“If one sups with sorrow, one need not invite the world to see you eat.” After losing his throne at the end of World War I, ex-Tsar Ferdinand of Bulgaria bore himself stoically. Proudly he noted:
“Kings...are more philosophic under reverses than ordinary individuals...our philosophy is primarily the result of tradition and breeding, and do not forget that pride is an important item in the making of a monarch. We are disciplined from the day of our birth and taught the avoidance of all outward signs of emotion. The main thing is...dignity.”
These are admirable words, yet Ferdinand could count himself relatively lucky. As Germany’s Kaiser Wilhelm II and Austro-Hungary’s Emperor Karl I, Ferdinand survived the war and ended by living in peaceful exile.
These ex-rulers had years to look back, to dream of what might have been, or indeed, could still come to pass. Karl, for example, thought Austria’s new government was illegal and that his own restoration was a natural right. Yet the tide of history was against him as chronicled in Gareth Russell’s “The Emperors: How Europe’s Rulers Were Destroyed by the First World War” (Amberly, $23.75).
By brutal contrast, Russia’s last Romanovs, Tsar Nicholas II, his wife and five children, were routinely humiliated and finally executed in 1918. It was only between 1998 and 2009 that their bodies were found, identified by DNA analysis and properly buried.
In his new work “The Emperors: How Europe’s Rulers Were Destroyed by the First World War,” British author Gareth Russell takes us back a century, into the dying days of some of Europe’s oldest monarchies. He goes through all the familiar stories: the 1914 assassination of Austro-Hungary’s Archduke Franz Ferdinand, the often ridiculed bombast of Germany’s Wilhelm II, outmaneuvered by his war ministers, Russia in revolution, the creepy Rasputin, Tsar Nicholas II’s abdication and demise.
To Mr. Russell’s credit, he also discusses less famous personalities, notably Austro-Hungary’s fiery last Empress Zita. The tension she and her husband Karl produced as they attempted to regain the throne is well captured, with the wife often trying harder than the husband.
Mr. Russell, a Modern History graduate of Saint Peter’s College, Oxford, usefully lists a host of sources in his book’s bibliography. His love of books is evident in his writing style. It is hard to imagine he would describe his own friends as having ‘alabaster skin’, for example, as he does about one royal personality.
He is by no means pompous or difficult to read, however – he has an obvious passion for what he wishes to share. The impression, though, is that he often thinks and writes in the language of his sources, rather than his own, critically detached voice.
In several passages, Mr. Russell is deeply hostile to Woodrow Wilson, whose insistence on a Europe without its old monarchies he damns unequivocally. According to Mr. Russell, Wilson’s idealism – to see Europe progress to representative democracies – was myopic at best, and a trigger for the poisonous ideologies of the 20th century at worst.
Where most royals favored stability and tradition, Europe’s new regimes sought permanent revolution, contributing to the conflagration of WWII. According to Mr. Russell, Wilson could at least have tried to foresee this. It is a provocative view, but one that would need lengthy deliberation to be judged. Still, Mr. Russell’s view is striking: it is one of the few strong opinions he advances in an otherwise polite work.
“The Emperors” does not consider why some monarchies fell, even as others survived. Foremost among the latter is Britain’s House of Windsor, which was never seriously threatened with obsolescence.
Was it, put simply, something they did – like changing their name from the Germanic Saxe-Coburg & Gotha to Windsor, to distance themselves from the enemy – or something about Britain’s relationship with its rulers? Was it simply because Britain was on the winning side?
These questions do not concern Mr. Russell, yet his views on them could have given his stories of the losers greater depth. Mr. Russell has produced a highly readable work, good as a refresher about all you forgot or did not listen to at school.
He is best when he takes us into less familiar territory and comes truly alive when he places his extensive reading into the background, to offer his own opinions. He will of course have more opportunities to do so: the reshaping of Europe after WWI is losing none of its interest.
Andre van Loon (vanloonandre@gmail.com) is a freelance book critic specializing in Russian literature and history.
First Published: November 9, 2014, 5:00 a.m.
