnnes
Paulus II Supreme Pontiff of Rome |
Unfortunately
for them and for the French people, the monarchs and their
successors have not been able to reverse this myth, in spite
of laudable efforts in this direction.
The
vision today is that many active French royalists look like
nostalgists of a mixture of absolute power and godly kingship.
Undoubtedly,
it is up to the French people to decide where their tradition
of democracy lies.
Commonwealth :
the debate is open in many Commonwealth countries whether
to keep the Queen as head of state or to opt for a republic,
as all African and Asian countries, Dominica, Fiji, Kiribati,
Trinidad & Tobago and Vanuatu have done.
Considering that Bermuda is the 3rd richest country
of the world, the Cayman Islands the 9th, Canada
the 16th, Australia the 21st , The Bahamas
the 24th etc, the issue of monarchy is certainly
very important.
Central
and Eastern European countries : a popular support
is existing for the exiled kings and pretenders, symbols of
a government system that was better than the 50 to 70 years
of communist rule they have endured. Referendums should be
organised to ask the people the form of government they prefer.
CONCLUSION
As
the richest countries of the world are predominantly monarchies,
there is not only a historical link but also a logical link
between tradition and democracy : where this link has
been erased, countries have known long periods of darkness
and misery, as the recent fall of communism has shown.
When
tradition commands it, the monarchy is the only system of
government that facilitates the evolution of democratic values,
especially human rights, because the monarch is the only government
person to stand above political and ethnic differences, playing
therefore a reconciling rôle rather than a dividing rôle,
because he has a longer term view than all other government
people, as the authority who legitimates the government’s
action and therefore acting as last recourse authority.
The
main opponents of monarchy are developing arguments that are
not consistent with a rigorous analysis of the facts :
the heredity vs. the election and the cost of monarchy.
In
most monarchies, the king appears therefore as a symbol of
harmony and exemplarity : these are his only duty.
Elizabeth
II by the Grace of God Queen of New Zealand, the United
Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, Antigua
& Barbuda, Australia, Bahamas, Barbados, Belize, Canada,
Grenada, Jamaica, Papua New Guinea, St. Kitts & Nevis,
St. Lucia, St. Vincent & the Grenadines, Solomon Islands
and Tuvalu |
