Imperial Requiem: Four Royal Women and the Fall of the Age of Empires

by Justin C. Vovk

  She had long wanted this imperial title which so many sovereigns like the King of Prussia had acquired and which enabled those who held it – as it enabled the Emperor of Russia whose designs in the Far East were notorious – to arrogate to themselves and their children dignities and precedence which she felt demeaning to herself and her own. “I am an Empress,” she announced one day in 1873 when she was certainly not, “& in common conversation am sometimes called Empress of India.”649

  It was a title that did not sit well with Edward VII. “I could never consent to the word ‘Imperial’ being added to my name,” he disapprovingly told Disraeli.”650 But George and Mary, who shared Queen Victoria’s love for India, had little trouble taking up the imperial mantle.

  Once she became queen-empress, Mary had to adjust to yet another change of address. Throughout the course of her life, she had lived at Kensington Palace, White Lodge, York Cottage, and Marlborough House. But all of those were eclipsed by her latest home: Buckingham Palace, now one of the most recognizable royal residences in the world. The three-story palace, with its 775 rooms, was originally known as Buckingham House. Built by the Duke of Buckingham in 1703, it came into the royal family’s possession when King George III purchased it in 1761. The palace earned the nickname “the queen’s house,” because for many years it was the home of George III’s wife, Queen Charlotte. King William IV planned to move into the palace, but the necessary renovations to it were not completed before his death. It was not until 1837 that Queen Victoria moved the official royal residence from Saint James’s to Buckingham Palace. Despite being the royal family’s official London residence, Buckingham Palace was described as “a soulless office with residential rooms attached, which has inspired little affection among members of the Royal Family since it was transformed in the nineteenth century from an unassuming house into a grandiose official residence.”651

  Thankfully for the queen, her job had largely been done before she moved in. During Edward VII’s brief reign, Queen Alexandra spent a great deal of time furnishing the palace with tasteful antiques and works of art, leaving Mary to only add personal touches here and there. The new queen moved into the palace four days before the rest of her family. She found the building somewhat daunting. “It is rather strange & lonely here without you & the children & I feel rather lost,” she wrote to George. “Here everything is so straggly, such distances to go & so fatiguing. But I ought not to grumble for they have been very anxious to make me as comfortable as possible & these rooms are very nice & I have a good many of my own things round me.”652

  After a year on the throne, Mary was beginning to establish her own identity as queen. Unlike Queen Alexandra, who was always in the spotlight with her trendy wardrobe and vivacious personality, Queen Mary was becoming symbolic of a renaissance of Victorian values. Instead of being a social butterfly like her mother-in-law, she was the epitome of quiet dignity and grace. Wherever she went, she was met with enamored spectators who were in awe of her elegance. Even her dresses, noted for their soft pastel colors and simple designs, sparked a nostalgic note in British society.

  Politically, George and Mary were set apart from their imperial counterparts. Unlike Nicholas and Alexandra and Wilhelm and Augusta Victoria, the king and queen were not absolute monarchs. In Russia and Germany, the new Reichstag and Duma were designed to curtail the powers of the sovereign through the democratic process. In Great Britain, the real power had rested with Parliament for centuries. This meant that, although George and Mary played hugely significant roles, they were not necessarily much more than figureheads. It was this existential reality that would separate the British monarchy from those of Germany, Austria, and Russia in the years to come. Ironically, the parliamentary nature of the British monarchy would be one of the very factors that contributed to its survival.

  When it came to the political arena, Mary made it a point to stay out of it, but she nonetheless exercised a strong influence over her husband, though perhaps not to the extent that Tsarina Alexandra did over Nicholas II. Some accused the queen of trying to boss her husband around. Others claimed that she was browbeaten and intimidated by George, who was known to have a volatile temper. James Pope-Hennessy, one of Mary’s most well-known biographers, interviewed her son David many years later. According to David, his parents did not always experience “a happy marriage.” He told Pope-Hennessy “his father had a filthy temper and would humiliate his wife, attack her verbally in front of the children.”653 “Truth lay somewhere in between,” wrote another of the queen’s biographers. “Her attitude was that the King must reign, and in order to reign he must be sheltered from the importunities of daily life … She was always to draw a firm line between the King’s duties as Head of State and as paterfamilias.”654

  Regardless of whatever influence Mary may have had over the king, it remains certain that she was uncompromising in her support of him. “First and always she was his wife,” one contemporary wrote. Though sometimes described as docile, George V was not without his dark moods. He often worried himself sick over important decisions or became depressed when things turned out badly for him. During these times, Mary was “by his side in anxiety and despondency, consoling him, greatly ambitious for him; with mind, heart, and soul ready for his service at any moment.” It comes as no surprise, then, that in his first speech after ascending the throne, George declared, “And I am encouraged by the knowledge that I have in my dear wife a constant helpmate in every endeavour for our people’s good.…”655

  King George V was unimpeachably faithful to his wife, despite a few, almost farcical, scandals. Shortly after his accession, the radical propagandist Edward Mylius circulated a pamphlet claiming that the king had secretly taken a wife when he was stationed on Malta with the Royal Navy. As early as 1893, salacious rumors were rampant that George had married an English admiral’s daughter. Three weeks before their wedding, George told May, “I say, May, we can’t get married after all! I hear I have got a wife and three children!”656 Mylius’s pamphlet further alleged that the king’s marriage to Queen Mary was bigamous and therefore invalid. Nobody took it seriously, but to avoid further accusations against the new king, Mylius was arrested, tried, found guilty of libel, and sentenced to a year in prison. George’s strict moral character and widely known conjugal fidelity were two of the main factors that contributed to his weathering the Mylius crisis. This was one area in which he was very different from his own father. Edward VII, though very much in love with his wife, was famous for his paramours. Some of his most famous mistresses included Lady Churchill, Winston Churchill’s mother; Daisy Greville, Countess of Warwick; and the actress Sarah Bernhardt. According to a 2007 report, Edward VII was believed to have had as many as fifty-five mistresses, since “he was the very model of genial but remorseless infidelity.”657 In an example of historical irony, one of the king’s longtime liaisons was with a woman named Alice Keppel, whose great-granddaughter Camilla Parker-Bowles married Edward’s great-great-grandson Charles, Prince of Wales.

  Edward’s liaisons were not as harmless as he may have hoped. In 1870, he was called to appear at the divorce trial of Sir Charles Mordaunt. Although Edward was not directly named in an affair with Lady Mordaunt, he was still booed one evening when he and Alexandra arrived at the Olympic Theater. Queen Alexandra often took her husband’s infidelities in stride, even joking about them with some of her ladies-in-waiting. When Edward became involved with the American debutante Miss Chamberlayne, Alexandra nicknamed her “Chamberpots.” This did not make Edward’s unfaithfulness any less painful. He kept so many mistresses that he earned the nickname “Edward the Caresser.” In this respect, the new king was the complete opposite of his father, who even described his affairs to George. In an 1881 letter, Edward boasted about the stage debut of his latest mistress Lillie Langtry. In contrast to Edward VII, George V remained completely loyal to his wedding vows. “We have seen enough of the intrigue and meddling of certain ladies,” he once said, referrin
g to his father’s mistresses, “I’m not interested in any wife but my own.”658

  In November 1911, King George and Queen Mary traveled to Delhi for their coronation durbar as emperor and empress of India. The decision to go came as something of a shock, since “such a novelty as the King’s visit to India had never occurred to more than ten in half a million” people.659 “I think it a grand idea,” Nicholas II wrote to George. “I do not doubt that it will produce a tremendous impression on the whole world.”660 No British monarch had ever been crowned in India, even though the title had been passed down from Queen Victoria. There was a tremendous sense of solemnity to the occasion. It was only the third time an imperial durbar had been ever held, and it was the only one ever to be presided over by a reigning monarch. The decision to hold the coronation was not merely a monarchical one but an imperial one as well. Contrary to the opinions of Britain’s Conservative Party, the sun had begun to set on the British Empire over the last decade. Unrest in Ireland and India had given rise to the idea of home rule—self-sustained autonomy within the empire. Religion remained one of the greatest obstacles. The Irish parliament in Dublin was Catholic, but other counties like Ulster were Protestant. Ireland was an ongoing problem, but India, George V believed, could be ameliorated with a display of empire that brought back memories of Queen Victoria’s reign.

  The official party left England on November 11 aboard the HMS Medina. A brand-new vessel, it was designed to carry 650 passengers, but for this voyage, it carried only the royal party—some two dozen people. During the monthlong trip, Mary’s seasickness resurfaced. A stormy crossing on the Bay of Biscay left her bedridden for three days. The skies cleared by the time they passed Gibraltar, and the queen spent most of her time from then on writing letters on deck to her children and Aunt Augusta. The Medina reached Bombay on December 2. When the queen went ashore, she wore a yellow, flowered chiffon dress, punctuated by the Order of the Garter’s bright blue ribbon. Her flat, straw-sewn hat was covered with artificial roses. “It is marvelous being in India again,” she wrote. “I who never thought I should see it again. I am so glad I came.”661

  From Bombay, the king, queen, and their group boarded a train for Delhi. The king entered the city on horseback through the massive Gate of the Elephants dressed in a full field marshal’s uniform. Next came the queen, who rode with her ladies-in-waiting in the first of a long line of state carriages. “It was a wonderful sight,” she wrote to Aunt Augusta. “George rode and I followed in a carriage with the Mistress of the Robes & Lord Durham—Very grand & I felt proud to take part in so interesting & historical an event, just the kind of thing which appeals to my feelings of tradition—You will understand.”662 In the words of one of Queen Mary’s biographers, “The preparations at Delhi were on a scale without precedent in the history of British India.”663 A vast canvas covering forty-five square miles was set up to accommodate the quarter of a million people who converged on Delhi for the historic event. A six-tent suite was set up for George and Mary’s personal use. It was an elaborate construct that included a drawing room, anteroom, office, boudoir, bedrooms, and dining room that opened into a formal reception area.

  At noon on the day of the durbar, December 12, King George, with Queen Mary at his side, entered the amphitheater wearing a crown specially made for the ceremony. It cost more than £60,000 to create—around $6.5 million today.664 The Imperial Crown of India, as it became known, was covered in emeralds, rubies, sapphires, and 6,170 diamonds. George later wrote that he became “tired from wearing the Crown for 31/2 hours, it hurt my head, as it is pretty heavy.”665 The newly crowned emperor and empress of India were seated on silver thrones beneath a gold dome upon a golden dais. On either side of them stood five-foot-tall maces, ornamented with lotus flowers, golden king cobras, and the Tudor crown. The correspondent for the London Times vividly described the coronation in their December 13 issue.

  Enthroned on high beneath a golden dome, looking outwards to the far north from whence they came, their Majesties, the King-Emperor and Queen-Empress were acclaimed by over 100,000 of their subjects. The ceremony at its culminating point exactly typified the Oriental conception of the ultimate repositories of Imperial power. The Monarchs sat alone, remote but beneficent, raised far above the multitude, but visible to all, clad in rich vestments, flanked by radiant emblems of authority, guarded by a glittering army of troops, the cynosure of the proudest Princes of India, the central figures in what was surely the most majestic assemblage ever seen in the East.666

  The day after the coronation, Mary wrote, “Yesterday’s Durbar was simply magnificent & too beautifully arranged, I am still quite under the influence of Imperialism it inspired.”667 King George was just as rapturous, writing to his mother, “The Durbar yesterday was the most wonderful & beautiful sight I have ever seen & one I shall remember all my life.”668 The high note on which the imperial coronation ended did not last. A week after the durbar, Sir Charles Hardinge, the new viceroy, was wounded when a bomb was thrown at his procession, killing one of his aides. Thankfully, George and Mary were on their way to Nepal and out of harm’s way.

  Always thoughtful and introspective, King George took this opportunity to look back and take stock of his life. When he did, the one person who was always there for him, to whom he owed unending gratitude and love, was his wife. He wrote the following to her while she was sightseeing in Jaipur:

  Each year I feel we become more & more necessary to one another & our lives become more and more wrapt [sic] up in each others. And I am sure that I love you more each year & am simply devoted to you & loathe being separated from you even for a day. Especially now in my present position with the enormous amount I have to do & with all my many responsibilities I feel that I want your kind help & support more than ever. And I must say you invariably give it [to] me, I greatly appreciate it & thank you from the bottom of my heart for all the love & devotion you give me.… very proud of being your husband & feel that our coming here to India as the first Emperor and Empress has certainly proved itself to be what I always predicated, a great success.669

  The Indian coronation marked a turning point in Mary’s life. She became more confident in her role as queen and empress. This was buttressed when she and George returned to England. The crowds gathered to greet them cheered like had never been done for a British monarch before. There was little doubt at the close of 1911 that, with few exceptions, King George V and Queen Mary were the most popular monarchs in the world.

  12

  “The Little One Will Not Die”

  (1912–14)

  When Charles and Zita returned from their honeymoon, they settled down to the quiet life of a provincial soldier and his wife. The archduke resumed his position in the Austrian military, beginning with the Seventh Dragoons at Brandeis, a small town on the Elbe River in what is today the Czech Republic. A few weeks later, Charles was transferred to the regiment at Galicia, located in the uppermost corner of the Austrian Empire near what is now Ukraine. The time that Charles and Zita spent in the company of their countrymen earned them immense popularity. One story that circulated during their first winter as husband and wife is ample testament to this.

  During a car journey they had to stop while some repairs were carried out, and they took shelter in a nearby house where the housewife gave them hot drinks and chatted comfortably. When she heard where they were headed she was pleased—her son was a young soldier in the regiment [at Galicia]. Would they take his clean washing back to him for her? And also this small envelope of money that he needed? The Archduchess cheerfully took charge of the laundry, and the Archduke promised to deliver the money safely. Only later, when both had been handed over to the young soldier—the money with some extra added—did the story emerge, and the country woman realise who her guests had been … The friendliness and naturalness of the young couple who were second in line to the throne were beginning to win hearts.670

  In 1912, Charles and Zita relocated to Vienna, brin
ging an end to his tour of duty in the provinces. The move was prompted by an accident that nearly put an abrupt end to Charles’s life. Earlier that year at Lemberg, he was thrown off his horse and hit his head on the ground, causing a severe concussion. The field hospital in Galicia was not equipped to treat this type of injury, so Charles was moved to a hospital in Vienna. After several days gripped with anxiety, Zita was finally able to see an improvement in her husband’s condition. Within a matter of weeks, he was back on his feet.

  Once Zita’s husband recovered, the couple’s relocation was made permanent by his promotion to the rank of major in the Thirty-Ninth Infantry Regiment, with command of the First Battalion in Vienna. The move had been in the works for some time, since Zita was expecting their first child. In the early morning hours of November 12, 1912, the archduchess went into labor at Villa Wartholz, her aunt’s home near Schwarzau. The old castle was chosen because both of the parents wanted their child to be born in peace, away from the public spotlight of the imperial court in the capital. After a lengthy delivery, a healthy son was born. He was named Otto for his paternal grandfather. Outside the castle, the townspeople gathered to sing and celebrate the baby’s safe arrival. So thunderous were the celebrations that Zita’s mother-in-law and brothers went out to greet the people. At Otto’s baptism on November 25, Cardinal Franz Nagl, the prince-archbishop of Vienna, poured water from the Jordan River over his head. One of Vienna’s leading newspapers wrote an article extolling the highest hopes for Otto’s future: “In the new-born child … is an emperor who, in all probability, will only be called upon to guide the destiny of this state in the last quarter of the twentieth century, and then, hopefully, in calmer times than we are living through now.”671