the book "Prins Wiwill"

Whether he was smart, I don’t know. According to Wiwipedia he might have been, according to other sources, which I can’t remember, he wasn’t particularly. Over the last couple of days I read, almost finished, the book “Prins Wiwill”. The book is a dramatized telling of events. Though an interesting and easy read, it does force the author’s interpretations and opinions about people and events on the reader. I wonder how many times the prince really was in tears and how many times the author decided the prince was.

One such thing, or rather person, victimized by this approach is Queen Sophie. In part the strong opinion ventilated in the book has been brought on by the prince’s personal care taker. This man, De Casembroot, has written a diary in the period he was responsible for the prince’s upbringing. The book is based on that diary. Very likely the author’s opinion about the Queen is mainly based on what De Casembroot wrote. According to De Casembroot, the Queen is a manipulative wench who’s not afraid to use everybody, including her own son, to oppose everything the King says, does and might think and does. In some accounts it is even said she was teaching her son where to lie down on the ground and how to press his ear to the floor to hear best what was going on in the room below.

I’m not sure how much of that is true. I’ve got the feeling a lot of those rumours are what they are; rumours, passed on by all the personnel. Maybe it is true, but there’s no way we’re going to see any evidence for that.

Not only the Queen doesn’t come off lightly, Prince Wiwil doesn’t come off very well either. According to the book he’s an uninspired, lazy, indifferent kid who’s suffering from tantrums and sometimes even shows behaviour foul and mad as his dad’s. Just like his mom, in this book, the view that is shed on him is pepperred in the opninions and ignorance of the time he lived in.

In both cases I believe parts of it, because I read it somewhere else, or because I observed, for as far as I can, certain behaviour before. A lot I will write off as “the view of the time”. For instance, De Casembroot is against everything Thorbeckian, which is very liberal, especially for the time. Thorbecke was once a minister in the 19th century Dutch government. He wrote the constitution we’re living on and extract our rights from to this day. I think it’s no surprise I am, to use the 19th century expression, a Thorbeckian.

In the coming week I planned to read a book about Queen Sophie, based on her letters, if I’m not mistaken. In this case I’m going to have to remind myself, Queen Sophie liked to dramatize everything. That has become very clear from the books about Wiwil and Alexander.

What will be left is to read about Willem III, their father. I think I have a fair amount of information about the man so far. What I’m interested in, in the King’s case, is why his marriage with Sophie didn’t work, but did work with Emma. What were the differences? What did Sophie do to tick the King off and what did Emma do to calm him down?

All this study is to try and understand Wiwil and Alexander. Their tragedy, especially their demise, puzzles me. Both did nothing to save themselves. More and more I start to believe Sophie has been the great cause for that. Sure, King Willem III didn’t help, yet, Queen Wilhelmina talks about her “dear father” and she turned out to be a good Queen. I know Emma has a very big hand in that one. Still, Wilhelmina’s “dear father” stands so far apart from the hatred both Wiwil and Alexander felt. Can one man really manage to have such different and strong effects on persons all by himself. Even so, could the King?

the Orange Bastards - a Proper Game of Thrones



Daddy



the Orange Bastards

A Proper Game of Thrones

If you think it’s normal and noble the Oranges (of Nassau) are on the throne rightfully so, than you’re very naïve.


I don’t understand people. Why sawing on the legs of the throne when you can just topple it over by sheer moral truth?

How do you think it’s possible a dynasty as “old” (old between quotes for reasons) as the Oranges of Nassau are still on the throne? Not because they’re sweet and cuddly, as a matter of fact their cuddliness has provided a lot of scandal (bastard children and sex escapades in every sort and form). Keeping your family alive was a real challenge in those days and keeping titles pure and fruity especially since only the males were allowed to carry those titles. Then how is it possible the Oranges are still the Oranges from Nassau? Well, by fiddling here and there. I’m not going to elate that whole sordid history, you can go here for that.

What I want to say is, so what the whole inheritance rule didn’t quite work and some people had syphilis and got infertile. Shit happens. A kingdom that is inherited by blood is in any form stupid, dishonourable, arrogant, greedy, self-important and not serving to the people. So why not complain about the basis? Willem of Orange, the father of our country, should have honourably said: “Sod it, I will be the only one in whole history who can carry the title ‘Prince of Orange’. You can bury the dynasty with me.” Well, that didn’t happen. Instead they bred and handed their title over to whoever was oldest son (or daughter in case of crisis), had some vague relation with the original family or just shouted the loudest. Very human.


Wilhelmina, daughter (not male), bastard(?)
and unrightful inheritor

 Does that mean we have to despise the family of Orange-Nassau? Well, they did do important things for the Netherlands. Wilhelmina might have been a bastard unrightful on the throne, she also lead the Netherlands through two world wars. Credit were credit is due. And eventhough Willem I was a self-important greedy ego-tripper with a penchant for begging for a kingdom to rule, he did unite the Netherlands and had import canals digged out, no matter it was to satisfy his own greed. Be honest, how many things do you do for your own good instead of for the bigger good? If you can do it for both, king (that would be you) and country, you would, wouldn’t you? Does that make you a good king? Some people might say “yes”, others will point out that you got better from it.

The last two weeks I’ve been digging in the family’s history and with that Dutch history. I learnt one thing: the Oranges and the Netherlands are so intertwined; the demise of the one might mean the demise of the other. In other words, the Oranges can’t live without us, but we can’t live without them either. Not anymore. I’m sure we would pull ourselves together if the kingdom suddenly would cease to be. We would lose our unity, especially in the times we are now in, think the current variant of political parties. That’s one reason to remain a kingdom. One big reason. Also, when Alexander died and Wilhelmina would not have been born, the throne most likely would have gone to some German prince/king(?). What would have become of the Netherlands in that case? We’ll never know now. Point is, as it is, is not so bad, it could have been much worse.

Oink!
Willem I looking wisely the
right way to align
with the impeccable layout
of my blog

Now let all the useless and senseless discussion about whether the current Orange belongs on the throne cease to be. I suppose my point is: You can saw away all the legs from the throne, the Oranges will still be sitting there ruling over us.

Hah! Turns out they’re only human after all. Very wicked humans. And Orange is a nice colour. Long live the Oranges!

Now back to my beloved Alexander.