To all my gentle readers who just celebrated my best hopes that you had indeed a Merry Christmas, and looking forward to a much safer and peaceful new year. 

This past year contained the anniversary of the most world-shaking event in modern history: 90 years since the end of World War I in 1918. As part of the Empire countries like Canada and Australia immediately jumped to the defense of mother England. Millions of young men died, showing magnificent courage under horrendous conditions. Many of those that returned came back with broken bodies and souls. But with their hard-won victory came a growing sense that they were now strong enough to stand alone, in loyalty to King and England, but to their own country too. 

In the aftermath the majority of the major European empires and monarchs vanished. Those who remained did so in name only and went into exile, leaving their devastated populations in the hands of military dictators or figureheads. Where had their anchors gone? 

Last month the Jester had the pleasure of listening to a talk by a Citizenship Judge. It’s his job to swear in new citizens when they take their oath of allegiance to the Queen, who is Canada’s Head of State, and become new Canadians. It is a joyful, emotional occasion for all of them, and he loves doing it. The topic of his discussion though was the human chain of progress toward loyalty to a monarch, and I thought it might interest you too. So here is the Jester’s version of our march toward why and how monarchy came to be. 

Human survival from prehistoric times depended on group efforts. At first was the family. What that consisted of we really don’t know. Perhaps a strong, young male like Trog took a mate, probably his cousin or other close relative, and they had children. Should that mate die in childbirth Trog would have found another, or possibly had a harem. Then Trog and his many sons formed hunting parties and went out in search of food in their little valley in southern France. The animals’ flesh kept them alive, and their pelts kept them warm. In turn each of Trog’s sons moved off, finding mates among other family groups, fathering families of their own, while daughters probably were given to their sons. And they had children.  

Then as Trog’s expanding family hunted out all the prey around them they had to start spreading out further away from home, and they started to run into other not-so-friendly family groups looking to hunt in the same places. To counter this invasion Trog and his younger brothers, now the patriarchs of their own family groups, formed an alliance to repel these others. And Trog became the leader of this scattered tribe. He may have had to fight for it if his brothers decided they would do a better job. In the end he won.   

As time went by Trog died and consequent tribal leaders found that hunting in large groups meant bringing down much larger prey, and that meant feeding and clothing more than just their own little family; so for convenience they started living together in large groups too, began to plant crops and raise livestock for the benefit of all, staying in one place all year. But then outside tribes began infringing on their ancestral hunting grounds. To protect their interests Trog’s tribes banded together to fight them off as an army. As they were mainly all descended from Trog they were by definition a Clan. 

Trog’s clan now numbered perhaps sixty people (people didn’t live very long back then, and age 40 was considered a very old man). So who was going to be the head of this disparate clan? Somebody had to make decisions, somebody had to be the boss, somebody had to be seen by other clans as the leader. Who was the clan to extend its loyalty to? Well, there was a great-great-grandson of Trog named Blen. And there were Blen’s brothers, numerous cousins, brothers-in-law and others. To prove he was worthy of their loyalty and that he was capable of heading the clan, potential chieftain Blen was going to have to fight for it, and then survive.  

Of course over in the next valley their enemy clan was embroiled in the same argument. It’s major candidate Loka decided that his test would be to defeat Blen , take over Blen’s clan as slaves, grab his livestock, his land, his weapons, his hunting grounds and take over as the Chieftain of a very much more powerful clan. Then he could go over to the next valley and conquer that tribe too. Oh he had big plans had Loka. But Blen was no fool. He decided to strike first, and he launched a sneak attack on the outskirts of Loka’s territory, laying waste to one tribe’s camp. Triumphant Blen returned to his people, who hailed him as their Chieftain. Loka retaliated. And Blen had to make a bigger show. It went on and on. 

The inhabitants of the Scottish Marches became trapped in that mentality well into Elizabethan times. It is the story of the reivers, driven by famine and poverty, and the machinations and constant warring of the Kings of Scotland for its independence, and of England to prevent it, which forced them into a state of clan warfare amongst themselves on both sides of the Border. From 1286, on the death of Scotland’s Alexander III, for over 300 years they made murder, kidnapping, thieving, burning, pillaging and livestock rustling, their way of life; until the two countries were united under King James VI and I in 1603, on the death of Elizabeth I. And even then… 

So let’s just say that Blen won the day, and absorbed Loka’s clan into his. Now Blen had to earn the loyalty of his new recruits. They hadn’t come peacefully, and to make sure they didn’t try to escape or kill his people, he had to prove to them that they would have a better life under his authority. But this was all beyond his understanding, and things deteriorated until the clans separated and went back to their own lands again. Well, you didn’t think this was going to be smooth road, did you? Nothing about human evolution ever was. 

Now let’s fast forward a few millennia. 

We have the ancient civilizations in what we now call the Middle East, and the Orient, and the Americas, and Rome. In different times, at different speeds, and in ignorance of the rest of the world, the chieftainates had now slowly evolved into monarchies. Their numerous clans had banded together over the centuries into nations, with one man (or woman) in charge. Whether called King, Emperor, Queen, Empress, Caesar or Khan, leaders of great civilizations had sprung from Trog’s little family tree. 

Diverse as they were they had one thing in common- all their people’s loyalty and fealty was given to one person who had either inherited the job, connived, married it or conquered a rival or two for it.. Each had their own version of King and Country. Why? Because that leader was traditionally there to guarantee his people would be well fed, had a roof over their heads and warm clothes on their backs, had plans to expand their fortunes and the money and power to protect them from outside invaders. And if that leader couldn’t due to incompetence, cowardice or in it for his own personal glory, someone else was always ready to take over. 

Then these Renaissance monarchs sent their hired explorers out into the world’s unknown waters to find a quick route to the orient to pillage its vast riches. (Wars cost money you know.) Though they never found the fabled Northwest Passage, once these adventurers returned with news of vast lands full of valuable animal pelts and pagan savages, successive sovereigns began to send out settlers into their newly claimed territories, and missionaries to convert the heathen to their preferred religions. And these settlers brought their loyalty to their monarchs with them, making their claims in the names of the King of Spain, England, France and Portugal. The Vikings had already made impermanent settlements on the east coast of North America. Ironically, Chinese explorers and cartographers had been to the west coast, backed by their Emperor’s quest for riches and knowledge of other lands. 

The problem with this was that the monarch was now so far away, and certain colonies decided they preferred to make their own rules, and pay taxes to themselves, like the Americans. Then others, like Mexico, remained loyal to Spain. Today those countries of the Commonwealth that were former members of the Empire, most of them constitutional monarchies or republics now, willingly support the Queen as Head of State while maintaining their own governmental systems. Countries like Japan revere their Emperor as a demigod, as they always have. The kings and queens of European countries like Denmark, Spain, Netherlands, Sweden, Monaco, Romania and Britain’s younger generation of royals continue a celebrity status that bodes well for their futures. Kings of Greece and Italy were deposed long ago, and languish contentedly in exile in London or Paris. The King of Belgium, Albert II, has the power to appoint his government’s Prime Minister; unfortunately the only one he thinks worthy doesn’t want the job. 

Well that’s the how. Why Monarchy? Because humans need a supreme leader they can depend on. They need the knowledge that someone is in charge, and that someone is looking out for them.  At first the role of monarch was played by the one who could conquer the enemy and protect his people longest. Then it became a role set by Divine Right, where the king’s word was law. When kings were found to be just as venal and human as everyone else their power was curtailed (for example, England’s Regent Prince John’s forcible signing of Magna Carta while his brother King Richard was off crusading and ended up a prisoner for several years). 

Prince Philip is descended from the Kings of Greece; the first was originally imported from Bavaria, and the next one who fathered the current royal house was the second son of the King of Denmark. (Court Jester- December 2004). 

Today’s modern monarchs participate in their government processes by opening parliaments, entertaining foreign dignitaries, supporting good works, fundraising for charitable organizations they support, and other actions no one else has the knowledge, authority or dedication to carry out. They are valuable members of society, and do a job that really needs to be done. In 2006 the University of Leicester in England did a survey, asking people in 178 countries if they were happy with their lives. Of the top ten happiest countries seven of them are monarchies. The country on the top of the ‘Unhappiest’ list is Burundi, which was a monarchy but deposed it. (See Court Jester column, August 2006 for details). 

Politicians come and go, but those who have a monarch see them as exhibiting the highest values of their country, Immigrants to Canada who take up citizenship are usually running toward a better life, or away from a horrible one. They may come from Europe, Taiwan, Moldavia, Germany, South Africa, Pakistan or mainland China. They take no exception to pledging their loyalty to the Queen and their new country because now they have the anchor they were seeking-just like Trog’s little family. 

Happy New Year, and anon until then.