Royal Insight Forum

There' doesn't seem to be a thread about this, and I'm kind of interested, Does anyone have theories on what happened.  I have just got a copy of Stephanie's book "I was to be Empress".... but haven't read it yet.  I believe that there is some new evidence that Rudolph's skull was bashed in, so possibly he did not kill himself at all

thoughts?

I dn't know much about this.  Is this the story of the heir to the Hapsburg empire who committed sucide with his lover?

Yes

There are theories about what happened. Did Rudolph kill himself because he was severely depressed.  Suffering from a venereal disease?  why did he want a woman to die with him.  or was he possibly murdered?  because of his (not very) liberal views?  because of too much involvement in politics... 

Great idea for a thread amabel.   Mayerling has always been a fascinating story since I saw a movie about it as a child.   I'd like to find that movie again.  I'll look up some info later but from what I remember reading more recently, the woman with him was not his lover -- which raised some red flags.  I seem to remember her body was exhumed more recently and bullet holes were found.  What is especially frustrating is that after over 100 years, it's probably too late to know the whole truth now. 

Marie Vertsera?  Unless all the earlier accounts are wrong she was certainly in love with him and probably was his mistress.  Initially it seemed as if Rudolph killed her and then some time later shot himself, but lately (I'd have to look this up) his body was looked at and it seemed as if his head was bashed in.. so he could hardly have done that to himself.....

Quote"Don't regret Rudolph"  If the Emperor had found these papers, matters would have been infinitely worse.   The crown prince has killed himself but if the Emperor had known all it would have been his duty to have him tried by law and shot as a traitor". 

[/size]

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9E03E5D8173FE633A25757C0A9639C946296D6CF

This is an interesting account of what happened by one of the participants, Countess Marie Larisch a niece of the Empress.

And another version: 

QuoteCrown Prince Rudolf was educated by the best tutors his father could find, over 50 of them. He was a personal friend of Alfred Brehm with whom he shared passion for natural sciences and whose monumental Thierleben he admired as a child. He wrote scientific articles to leading journals on life sciences. His views were farsighted and were partially realized a century after his death. In personal letters dated July 26, 1882 and December 12, 1886, Crown Prince Rudolf Habsburg describes his view of the Austrian Empire:

The principle of nationalism rests on the most base of human instincts. It is a victory of primitivism over the noble ideals of equality. The national and racial animosities are a step backward. It is characteristic that these principles are most often used by the most divisive elements of our society. As the science is cosmopolitan, so should be the just societies.

http://www.visualstatistics.net/East-West/Mayerling%20Tragedy/Mayerling%20tragedy.htm

drezzle,  it is possible the film you are talking about starred Omar Sharif, Ava Gardner and Catherine Deneuve.

I'm not sure Hale?  I think it might have been an earlier version of Mayerling as I would have remembered Omar Sharif.  I saw it as one of the old movie classics on TV. 

The film I was talking about was made in the 70's, I think

There is an earlier film made in the 30s or 40s I think but the only one I've seen is the one with Omar Sharif.  its a bit over romantic

This is a very interesting, and quite mysterious story. There are at least 3 different movies based on the Mayerling tragedy :
- The secret of Mayerling (1949) with French actor Jean Marais as Rudolfhttp://www.imdb.com/title/tt0040769/ (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0040769/)
-a German movie Kronprinz Rudolfs letzte Liebe (1956)
-and Mayerling (1968) with Omar Sharif and Catherine Deneuve

So many different theories on this case! The last Austrian Empress Zita said Rudolf had indeed been assassinated, according to Rudolf's sister Gisela (who told Zita). Another "suicide theory" says Rudolf and Marie Vetsera discovered there were father and daughter, or father and sister, and that'they commited suicide because of their incestual relationship.

The Empress Zita also said she asked the last emperor what had happened and he said after he died, she could read the papers in the locked desk in his drawer that would give the true story.    After he died, the drawer was opened and found to hold a stack of blank paper. 

Also this must have been the movie:  http://www.answers.com/topic/mayerling-film with Charles Boyer.  It had much better reviews than the one with Omar Sharif. 

Quote from: Ladybee on January 10, 2010, 07:46:44 PM
-and Mayerling (1968) with Omar Sharif and Catherine Deneuve

Here's the IMDb website for this version:  http://pro.imdb.com/title/tt0064645/

The book "He did not die at Meyerling" seemed plausible for several reasons.  It was supposedly written by a son of CP Rudolf, who was very circumspect about giving any information out that might identify himself or his adopted family.  He said he wrote the book to set the record straight and to repair the memory and reputation of his father.  He was in his late 60s when his book was published in 1937 and he claimed absolutely no interest in reclaiming his heritage.

Interestingly someone named Robert Pachmann first filed for recognition as CP Rudolf's legitimate son in 1937, but from the dates, he would have been about 5 years younger than the author (R) of the above book.  Pachmann kept up his fight for recognition for the next ~30 years. 

R's side of the story was that after the semi-coup was overturned, CP Rudolf went to his father to deny any intention of replacing him as emperor, but Franz Joseph was angry still and made Rudolf sign a renunciation of succession for himself and all his children and told him he was not fit to be crown prince.   So Rudolf decided to fake his death and move to another continent.  Rudolf had a close friend who became R's foster father who was only referred to as the doctor, since he was a surgeon and an artist.   The plan was through the doctor's contacts to get a body from the morgue resembling Rudolf, and then the doctor would redo the face using wax molds.  His work was about done at Meyerling when Maria Vetsera showed up unexpectedly and thought Rudolf had been killed and she then started fighting with some of the guards surrounding the procedure and she was accidentally shot in the torso. 

The couple reasons I think there may be some validity to it is the Emperor was beside himself with grief during the funeral, but within a few weeks, he was unusually cheerful.  I don't remember where I read that (not the book) but his quickly recovered cheerful mood was a mystery to many close to him, knowing how much he suffered when his son supposedly killed himself.

The other reason is the disappearance of Rudolf's close friends, including John Orth, at about the same time.  I also think Bratfisch and Larisch moved to South America at about the same time as Rudolf's "death".  Why would all these people suddenly move to the other side of the world when Rudolf died?

Then there's another story where some thought it was Rudolf who showed up in El Salvador in the late 1880's who became the father in ~1898 of an uncle to the wife of Nash, the protaganist in the movie "A Beautiful Mind".  This wife came from a prominant family named Larde' in El Salvador.  http://www.math.dartmouth.edu/~lamperti/Justo_Armas.html

So here's some more information from  the book "The Mayerling Murder" by Victor Wolfson, with the help of Prince F.J.N. Windisch-Graetz (Rudolf's oldest grandson by his only known legitimate daughter), supports their argument that Rudolf was killed on orders of Otto von Bismarck, who no doubt was as ruthless a man as they make them, because he feared that Rudolf would forge an alliance with France and England against Germany.  If this would have happened, then Germany might have been no more -- so the motive is certainly there.

It's interesting there are a lot of photos of Rudolf looking very cozy with Wilhelm II, the last kaiser.  They were the same age, and they both by all reports were not in the least fond of each other.

For example:  Rudolf on your right:   http://www.imageshugger.com/images/pydwd8bclafxq938qve.jpg
And:  http://www.imageshugger.com/images/sokbsnce7135tmounn9l.jpg

drezzle, I think I've told you before I am not 'up' on non British Royals, but I am curious to know if Rudolph didn't commit sucide then why would anyone want to murder him?  Is this something to do with nationalism, people wanting change within the empire........what?  I'd be interested to read your theories.

Quote from: Ladybee on January 10, 2010, 07:46:44 PM
This is a very interesting, and quite mysterious story. There are at least 3 different movies based on the Mayerling tragedy :
- The secret of Mayerling (1949) with French actor Jean Marais as Rudolfhttp://www.imdb.com/title/tt0040769/ (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0040769/)
-a German movie Kronprinz Rudolfs letzte Liebe (1956)
-and Mayerling (1968) with Omar Sharif and Catherine Deneuve

So many different theories on this case! The last Austrian Empress Zita said Rudolf had indeed been assassinated, according to Rudolf's sister Gisela (who told Zita). Another "suicide theory" says Rudolf and Marie Vetsera discovered there were father and daughter, or father and sister, and that'they commited suicide because of their incestual relationship.

There is also a Charles Boyer film from the thirties where he played Rudolf.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0027951/

Quote from: Hale on June 16, 2010, 10:35:21 AM
drezzle, I think I've told you before I am not 'up' on non British Royals, but I am curious to know if Rudolph didn't commit sucide then why would anyone want to murder him?  Is this something to do with nationalism, people wanting change within the empire........what?  I'd be interested to read your theories.

Hey Hale, thanks for asking!   I'm no expert either in that I've only read several books recently plus a lot of online info -- but that's just for starters.   There was a huge motive for getting Rudolf dead and gone.   He was an outspoken opponent of all that the ancient duel empire held sacred and he was also a determined enemy of Prussia / Germany.   In his memoirs, Bismarck often lamented what a danger Rudolf was to all of his own goals for the German empire, and it was well-known that Bismarck had no compunction about ordering an assassination. 

There are also easy ways to discount all the suicide theories -- the forgeries of Rudolf's handwriting known to be happening long before his death, (so much for suicide notes) and that's for starters.

Another photo:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/12/Rudolf_Kronprinz_1881.jpg

Thanks drezzle.  :princess:

I remember a biogrpahy about the late Hapsburg empire that Rudolf was into modernization and that the Court stifled him to the point where he went insane and he killed himself with his mistress. His mistress after her death was hidden to the point where it was practically a cover up.

That is true -- the court/camarilla were into covering up everything about this tragedy as fast as possible.  Not only was Mary Vetsera's body spirited away in the middle of the night under disguise and buried in a secret grave, but they tried their best to cover up the cause or evidence at the death scene.  First it was they were poisoned -- when rumor was too vast to accept that, they decided on apoplexy and then on heart disease -- neither of which would begin to hold ground.  Finally they settled on suicide, then on a double suicide then on murder/suicide.  The investigation into the cause was quickly started with much energy the morning of the deaths, and then concluded before the day's end.  

It was commonly said by most in the know at that time (imperial family, embassies, friends) that the truth was far worse so it was best to settle on suicide and then censor like crazy, forbidding any mention in newspapers or other public means of communication.  Most thought the truth would come out after the death of Emperor Franz Joseph (27 yrs later) but it didn't and now today, over 120 years later, it is still considered an unsolved mystery.  

However, what I found most informative was the response of those who knew what happened -- and they (it seemed every last one) believed that it was best to never speak of the real truth.  This was in a context that suggested they believed it was for the best of all concerned and the most proper response.  Now of course one has to wonder what is worse than someone becoming totally deranged and killing a young girl and then himself several hours later.  To me this is about as bad as it gets.  

So what could be worse than this as the real and more awful truth?   To account for an end to existence, other than suicide, there are 2 possibilities:  murder or disappearing (called "dying without dying" by Rudolf's good friend John Orth who did exactly that soon after the Mayerling occurrence).  So what could be worse, and then again, from whose point of view?  Now if Rudolf staged his own death and disappeared as claimed in the book by his supposed son in "He did not Die at Mayerling", then would that truth be worse than suicide?  What if that was the reason the investigation into the deaths was concluded so quickly -- they realized that Rudolf had skipped the country??!!  Now I could understand how that might make a laughing stock out of Emperor Franz Joseph who had already telegrammed most of the world's heads of state about the death of his beloved son.  Would it be worse to be a laughing stock, or to have ones son commit suicide?   From what I've read about FJ, he'd go for the former as being far worse.  Naturally this would go for double worse if the reason for Rudolf's disappearance was that he had staged a coup against his own father that failed.  Yes, I could understand why the powers that be would find it most fitting to give an official finding of murder/suicide by an insane and dissolute degenerate instead.  Haha, fitting justice.

One other piece of information I happened across that supports the above possibility was when the Prime Minister Taafe met with Rudolf's mentor and good friend Bombelles and Rudolf's doctor -- Weiderhofer and 3 other names I didn't recognize to draw up the official findings and conclusions of the deaths at Mayerling only 2 days after it happened.   At this meeting was also Loschek, Rudolf's devoted valet.  He said there was much levity and laughter at this meeting -- they were all in good cheer.  Now I could understand why Taafe might be laughing since he hated Rudolf and saw him as a dangerous political enemy, but by all accounts, Bombelles and Weiderhofer were devoted to Rudolf, and greatly grieved when they first heard the news.  This was in a book by Count Carl Lonyay, the nephew-in-law and heir of Crown Princes Stephanie's 2nd husband.    

There's another little truth hidden in the book "He did not die at Mayerling".  He did say he would write it with the truths hidden for those who should know since his first priority was to maintain his anonymity which I can understand.   So this was what he wrote, amid the general praise for his claimed father, Rudolf:  "There was a tragedy of Meyerling, but it was not the tragedy history has recorded, -- the supposed death of the Crown Prince Rudolf, Archduke of Austria.  It was a tragedy greater by far than that, for if he had died then, it would have been the end of suffering for him, for his father, the Emperor Francis Joseph, for his mother the beautiful Empress Elizabeth, and for me".   What a chilling and shocking statement that is!!!

However, I've come to the conclusion this book is not what it appears to be for getting at that hidden and far worse truth.  More on that later.  

I'm afraid I'll be posting mostly to myself in this very exciting thread!   :laugh:

Anyway, here's some more information on Rudolf's supposed son and heir:

http://newspapers.nl.sg/Digitised/Page/straitstimes19661125.1.9.aspx

http://www.imageshugger.com/images/uu5kns52x2hee61dcxum.gif

Here is says that a Viennese court recognized Theodore Rudolf Pachmann as a direct descendant (grandson) of Crown Prince Rudolf.  

Also, another little bit of corroborating evidence:   Here a handwriting expert analyzed a handwritten document where Rudolf wrote about his secret marriage to Princess Maria Antoine of Tuscana (before he met Stephanie) which would have made his marriage to Stephanie illegal in the eyes of the Catholic Church at least.  

http://tinyurl.com/39vak3u

Princess Antoine was originally presented to Rudolf as a suitable bride and he fell madly in love with her but then marriage to her was forbidden when it was found she suffered from tuberculosis and not expected to live long.  However, supposedly, Rudolf married her anyway in secret and fathered a child and she was still alive, at least until the time of his marriage to Stephanie.  

It's too bad no handwriting expert analysis has ever been applied to all the claimed suicide notes written by Rudolf.

Oh dear, sorry drezzle.  Your knowledge of European Royalty never ceases to impress me.   

Just out of curiosity, was the supposed sucide at the time acknowledged as a sucide?  Only if memory serves me well one of the problems with Empreror Joseph he was something of a fanatical Catholic.  Too conservative at a time when people within the Hapsburg empire wanted change. 

Thank You kindly Hale.   It's so exciting get a response in this favorite thread of mine.   :banana:  :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

The official line finally settled on that same day finally became suicide -- but for the first few hours, everyone assumed it was a double murder.   And that changed to the story that Vetsera had poisoned Rudolf and then killed herself.   Then it changed to apoplexy and then heart attack.  It was at this point Emperor Franz Joseph sent out all his announcements of the death.   However later on the family physician Dr. Weiderhofer convinced FJ that the heart attack explanation would never work.  So they settled on suicide.  The presence of Mary Vetsera was denied and covered up for a long time -- don't remember how long -- but eventually the official position was that Rudolf killed Vetsera, and then himself several hours later.  

Then the autopsy physicians had to lie and say Rudolf's brain anatomy showed he was totally insane so that the Catholic Church would allow a church burial for Rudolf.  More modern medicine knows that it's impossible to measure insanity by brain anatomy.  

The official investigation was started and finished the same day of the early morning deaths.  Unfortunately the documents from this investigation never made it into the proper national archives.  Instead the Emperor had his friend from childhood, Prime Minister Taaffe, take charge of these documents with the understanding that they would never see the light of day, and to this day they have not been seen.  It was falsely told that the documents were destroyed in a fire in the prime minister's study.   However, just recently, I came across a book that tells a shocking story of what was actually in these papers.   This is the book A Habsburg Tragedy by Judith Listowel published in 1978.  This follows the path took by these documents from Prime Minister Eduard Taaffe, to his eldest son and heir, Henric Taaffe, and then to his eldest son and heir, Edward Taaffe.  Unfortunately Edward Taaffe died unexpectedly without any heirs so the documents disappeared with him in some unknown location.  However, his close friend, cousin and heir, Group Captain Rudolph Taaffe, who lived with him for some time, told the author what was in the papers.  And it most certainly is shocking and most bizarre.  

But more on that later, it's too late now.    ;)

drezzle, usually government papers are in triplicate.  Especially that era.  If it is such a controversial subject, I'm surprised they haven't been discovered.  Although, having said that, things did move around during the World War II.

It is frustrating that no solid conclusions can be drawn after so many years.  There was so much deliberate misinformation and secrecy -- that the real story is difficult, but not impossible to find.  I believe the truth is out there now, but so many want to hang on to the romantic drama of a suicide for lost love.  However the interest in this topic is still so extreme that some grave robbers dug up Vetsera's body for purposes of an autopsy to get some answers.  However, her family refused to allow any DNA tests.

It would be so easy to put rest to the rumors by a DNA test/genuine autopsy on Rudolf's body, but of course that is strictly forbidden by........the Hapsburgs -- both his direct descendants and the current head of the Hapsburgs.  The reasons for their resistance are not clear -- especially since there was not any substantial wealth or position left today.

Here's a legend folklore that suggests what really might have happened to Rudolf, and possibly where the idea might have originated:

The mysterious death of Alexander I of Russia:

QuoteIt is the death of Alexander the First and his wife (of all Russian Tsars) that is shrouded in mystery to this day. According to an official version, the Emperor's body was taken from Taganrog to St. Petersburg and buried with full state honours in the Peter and Paul Fortress there. But a while later witnesses began to emerge of the events in Taganrog claiming that in the coffin they had seen another man's body, not that of Alexander the First. The man greatly resembled Alexander and had died several days before Alexander did. That man's body was placed in the coffin, which was never allowed to be opened ever after. Then it stands to reason to ask where Alexander's body was, or did he not die at all? Besides, the sentry who guarded the Emperor's home in Taganrog on that day claimed that he saw a tall man sneak out of the house via the backdoor and quickly walk away. The sentry hailed him, but the man did not respond. But the soldier claimed that he at once recognized the man as Alexander the First. He was quick to report this to his chief, but the officer on duty laughed the report out of court, saying that the sentry must have gone mad, since the Emperor was about to die.  

http://english.ruvr.ru/2010/08/10/15211085.html

Actually drezzle, seeing that this moment in history is of such great interest to you I wonder have you ever sought to see what is held within your own countries records?

We in England know that historical records of correspondence and government papers are held within the Public Records Office at Kew.  I don't know what the American equivalent would be.  My suggestion isn't as far fetched as it may appear because Austria and Germany were both on the same side during WW1, consequently when the USA entered that war then they would have set about accumulating their own intelligence.  Obviously this was an era before the existence of the FBI, so I'm not sure which agency would have gathered this kind of  intelligence.  Would the Library of Congress have this stuff?  Where do they keep public records in the Sates?

Great idea Hale.   The National Security Archive and The National Archives might be good.  No doubt there are people far more adept at these searches than me who have scoured all available information and published their findings.  For example, someone discovered the real name of R anonymous who wrote "He Did Not Die at Mayerling", and also took the time to interview his neighbors and colleagues.  He was a patent lawyer in the USA and everyone who knew him said he was sane and level headed / low key.  

Another book reported how a famous American Civil War General, James Longstreet, represented the US at Rudolf's and Stephanie's wedding and remained on friendly terms with Rudolf and was then hired by the emperor to track down Rudolf's son after the Mayerling tragedy.  General Longstreet was joined in his efforts by another civil war general -- Cassius Marcellus Clay -- who was appointed by Abraham Lincoln to the Russian court where he remained for 8 years and became close friends of the Czar and through that connection became involved with Rudolf and his American son.  Much of this information came from the State Historical Society of Missouri.

There's already a massive amount of information out there that has been published, unfortunately much of it contradictory.  What I'm most interested in is getting to the original/earliest source to see from where the contradiction comes.  The best sources I like are Embassy reports at the time, or letters from notables at the time stating their first hand knowledge, such as from Edward VII, then Prince of Wales and a great friend of Rudolf or from the Papal Nuncio.  Also information directly from family members is good.  Another good book was written in 1914 by Rudolf's private secretary, and has received scant attention.  

The biggest problem is that Franz Joseph was so determined the facts of the case would remain forever hidden with censorship and lack of documentation that this only invited a lot of speculation.  A story would start, it would be picked up in a movie, another book written using the same information with some added embellishments -- and it snowballed from there, and takes on a life of its own that probably has nothing to do with the truth, and paints Rudolf in a most unflattering light.  

QuoteThe National Security Archive and The National Archives

So that's what you call your public records office.  Thanks.

Well drezzle, you've got me curious now.  Next time I go shopping I'm going to try and get the film Mayerling.  Okay, it may not be an accurate portrayl, but its a start.

Have at it Hale ;)   I was certainly impressed with the Mayerling movie as a child.  It would be hard for me to watch it now though, not so much that it is probably inaccurate, but  how the 3 main Mayerling movies completely fail to capture the personality of Rudolf in the main actors.  With all the contradictions and misinformation, there is one thing everyone seems to agree on:  Rudolf was a real charmer -- the most beguiling of personalities, a beautiful personality, magnificent and charismatic.  At the same time, he displayed in all his photos, a certain detachment or spectral gaze -- very low key.  It was a very similar look to that of Edward VII which might come from too many long hours of official engagements over too many years?  By contrast, all 3 actors portraying Rudolf in the Mayerling films over-acted, they were intense and overly dramatic-- none showed the smooth/calm charm of Rudolf -- their emotions were all too obvious, but then I guess that's what actors do.   :D

Here's how Rudolf's sister-in-law (Stephanie's sister Louise) described him:  

"He was more than beautiful.  He was enchanting.  Behind his fragile appearance lay reserves of strength and energy.  He reminded one of a racehorse;  he had its temperament, breeding and caprice.  His will-power was only equaled by his sensibility.  His shining brown eyes seemed to change their very colour and shape as often as the expression of his face altered...................like his mother, the Empress Elizabeth, he had a way of talking that held everybody".......... from My Life and History by Berta Szeps.  He even charmed old Queen Victoria who extended him the rare invitation to stay with her at Osborne.  The sole person who saw no charm (or good) in Rudolf was his wife Stephanie, and this was noted from the time of their engagement.  

The other point of general agreement on Rudolf was that he was brilliant in many areas and had an outstanding gift for expressing himself in both writing and speech.   He knew several languages flawlessly -- fluent to the point of no discernible accent -- and he was highly educated in natural sciences, economics, and military strategy but his real passion was politics which he lived and breathed.  He was idealistic, earnest and loyal, and the people loved him.  He was a people's prince.   All other areas were and are open to much disagreement and contradictions.

http://i49.tinypic.com/sqhw6q.jpg

Drezzle,  :thankyou: very much for sharing all this with me.   :notworthy:   :princess:

Crown Prince Rudolf would have been 152 years old yesterday if he had lived.  He might have died at Mayerling at age 30, or perhaps according to one book, he didn't die until sometime around 1914 which would have put him in his mid-fifties.  

One of the best sources of what really happened comes from the book by Judith, Countess of Listowel called "A Habsburg Tragedy" written in 1978.   Her family was Hungarian aristocrats and her maternal grandfather knew Rudolf as he was a member of the Hungarian Upper House and of the delegation to Austria.  

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/obituaries/article852684.ece

Her information for what happened came from an heir of the prime minister at the time, Eduard Taaffe, a bitter enemy of Rudolf.  As Prime Minister, and keeper of the papers related to the short investigation into the death, he would be the most likely person to know what really happened -- he might have even been party to it.

So what is this truth that was far worse than any of the versions as Emperor Franz Joseph said at the opening of the Mayerling convent?  As confirmed by both the grandson of Prime Minister Taaffe and by a direct descendent of Crown Prince Rudolf, as well as confirming the contemporary theories of what happened by Papal Nuncio Galimberti and German ambassador Prince Henrich VII Reuss, this is what they believed happened:

"Ten soldiers  of Archduke Albert's (Albrecht -- Emperor FJ's uncle and head of the Austria-Hungarian military) Roll Commandos were dispatched to Mayerling.  The Roll Commando were specially trained troops of the Austrian Army kept ready to carry out special orders at any time and in any place.  The detachment, two of whom were experienced sharpshooters, were hidden in the garden of the Hunting Lodge.  They were given explicit orders that if the Crown Prince had not taken his own life by 6:30am, they were to shoot him.  Rudolf was unable to carry out his desperate intention and accordingly at about 7 am, the two Roll Commando sharpshooters entered his room through the window and shot him."

This version certainly covers all the angles since there is good evidence that Rudolf intended suicide, and there is also good evidence that it was a murder -- and the two together, with the official denial of one part of the tragedy would go far to explain the confusion.

It's not difficult to imagine that Archduke Albrecht could be responsible for this.  He was a man not know for being amiable.  Albrecht had become a bitter enemy of Rudolf who described him as "........really deplorably nervous and could leave nothing and nobody in peace for a moment................and he delights in nosing about, picking quarrels, in intriguing and doing harm for he is malicious".  
 
http://www.austro-hungarian-army.co.uk/biog/erzalbrecht.html

Another photo of Archduke Albrecht:

http://www.imageshugger.com/images/pejiineznflslgsqctxh.jpg

Albrecht was a reactionary, ultra-conservative, cold, ruthless and there was a wrong way to do things and his way.  He could not tolerate either Archduke Johann Salvator (who renounced his titles and disappeared as John Orth after Mayerling) or the Crown Prince.   For years Salvator had been taunting the old Albrecht and agitating him to the breaking point since Salvator had few restraints on his behavior.   Here's a photo of Archduke Johann Salvator and notice that Habsburg jaw in both Albrecht and Salvator.

http://www.imageshugger.com/images/wwen0q9alchnh5wjoq2.jpg

The direct descendents of Archduke Albrecht became the Dukes of Württemberg and the Princely family of Liechtenstein.

You gals have so much knowledge.

Thanks Scarlet, but it's all a mirage -- especially when it comes to what happened at Mayerling.  

Anyway, how does Mary fit into the above scenario?  Lady Paget, wife of the British Ambassador to Austria at the time, asked the same question:   "Why did they have to kill the girl too?"

My best guess is that Mary showed up unexpectedly -- and she had a Love-To-Die-For on the brain, so it is reasonable to think she killed herself -- hours before Rudolf was killed.  Or maybe they were both murdered at the same time?  

There used to be a custom in the Austrian army that if a soldier was found guilty of some grievous offense, he was visited by a couple officers, given a pistol and told to do the honorable thing.  If he didn't, then someone else would do it for him.  This kind of scenario would explain the suicide letters Rudolf wrote where he said something like ~~ I don't want to die, but I have to.  It's the honorable thing to do~~.  Now it's a sure thing that if Rudolf was worrying about doing the honorable thing to save his name, he most certainly would not have wanted to be found dead in bed with a nude dead mistress next to him.  The 2 possibilities are mutually exclusive.  I've come to the conclusion that the whole spiel about Rudolf wanting someone to die with him was just spin designed to further assassinate his character.

For example, consider the alleged claims by Mitzi Casper (Rudolf's long-term mistress) that Rudolf had asked her to die in a suicide pact with him.  She apparently reported this to the local police, who took down no documentation and did nothing about it.   (Mitzi never talked, but she was well provided for until she died.)  Now to get a better idea of how silly this claim is, try to imagine today's Prince Charles asking Camilla to join him in a suicide pact since the fallout from the War of the Wales was getting too messy.   Would anyone here expect Camilla to go to the local police and report that Charles was thinking about suicide?   Haha, I do not think that would have been her response, or the response of any woman in that position.   There were plenty of other people who were older and did care about Rudolf that Mitzi could have, by all reasons been expected to go to first, such as Latour or Szeps?  

While the above scenario does explain many of the contradictions and dismisses some of the strange conclusions made from essentially nothing, it still fails to take into account some other possibilities that also come from excellent sources.   For example, what about Empress Zita's (last empress of Austria - her husband was the successor to Emperor Franz Joseph) claim that it was Georges Clemenceau of France that had Rudolf killed.   Now it is known that it was Crown Prince Rudolf's sister Gisele who told Zita that, so actually, that is also a good source that cannot be easily dismissed.................more on that later.  

Finally I'll close this post with a photo of the lovely Crown Princess Stephanie, who I suspect might have been the source of much of the really awful beliefs commonly accepted about her husband, Rudolf today:

http://www.imageshugger.com/images/ymp11ud4ax1naf5zfci.jpg

Isn't it possible that the girl was murdered also because she may have been a witness?

Quote from: Hale on August 25, 2010, 09:35:04 PM
Isn't it possible that the girl was murdered also because she may have been a witness?

isn't it far more likely that it was a double suicide....

Reasonable questions Hale and Amabel.  In hindsight, if this is true, they obviously didn't want any witnesses -- but then again, there were several other people at the hunting lodge that morning, so anyone of them could have been a potential witness.  There is evidence, early on from 3 different sources coming from 3 different points of view that strongly suggest Mary Vetsera was much more than a ditzy fashion plate infatuated with the prince.  Many, including his father, Franz Joseph, believed Rudolf became involved (unwittingly?) in some conspiracy for a military coup to replace his father, and Vetsera was actually involved in this somehow or a co-conspirator -- who played a part important enough to sign her own death warrant.

Amabel, on the question of was it a double suicide or murder suicide, I would tend towards double suicide also given the supposed nature of Vetsera in some of her letters.  However, Loschek, the closest in time and space to the event, and the court physician, Weiderhofer, who arrived on the scene soon after both claimed there was no question that Rudolf had first killed Vetsera and then himself.  But how could this have been obvious?   No forensics was ever done, and even then fingerprints were just coming into use.  I've watched enough TV (some serious documentaries ;)) to know how easy it is to stage a murder to look like a suicide.  All official documents as to their reasons disappeared along with the rest into Taaffe's lair.

There's another reason I don't trust Loschek's (Rudolf's long-term valet) account.  He said he was pounding on both doors to the bedroom trying to wake up Rudolf for a long time (~hour or so) and finally had to break down the door with an ax.  Rudolf's hunting companion, Josel Hoyos, also confirmed this, but I think they both had memory lapses.  The reason is because Rudolf's bedroom was on the ground floor with big easily accessible windows.  It makes no sense and would be the little detail that would have Columbo scratching his head and saying ~~ oh, one more thing Sir, may I please.................................

Floorplan of ground floor of Mayerling -- his bedroom on upper left:
http://www.imageshugger.com/images/72awlkd7i9wvu3xbrcb.jpg

The ground floor windows look easily accessible:
http://www.imageshugger.com/images/3y5d3iuy05vjn5qxye.jpg

well from what I've read, it seems to me  that suicide was the most likely scenario.  IIRC Rudolph had asked other women to join him in a suicide pact, which does not suggest that he was particularly sane... and IIRC even Judit ht Listowel says that there was no doubt that Rud was intending to kill himself.  He may have said that  he had to die to avoid shame, but it seems to me that he wasn't' sane, so he may have reasoned ( if he reasoned at all) that if he was found dead in bed with a woman, the IF would cover up.. as they tried to do.
The Prince of Wales says in a letter to Q Vic that it seemed to him that it was suicide and he was shocked at it, but that perhaps Rudolph was insane due to head injuries....
As for Mitzi Caspar again it is some time since I read about Rudolph, I thought that the police did file a report and it went to Taafe, the Prime minister....

That's true Amabel, there's some good evidence for suicide.  There's also some good evidence for something else having happened.  Incidentally for some unknown reason, Vienna was the suicide capital of the world back then and it still has a high suicide rate despite being named #1 world wide in quality of living:

QuoteDespite its relatively high suicide rate, Vienna is one of the world's most attractive cities in which to live — placed sixth in the world, according to a survey provided by Vienna Tourist Board.

Number one worldwide in quality of living (followed by Zurich and Geneva,) according to Mercer's Quality of Living Survey (April 2009), Vienna mainly attracts...............................

http://www.sptimes.ru/index.php?action_id=2&story_id=30685

Rudolf would have been pleased to know about the Vienna of today since back then, he was quite dismayed about the backward condition of Vienna in terms of modern conveniences, such as plumbing and electricity.

Quote from: drezzle on August 29, 2010, 12:17:38 PM
That's true Amabel, there's some good evidence for suicide.  There's also some good evidence for something else having happened.  Incidentally for some unknown reason, Vienna was the suicide capital of the world back then and it still has a high suicide rate despite being named #1 world wide in quality of living:

[quoteNumber one worldwide in quality of living (followed by Zurich and Geneva,) according to Mercer’s Quality of Living Survey (April 2009), Vienna mainly attracts...............................

http://www.sptimes.ru/index.php?action_id=2&story_id=30685

[/quote]

I rather thought that Stephanie was the one who was annoyed at the lack of cofmrots in Laxenburg and other palaces...
but having read a little of Judith Listowel's book it seems that she definitely believes that Rudolph intended to commit suicide.. that he asked not only a few women but also some male friends to join him in suicide - and that he was certianly sufferign from serious depressoin and mental problems due to his having contracted gonorhea and syphilis
and that if he was killed it was possibly because (I haven't Read all the book yet but from a quick look) he DID intend to kill himself and lost his nerve and the PM had a group of sharp shooters who finished him off...

"The life of the Crown Prince Rudolph of Habsburg, with letters and documents found among his effects" by VON MITIS

This is the next book on my reading list -- partly because it was suppose to be the earliest comprehensive book that was published -- 1930, and also to see what he had to say about Rudolph's health and state of mind without the influence of Stephanie's book which was published ~ 1934 I believe, and from which too many subsequent authors merely parrot.  Many of the health and insane rumors came from Stephanie herself, or from her claims and letters, later used by her nephew-in-law Carl Lonyay in his book about Crown Prince Rudolf, and for various reasons, I doubt the credibility of Stephanie who was bitter to the point of being delusional.  Moreover, she was one of those unfortunate people who felt the only way she could boost her own esteem or social rating was to tear down and put down any and all others, including her own husband.

It must be remembered that Rudolf's suicide (if it was that) initially came as a total shock to all who knew him (with the sole exception of Stephanie's claims), and only after did the stories then change to fit the circumstances of the tragedy.

Quote from: drezzle on August 29, 2010, 09:07:11 PM
"The life of the Crown Prince Rudolph of Habsburg, with letters and documents found among his effects" by VON MITIS

of Stephanie's book which was published ~ 1934 I believe, and from which too many subsequent authors merely parrot.  Many of the health and insane rumors came from Stephanie herself, or from her claims and letters, later used by her nephew-in-law Carl Lonyay in his book about Crown Prince Rudolf,

So do you regard Judith Listowel as "merely parrotting" Stephanie's claims? AFAICS her book is a fairly scholarly work and she's not very sympathetic to Stephanie.

AFAICR. Listowel repeatedly mentions things like Rudolph's severe depression, his sexually transmitted diseases which possibly affected his brain,  his mentioning suicide and wanting to have a suicide pact with both male friends and mistresses... his volatility...
and the Prince of Wales (Edw VII) in his letter to Q Victoria says that he understood that it was suicide and that he was shocked because he thouhth that Rud was a clever man, but that R had had a head injury which might  have affected his brain and caused him to become depressed and suicidal (I suspect that EDw also knew of R's STDs....) 

Of course people were shocked by R's suicide... it is not only a mortal sin in the eyes of the Catholic church but also a huge scandal for an Imperail archduke ot do it esp when it also invovled killing his mistress...

I made a small mistake in the above post, I was quoting from Franz Lindman?'s book on Mayerling and accidentally I mixed up two letters written about the tragedy... one was by Edward VII, where he did say that he had heard it was suicide.. the other, from Prince Philip of Coburg referred to R's head injury.....AFAICS Edward didn't refer to R's head injury....

Quote from: amabel on August 30, 2010, 07:15:09 AM

So do you regard Judith Listowel as "merely parrotting" Stephanie's claims? AFAICS her book is a fairly scholarly work and she's not very sympathetic to Stephanie.

AFAICR. Listowel repeatedly mentions things like Rudolph's severe depression, his sexually transmitted diseases which possibly affected his brain,  his mentioning suicide and wanting to have a suicide pact with both male friends and mistresses... his volatility...

I agree, the book by Judith Listowel was for the most part scholarly and well documented.  However, she like all the others, accept one piece of evidence as the last word and ignore all others, and my question is how valid is that distinction?  For example most of the scholars have discounted everything by Marie Larisch and by Princess Louise of Coburg -- partly because later motives proved questionable.  But that doesn't mean every single thing they wrote needs to be discounted, especially when there is no known motive for some of the statements.  The same, only in reverse, should also be applied to Crown Princess Stephanie, or any other author speaking from their personal experience, IOW, it's a mistake to assume every single word is the absolute unvarnished truth.  For example, Stephanie was so competitive, she was the ultimate "me too" kind of person -- and it's a common trait in certain people.  So naturally I'd expect Stephanie to say "me too" when she heard that Rudolf had asked his long-time mistress to join him in a suicide pact.

I thought Prince Philip of Coburg (brother of Tsar Ferdinand of Bulgaria)  never said another known thing about Mayerling since he was so traumatized by it?   I can't find any book about the event by a Franz Lindman?

Unfortunately, gonorrhea was very common back then among many, because there was no treatment for it, but it usually didn't lead to sterility or insanity.  Listowel also states that was the reason for the breakdown of the marriage between Franz Joseph and Sisi and her usual absence from Austria -- he gave her gonorrhea!

Quote from: drezzle on August 30, 2010, 11:43:31 AM

Quote from: amabel on August 30, 2010, 07:15:09 AM

So do you regard Judith Listowel as "merely parrotting" Stephanie's claims? AFAICS her book is a fairly scholarly work and she's not very sympathetic to Stephanie.

AFAICR. Listowel repeatedly mentions things like Rudolph's severe depression, his sexually transmitted diseases which possibly affected his brain,  his mentioning suicide and wanting to have a suicide pact with both male friends and mistresses... his volatility...

I  For example most of the scholars have discounted everything by Marie Larisch and by Princess Louise of Coburg -- partly because later motives proved questionable.  But that doesn't mean every single thing they wrote needs to be discounted, especially when there is no known motive for some of the statements.  The same, only in reverse, should also be applied to Crown Princess Stephanie, or any other author speaking from their personal experience, IOW, it's a mistake to assume every single word is the absolute unvarnished truth.  For example, Stephanie was so competitive, she was the ultimate "me too" kind of person -- and it's a common trait in certain people.  So naturally I'd expect Stephanie to say "me too" when she heard that Rudolf had asked his long-time mistress to join him in a suicide pact.

I thought Prince Philip of Coburg (brother of Tsar Ferdinand of Bulgaria)  never said another known thing about Mayerling since he was so traumatized by it?   I can't find any book about the event by a Franz Lindman?

Unfortunately, gonorrhea was very common back then among many, because there was no treatment for it, but it usually didn't lead to sterility or insanity.  Listowel also states that was the reason for the breakdown of the marriage between Franz Joseph and Sisi and her usual absence from Austria -- he gave her gonorrhea!

sorry my mistake there, the book si by Franz Judtmann.. but as I said, Rudolph ddint' just have gonorrhea which he apparently gave to Stephanie, causing her to become infertile.  (so while she' not a lovely person I'd say she has some reasons for her announce with him...) he also had syphilis.  Not to mention the fact that his mother also had mental health issues...
I'm sorry but it seems to me that Listowel's book while she clearly has more sympathy with R than I have, is a pretty good piece of work, and it states that R was depressed, that he had a morbid thing about death, that he clearly intended to kill himself, so I'd believe it....
as for FJ and Elisabeth that has bene mentioned in more than one bio AFAIK that he apparently gave her gonorrhea...

The evidence is not clear cut on any of those points -- one of the reasons this mystery is so compelling.

So what finally happened between the 'the gravedigger of the Monarchy' as Rudolf referred to his uncle, the Archduke Albrecht, Colonel-in-Chief of the Roll Commando Execution Squad, and Emperor Franz Joseph?  Did FJ suspect what might have happened?  Could FJ have been partly guilty by sin of omission?  Although almost completely blind, Albrecht remained Inspector General until his death in 1895 at the age of 78.  Over a thousand officers attended his State funeral, and the Emperor issued an Order of the Day describing him as the 'ornament and pride' of the army.  However, Archduke Albrecht did have the humiliating experience on 1893 of having to preside when a military commission, set up by Franz Joseph, re-examined Rudolf's drill book and found it so good that it was introduced into the Austrian Army training and used until the Emperor's death in 1916.  Prime Minister Taaffe also resigned in 1893 and died in 1895.

Was Emperor Franz Joseph so ruthless and hard-hearted that he would allow his own son to be murdered as suggested by the activities of those closest to him in policy/decision making, or was this information carefully hidden from him? If it was hidden from him, then why would FJ have agreed to close the investigation into Rudolf's death after less than one day?  Would he not want to know the truth like any normal father?  Or did he know the truth and for whatever reason, thought silence was best?

No matter how many pictures I see of FJ, he always looks like a kind person and incapable of being cold and ruthless to the point he would allow his son to be killed.  Examples of cold and ruthless personification are not hard to find when looking at photos of Bismarck, Churchill, Gladstone and Lenin as follows:

http://www.imageshugger.com/images/oehrj67p7daon4oiwsrc.jpg

Rudolph: The Tragedy Of Mayerling by Carl Lonyay made claims that the Camarilla could run circles around Franz Joseph who was uneducated and not very intelligent.  They made a point of keeping FJ so busy with busy work that he would have no time to interfere in important decisions of running the country.  They gave him piles and piles of papers every day and asked him to make notes of what he thought was important and then to make sure they were properly filed away (and ignored), and the obsessive bureaucrat in the Emperor loved this type of "work".  His other main occupation was designing uniforms for the military and the micro-management of all his extended relatives, who were also almost all kept out of any important or meaningful activity.

However, some hints can be seen regarding the true feelings of Franz Joseph, not only in his insistence that his son's military drills were put into use over the objection of his advisors, but also in his effective block in preventing Cardinal Rompello from becoming pope.  Cardinal Rompello was on his favorite moral hobby horse soon after the death of Rudolf -- making every effort to prevent Rudolf from  having a Christian burial, and clearly, FJ never forgot or forgave this.

In addition I've often wondered if the unforgiving response of FJ to the assassination of his next heir (Franz Ferdinand) was not a delayed reaction to what he wished he could have done following the death of his own son.  When Franz Ferdinand was killed, Austria immediately made extreme demands on Serbia, and surprisingly, Serbia agreed to all the demands, but then the Austrian government  shocked the world by declaring war on Serbia anyway, and so started WWI.  

Another surprising twist to the story, also inspired by Franz Joseph I suspect, is the rumor that it was French Prime Minister Georges Clemenceau who had Rudolf murdered.  This claim came through Empress Zita apparently through Rudolf's sister Gisele.  It's hard to imagine they would make this claim without the approval or knowledge of the Emperor, and it's even harder to imagine there's any truth to it since Rudolf was quite pro-French alliance.   It makes no sense unless it was some red herring used to further confound and bury the tragedy in a mass of confusion.

Franz Joseph died before history found his son to be dissipated, dissolute, immoral, corrupt and weak but powerfully insane.  I'd like to believe that if FJ knew this is how history would judge his son, he would have made some effort to get a better story accepted, and it might have even been more more truthful, even if that truth was worse for someone else.  

I realy dont know what you mean by describing Chruchill Gladstone and Bismarkc as cold and ruthless.... so I think I'll end the discussion

Here's excerpts from the alleged farewell letters written by the allegedly insane Rudolf:

QuoteDear Stephanie,
...........................................I am going tranquilly to death, which alone can save my good name.  

I embrace you most warmly,
Your loving Rufolf

and

QuoteDear Szogyeny,

I must die, it is the only way in which to leave this world at least like a gentleman.............................be so good as to open my writing desk in Vienna.......................... to deal with the papers in it as laid down in my final wishes -- enclosed herewith.......................

Also to his sister Valerie: "I do not die willingly but........".  In each letter he repeated the same theme -- that he must die.  He did not reveal why except it had to do with saving his honor and good name.

I'm surprised no one has ever picked up on the impossibility of these letters in conjunction with how he was found dead.  Sure it's easy to say, well he had the insane Wittelsbach genes from his mother (and father), and of course if his 2nd cousin (King Ludwig II of Bavaria) was completely insane, then Rudolf must have been too since he was a friend of his, and he must have picked it up (by osmosis), and so nothing he would do could expect to have any reason.  Never mind that this ignores everything that Rudolf was up until the time he died, what's most important is to have high drama with sex, drugs and debauchery.  

From the above theme of Rudolf's suppose farewell letters, only 2 conclusions can be reached.

1)  He did plan on suicide, but he did not plan on the presence of Mary Vetsera or her death.

2)  He never planned on suicide, and those letters were written by someone else who planned to kill him and frame him for a murder/suicide.  

Well onto an examination of the next idea on the Mayerling Mystery.   Back in 1915, a book was written by a member of the secret service and privy counselor to the German Kaiser called The Secrets of the Hohenzollerns by a Dr. Armgaard Karl Graves.  Several years before he also wrote The Secrets of the German War Office.          
http://tinyurl.com/2wmukme

Needless to say this fellow had become a rogue agent and was hounded for years by the authorities in the US, Germany and other countries and finally ended up in prison.  He did know an amazing amount of detail to have made it all up, and he was taken seriously enough to prosecute to the fullest extent.  

His book, The Secrets of the Hohenzollerns is the earliest published report of which I am aware of the champagne bottle in the brain story for the cause of Rudolf's death.  Parts of it were later corroborated by several different books approaching the mystery from a different point of view, including the books by Marie Larisch, the private secretary of Rudolf, the forgotten son R, and by Ferdinand IV of Tuscany, perhaps the closest thing to a real friend accepted by Emperor Franz Joseph.

So here is the 1915 explanation for the death starting on pg 218:

 

Quote "Erherzog Rudolph, the archduke, next in succession, was mysteriously killed at Mayerling, an obscure little hunting lodge in upper Austria. Much has been written and many conjectures made about the cirumstance of this lamentable tragedy. The real reason, so vast in its importance, has of necessity never been divulged.

   "On a blustery and cold January night in 1889 His Royal Highness and the Baroness Marie Vetzera (Vetchera) were familiarly seated around a plain but daintily spread supper table in the hunting lodge of Mayerling. They were attended by Max and Otto K----, two brothers much trusted in the archducal household. Supper was nearly finished and the Prince, who was very fond of a certain brand of champagne, had just given the order to Otto for another couple of bottles, when the deep baying of the Prince's favorite deerhound gave notice of the approach of strangers. A dull thud and agonized yelp of the dog made the Prince jump up and stride toward the door, which was guarded by Max. Pushing the servant aside, His Royal Highness pulled the door open. Three men muffled up to their eyes in great coats forced their way into the room. In a trice the leader of the trio pinioned Max to the wall. The Archduke, who had jumped back startled and was reseating himself behind the supper table, demanded the reason for this intrusion, when the smallest of the three, supposedly the brother of the Baroness Vetzer, laid hold of a bottle of champagne and brought the weapon down with terrific force on his unprotected head, completely crushing the skull. The Baroness, who apparently had recognized one of the three intruders, was hysterically screaming and uttering dire threats and vengeance against the perpetrators of this foul deed. As she stood there, gripping the edges of the table, the third, standing at the door, raised his Stutzen (a short hunting gun in great favor in the Austrian Alps), and fired point blank at the unfortunate woman, almost blowing her head to pieces.

   "The commotion brought Otto from the wine cellar, and, taking in the situation at a glance, he threw himself fiercely upon the intruders, ably assisted by his brother Max, who also began attacking his captor. They managed to dispose of one of the assailants when again the gun rang out, sending Max to the floor with his chest almost torn to ribbons. The next moment Otto received a Hirsch-fanger (a hunting dagger) between his shoulders. Dragging their wounded conspirator with them, the two assassins disappeared into the night. From that day to this there have never been any arrests made or any one held to account for this dastardly deed.

   "Otto, who was left for dead, on regaining sufficient strength decently covered the bodies with table cloths and napkins, and left a short pencil written account of the occurrences pinned on to his brother's clothes. He also disappeared in the night; for he well knew the consequences attached to an even entirely innocent witnessing of such a royal family tragedy. Old, gray and bent, Otto is living to this day the quiet life of a hermit and exile not five hundred miles from New York City. Money would never make Otto talk, but some day the upheaval in Europe may provide an occasion when this old retainer of the House of Habsburg may unseal his lips; and then woe to the guilty.

   "The above account of the tragedy of Mayerling, notwithstanding the 'proof' of the Crown Prince's supposed suicide contained in the letters alleged to have been written by him to his confidant and friend Ambassador Szoegyenyi and to the 'Duke of Braganza,' is the correct one, and will be proved when the venerable head of the House of Habsburg shall have passed away. The Author."

Armgaard Karl Graves also suggested that Prussia might be responsible for the deaths by the following:

Quote
"...Prussian diplomacy had gained such an ascendancy over the House of Habsburg and the affairs of Austria, that Austria has been and is a staunch ally and supported by Germany in all its aims and ambitions. This alliance is developed to such an extent that even an heir apparent to the Austrian empire unless acceptable to and identified with Prusso-Germanic interests finds it impossible to ascend the throne............."    "Rudolph of Habsburg had to the full the proud instinctive dislike to, and rooted disinclination against, the ever increasing Germanic influence in and over his country. He died."

Here's an excerpt from "Francis Joseph And His Court: From The Memoirs Of Count Roger De Resseguier"  (1917) that also supports the champagne bottle in the brain story.  Count Roger De Resseguier was the son of FJ Court Chamberlain.  This book was written a couple years after the one by the rogue German agent mentioned above, but the details differ considerably.

"..................it was now that her brother or cousin, Baron Baldazzi, appeared on the scene and was betrothed to the wayward girl.  But he was not the man one might have thought.  He soon proved to be rather the guardian to the family's honour than the convenient bridegroom.  He installed the reign of terror...................................

Night was closing in.  The usual orgy took place at Meyerling that evening to the accompaniment of much champagne while snow reigned over the whole world without.......................from a solitary pine tree which stood like a sentinel at the side of the road, death came to them.

For at a very late hour, Baron Baldazzi, stood beside it.  There is a ditch between the road and the castle so that the trunk of the pine tree is on a level with the first floor.  Baldazzi looked through the window and beheld a revolting scene in the flickering light.  In the background, on a bed in the alcove, the Archduke Rudolph and Mary Vecsara slept in each other's arms.  On a divan, on the floor, even under the table, lay Philip of Coburg, Count Hoyos and the 2 Apanjagers, all dead drunk.  Empty bottles of champagne were scattered about all over the place.  The candles were expiring in their sockets.

Then Baldazzi fired without the least hurry or excitement.  He fired at his betrothed and at the heir to the Austrian throne.  He was a crack shot and he struck both through the heart. 

Then he was seized with mad fury.  He threw away his gun which was later found by servants of the Abbey, swung himself up to the low window whose panes had been broken, entered the room, seized an empty bottle and battered the heads of the two dead lovers.  Bits of glass were later found right inside their brains.

Very early the same morning, Count Hoyos and Philip of Coburg, hurried off to Vienna to announce the death of the Archduke................naturally the police stopped its feverish secret inquiries as soon as they found it was leading where they didn't want to go..................."

The where had to do with how Franz Joseph had an affair with both Mary Vetsera's mother and sister:  The Baldazzi sisters from Greece, and he treated them so badly, that one killed herself in the Danube, and the other gave birth to Mary, FJ's child, and was quickly married off to some newly created baron.  It was this tangled past that fed the rage of the Baron Baldazzi as avenger. 

Beautiful little youtube about:

The Crown Prince - Who Wants To Live Forever

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6p4-jnUCaMA&feature=related

One of the earliest books about Mayerling I've read in part thusfar was published in 1899 called The Martyrdom of an Empress  by Marguerite Cunliffe-Owen and there was something unexpected that caught my eye.  This author stated that Crown Princess Stephanie refused to accompany her husband on his trip to England to celebrate Queen Victoria's Golden Jubilee because Stephanie could not face the humiliation of having her husband run after a girl who should still be in school, namely Mary Vetsera and furthermore Stephanie had heard that Rudolf was meeting the Vetsera girl even in Vienna before the planned trip to London.

Queen Victoria's Golden Jubilee was held in June 1887, almost 1.5 years before Rudolf and Vetsera were suppose to have started their relationship!!

So I did a little checking to see where this information might be supported other than this book written in 1899 -- and it was verified in a book written about 5 or 6  years later by Joachim von Kürenberg in his coversations with Katherine Schratt where she stated that Crown Princess Stephanie had told her of her stress and worry about Rudolf and Vetsera's relationship in mid 1887. 

This little discrepancy of at least 1.5 years lopped of the relationship of Rudolf and Mary is amazing.  Then the elaborate explanations to ensure that it was known their relationship was not consummated before only a little over 2 weeks before their deaths?  Was that suppose to rule out speculation on some pregnancy?  What was the point?  Why was it so important to shorten the known relationship? 

One good proven source deserves some more attention to the book published in 1899 called The Martyrdom of an Empress by Marguerite Cunliffe-Owen.  Countess Cunliffe-Owens was a New York gossip columnist and novelist where she moved with her husband from France.  Frederick Cunliffe-Owen wrote newspaper editorials and society columns concerning, for the most part, European affairs and the social life of the nobility, becoming an editor of the New York Herald Tribune in 1889.

The Martyrdom of an Empress was first published anonymously and was thought to be ghost-written for a close lady-in-waiting to the Empress Sissi from the time of her marriage to her death.  However true the entire book may or may not be, it is one of the first books written about the Mayerling deaths and so is widely quoted/plagiarized and its theme no doubt is the source for the romance and drama in the movies about the events at Mayerling.

Unfortunately, the book is rather extreme in its biases, i.e., Rudolph and his parents couldn't be more wonderful while the Crown Princess Stephanie and Marie Larisch could not have been more evil, but those extremes rarely represent the truth.

Quote...............that justice has never been done to the motives which led this plucky, courageous, honorable, and also sincerely religious young man to give himself to death. It was rumored at the time, and it also has been declared since, that before committing an act so severely condemned by the Catholic Church he had actually killed with his own hand the woman whom he loved better than life. This is thoroughly and shamefully untrue. Marie Yetsera died during the night of the 29th to the 30th of January, 1889, and she did die in the arms of the Crown-prince, but it was not he, as everybody persists in believing, who killed her. It has been authentically proved that it was she herself who cut short her fair and beautiful existence while Rudi had absented himself for a moment from the salon where they had been talking together.

My objections to the above is that I'm fairly certain Rudolph was not sincerely religious although his parents might have assumed such.  I also doubt that he loved Marie Vetsera better than life, or maybe that's some of my own bias?  It's as his ADC stated in 1914 -- she was not his usual type of girlfriend and he had a hard time to understand the attraction. 

However it is reasonable to believe, given the supposed nature of Mary Vetsera and her youth that she might have killed herself when Rudolf told her for whatever reason that they had to stop seeing each other.

QuoteThe awful disclosure which the young man made to her was truly of a nature to unbalance the steadiest brain, and Loschek, the valet, said later on that he had heard, when passing the door, on different occasions, the muffled sound of violent sobbing...............................The crumpled letter which Marie had written to her mother was not the only one of the sort found, for when her dress was removed another sheet of paper, evidently torn out of a book, was discovered secreted in the corsage. It was intended for her sister, and I give here a copy of it:
" He has told me all. I cannot tell you what he did tell me. I can never be his now. I am alone for a moment, while he has gone down to send away Bratflsch. I knew that something dreadful would happen to prevent our being happy, so I brought the poison with me, and I am going to drink it. When he returns it will be too late to save me, and I will die in his arms, happy to be with him till the last............

I can't help but notice that all the letters of eternal love come from Vetsera and none from Rudolph? 

Contrary to the later idea, perhaps started by Marie Larisch, that Vetsera was found nude and wounded (eye out of socket), this author states that:

Quote......................On the lounge near the window lay the body of Marie Vetsera, still dressed in her dark serge gown, but with all the violets of her two bouquets scattered about her....................Her white face, outlined against the silk of the cushion upon which her head was resting, seemed cut out of marble.

And Vetsera's death

Quote....................has been more than disproved by the autopsy performed upon Marie, which revealed the fact that she had died from strychnine poisoning, and that her death had preceded that of the Crown-prince by more than two hours.

And this was followed by: 

QuoteCould anything have been more dreadful than the despair of the unfortunate young man when, after having disclosed to his beloved the true reason which made it impossible for him to fulfil his promise of marrying her as soon as he had succeeded in obtaining the dissolution of his union, he found that she had swallowed the deadly drug which she had brought with her ? When, a few minutes later, she breathed her last in his arms, no wonder indeed that, seeing his honor jeopardized, his hopes dashed to the earth, and his entire existence ruined, he should have decided to end his own career without any further delay!

Also in contradiction to the claims of Marie Larisch and usually accepted today, Vetsera's body was not removed from Mayerling under the macrabre circumstances of being supported by some broomstick but instead: 

QuoteBy the care of Count Bombelles, the Crown-prince's tutor and best friend, who had been sent immediately by the Emperor to take charge of everything at Mayerling, the fair body of Marie Vetsera was concealed in a room which Count Bombelles himself locked with his own hands.

On the night of the 31st of January a small posterndoor in the northern wing of the castle was stealthily opened, and another black, unadorned coffin was carried by four trustworthy attendants into the depths of the woods, where another fourgon awaited it. It was conveyed as secretly as possible to the chapel of Heiligenkreutz, and from there, twenty-four hours later, to a distant railway station, where it was embarked for Trieste, and taken thence to Venice.

Alas, this glorious and sweet drama was not to stick -- but how and why did it get derailed?  Part of the answer might be right in this book itself.  Despite its absolute support of the crown prince, it also revealed something about him that totally shocked me.   Maybe I over react, and maybe that was considered normal back then, but I found this behavior of Rudolph no less than chilling............................to be continued later.   ;)

One of my favorite photos of Rudolph:

http://img836.imageshack.us/img836/5749/18september20102.jpg

He certainly was a handsome fellow -- also with charm and intelligence.................his mind sparkled and his tongue flashed and he could be irresistible when he wanted.  Unfortunately, it seemed he also had some enemies.

QuoteThe official version – despite contemporaries' doubts – was that of suicide and yet, especially in recent years, historical research has revealed new elements that suggest the possibility of a double homicide. This homicide was an epilogue to a complex, international plot organized between Paris and Vienna in order to place Rudolf on the throne as quickly as possible to put an end to his father's pro-German policies. However this project hadn't taken two things into account: first Rudolf's psychological fragility and then the extreme efficiency of Bismarck and William the Second's German secret services...

I'm not sure why this theory would be seriously considered only in recent years.  It was spelled out quite clearly in "The Last Days of the Archduke Rudolf" published in 1915. 

http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=it&u=http://www.storiainrete.com/&ei=uCOWTKT2IoqmngfRle3QCA&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CBsQ7gEwAA&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dstoriainrete.com%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26hs%3D3I1%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26prmd%3Div

The Barbarity of Emperor Francis Joseph and his mother the Archduchess Sophie:

---From what I read in "The Martrydom of an Empress" Elizabeth could have been a good mother to all but Gisele with whom she seemed to fail to bond.  She was forced out of Rudolf's life when he was still a tiny baby.  They were able to convince her she'd be a bad mother to the future emperor, and prevented her from nursing him or visiting him often or when she wanted.  That loss of contact with a child so young can do a lot of damage to a parent, and alone can explain her need to escape and constantly be on the move.  When she was finally invited back into young Rudolf's life, it was too late to reestablish the bond as first formed -- although they did manage to eventually develop some kind of relationship.   It was insensitive at best on the part of Francis Joseph, and cruel and insensitive on the part of Archduchess Sophie to force Sisi apart from baby Rudolf.

---Clearly there wasn't an easy two-way street between Hungary and Austria.  In hind sight it might not have been for the best that one of Rudolf's teachers with whom he developed a strong life-time bond starting when he was around age 12 taught him his truth of Hungarian History and this was J.J. Ronay.  It is believed he eventually told Rudolf "about his father's extreme cruelty to the Hungarian insurgents.  Between 1848 and 1853, Francis Joseph signed and confirmed more death warrants than any other European ruler during the whole of the 19th century".  (Judith Listowel in A Hapsburg Tragedy)  He also told him about the unexpected execution of one of Hungary's heros by orders of Archduchess Sophie since by legend, he rejected her amorous advances.  Sophie then insisted the execution be done by garotte since that was considered an insult to the Hungarian Aristocracy, and not by firing squad.  I won't go into further details since it gets worse, but there was reason for the loathing to work both ways between Hungary and Austria.

However, what's important in this thread is the diary of JJ Ronay which showed this kind of historical information clearly upset the young and sensitive Rudolph.  How could this kind of knowledge have affected Rudolf at such a young age when the only, or at least strongest, moral authorities in his life at that time were Francis Joseph and the Archduchess Sophie?   Considering this, one starts to understand why Rudolf might have made bloody drawings of an alien-type foreign-looking chieftain with a sword holding up a decapitated head.  Was this his way of trying to distance himself from the brutal insensitivity he'd learned was in the nature of his beloved father and grandmother? 

Although the above relates to a problem in the nurture arena, perhaps the greatest pity is that Francis Joseph understood his son only too well.  I'll remain a fan of Rudolf because he did have a very fine side, but I'm also starting to see the tell-tale signs of something very dark, and it's not quite so simple as the depression/physical decline/dissipation/suicidal ideation etc. that is usually generated from a conflicted upbringing.

Back to one of the earliest books written about Mayerling, The Martyrdom of an Empress (1899), and totally supportive to Rudolf and his parents was the following little bit of information about the interior design of Mayerling:

Quote

QuoteHis apartments resembled more a museum, or the rooms of a professor of natural history, than those of a high and mighty prince. One of the salons was arranged so as to represent a forest, with grottos of rock, trees and shrubs planted in enormous boxes concealed under moss and trailing ivy, and was decorated with magnificently disposed and lifelike animals. A huge bear, the first which the Crown-prince had shot when staying at Munkdcs, seemingly clung to a pine-trunk, and several superb eagles looked as if they were about to swoop down from their elevated positions near the ceiling. Owls, lynxes, pheasants, foxes—nay, even deer and stags —were all to be found in this wonderful room.

One of the most cherished possessions of the Crown prince was contained in a large glass-case, and was nothing less than the carcass of a horse in the act of being devoured by vultures, hawks, and ravens, the whole group being wonderfully prepared and executed, and giving one an exact idea of the gruesome thing itself. These birds were shot by Rudolph during his trip of " fifteen days on the Danube" which he described in one of his books, and also in Spain, in Egypt, and on the island of Plawnik, in the Quarnero.

The Prince's study at Mayerling was decorated with wonderful specimens of foreign and domestic arms— guns, carbines, pistols, matchlocks, swords, kandjars, and yataghans inlaid with gold, silver, and mother-of-pearl. These rested on the antlers of the many deer which Rudi had shot or forced. The magnificent snow-white Eddhirsche (noble deer) which he shot in Bohemia were perhaps the most remarkable items of this beautiful collection.

Now I have no problem with stuffed animals everywhere and decorations of weapons of war covering many walls but I just thought "Oh My!" when it came to the predatory/prey display in the glass-case with the horse as the most unfortunate creature.  Perhaps I'm just being silly, but this suggests something to me that is far from normal behavior?  There's only been one other person I know of who had his predator/prey art everywhere and therein was the heart of a killer.  And again, a horse of all creatures!  His mother's favorite and closest animal...............?

Another pre-sign I noticed that is consistent with the above was a statement, that at the time seemed apparently just left to dangling in nonsense, from the book, "My Past" by Marie Larisch (niece of Sisi).  She claimed the Empress Sisi told her to be careful around Rudolf -- he could not be trusted and he was dangerous.  At the time it did not fit anywhere and I had not the slightest idea why such a strange statement should be attributed to a mother of all people. 

Another pre-sign that seems unrelated, but fits in with this general theme comes from a book by Archduke Leopold of Tuscany, a friend and cousin of Rudolf and someone who loved him but wasn't blind to his other side.  He said something like ~~ Rudolf failed to show any empathy in his behavior concerning his multiple relationships with women, but then he could certainly understand how this might happen since Rudolf was never shown what love was from either parent. 

Next -- the manner of death described by 2 credible witnesses that is consistent with this dark side which is' much worse than the official version of what happened at Mayerling.  Again, I may be way off-base here, but I'm still considering all possibilities and seeing where the best evidence leads.

Ah well, muddling on here to try and see what the actual physical cause of death was to Rudolf.  This is of pivotal importance since it will give a good indication of the possible reasons leading to Rudolf's death.  Its importance can be seen in the desperate scramble to find something, anything that would stick.  The very first word was that Rudolf had been murdered, then poisoned, then he died from such natural causes as apoplexy and heart stoppage before finally settling on the suicide theory.  This vacillation is the cause of why today so many still doubt the official story of suicide, along with all the tears in the fabric of the primary witness testimony.

http://www.mayerling.de/images/loschek.jpg

The first primary witness was Johann Loschek, Rudolf's valet, who claimed that he could see immediately that Rudolf had killed Vetsera and then himself with 2 well-aimed shots that he heard soon before breaking down the 1st floor door and discovering the bodies.  Immediately it is apparent that this contradicts the later testimony that Mary was dead at least several hours before Rudolf.  It also suggests some amazing powers of observation in someone not trained in forensic or police science.

The resulting lack of credibility in relying on Loschek as the first and primary witness to make the official case of suicide was that Loschek told too many tales.  At one time one author estimated there were at least a hundred different versions about what happened from Loschek.  His explanation for doing this was that he liked to talk and he liked to drink and he was worried that the truth would slip out, and so this is how he covered his tracks.  But ah-hah, this is exactly where he gives himself away, in that the official version he gave must not be the truth.  By all reports, Loschek was devoted to Rudolf, so then it follows that what he was so desperate to hide must have had something to do with protecting the memory of Rudolf.  Of course this assumes that Loschek's first allegiance was to Rudolf and not to someone else, and again, this seems to be the case since Loschek had a reputation for not being liked by anyone outside of Rudolf's immediate circle and this was thought to be because Loschek refused to release any information about Rudolf that might be demanded of others particularly in the Emperor's court.

Johann Loschek made his last official statement soon before he died to his son about what happened at Mayerling and this was published in 1932.  In this statement he reinforced the official version of suicide and he also stated that the presence of a third person or that glass shards stuck in Rudolf's head are like so much about Rudolf's death fictitious.  One has to wonder why of all the other theories, Loschek would specifically disclaim only these 2 – the glass shards and more bodies?  Could it be these 2 were the only serious threats to protecting the memory of his beloved Rudolf?

As an interesting aside, in his last statement, Loschek stated, "...........I knelt down, put my head on Rudolf's arm and wept bitterly;  A knock startled me, it was already Dr. Widerhofer and a secretary, whom took up the facts according to my data."  This "secretary" wrote a book in 1915 called "The Last Days of Archduke Rudolph" in which he describes arriving in the room with Dr. Widerhofer.  Incidentally, the claim of this private secretary was that Rudolf was not suicidal or mentally or physically sick but in top form.  The secretary was in the area since he had arranged to deliver some manuscripts Rudolf had asked him to get from a library in Vienna so he could work on a book while at Mayerling, which certainly suggests an absence of planned suicide by Rudolf.

The only other witness at Mayerling who gave a statement was Count Josef Hoyos-Sprinzenstein.

http://www.mayerling.de/images/hoyos.jpg


His account was finally discovered ~30 years later and published by Baron von Mitis in his "The Life of the Crown Prince Rudolph of Habsburg", but as various authors have since noted, he obviously had many "memory lapses" in his account.  Apparently his first account of the tragedy was rejected by Franz Joseph who saw the lies in it immediately and reprimanded him severely.  This was followed by Hoyos ~~offering to fall on his sword for forgiveness~~ from the Emperor, and later he wrote a more careful statement of what happened at Mayerling.  However as Listowel pointed out in her book "A Habsburg Tragedy", the timing he gave in his later statement was impossible – so one is left to conclude that Rudolf must have died several hours at least before the time claimed by Hoyos or Loschek. 

Other than the timing and the number of people present, the official testimony of Hoyos and Loschek was more or less in agreement.
However, there was another reported statement from Hoyos several years after the Mayerling deaths where he told a friend that Rudolf had been killed by a blow from a champagne bottle doing something – (can't remember what the circumstances were now and can't find it).  The Emperor found out he had sent this other statement and was very upset and made him retrieve it, burn it and retract his statement. 

So it would seem the glass-shards-in-the-brain-story was quite a sensitive taboo to the official story of how Rudolf died.  Naturally, the next question is how could Rudolf's death from a blow to the head by a champagne bottle be seen as so much worse than a self-inflicted gunshot wound? 

Here's a little information and a photo I found on the author of "He did not Die at Mayerling" who claimed to be the first child of Rudolf, H.R. van Deventer.

http://oi54.tinypic.com/j13n6o.jpg

Can't tell if he looks like Rudolf or not?  The photo on the left is a photo of Rudolf as a child, the one on the right is of Deventer.

He was a patent attorney and inventor including founding a company called Domestic Elec Refrigeraid Co. (H.R. Van Deventer, Inc., New York) which was interesting since he claimed John Oth and Rudolf made their living by shipping refrigerated beef from El Salvator to Europe. 

He wrote "Ignition Hand Book". By H. R. Van Deventer. 1911. Gift of Sumter Telephone Mfg. Co.

I also saw where he had a patent on some self-generating power source in the early 1900s.

Here's a little blurb about him from the Sumter Company:

QuoteMr. H. R. Van Deventer, electrical and sales engineer, is one of three brothers who made electrical pursuits their life work.  After completing a collegiate education and obtaining the degrees of B. S., E. E., Mr. Van Deventer took up general engineering work being employed in responsible positions by several of the larger operating companies.  Realizing the field for independent telephony in the South, Mr. Van Deventer became associated with the Sumter company.

Immediately the advantage of his fifteen years of practical experience in the operating field was apparent, especially in connection with actual service tests, and the design of special circuits to meet certain conditions.  The United States government specifications are particularly rigid as to inspection, and the technical details of the apparatus to be furnished, and Mr. Van Deventer has been remarkably successful in devising tests to locate imperfections in raw or finished material, with the result that every order of Sumter apparatus submitted has been inspected and approved without change or rejection in any particular.  By means of a fully equipped laboratory, with connections through cable to the city exchange, many miles of cable being in circuit if desired, Mr. Van Deventer has attained actual service conditions for tests, which all Sumter  apparatus must undergo before leaving the factory.

Mr. Van Deventer is a well known contributor to the technical press on various subjects of a practical nature.  Being a registered patent attorney and member of the various engineering societies, he also realized the necessity of collecting and preserving the literature of the telephone art.  To this end he has for many years gathered date, models of apparatus - especially early designs of Mr. Mason, etc., some of which have but recently proved of great value in patent litigation of vital importance to Independent telephony.

Mr. Van Deventer has long desired to contribute something of permanent value to telephone literature, and, after more than two years labor, has just completed Telephonology, a work of nearly 600 pages with over 700 illustrations, describing in detail modern apparatus, systems, and methods, written especially for the practical man, and valuable to the large and small exchange.  This work incorporates date never before obtainable outside the engineering offices and laboratories of the larger operating companies and manufacturers.  The appearance of this work is awaited with interest.

Mr. Van Deventer handles the advertising, and usually represents the Sumter company at conventions, and in other ways booms Sumter products.  Throughout the South he is widely known as a through Independent, and practical telephone man.

Thanks for finding all that information, Drezzle.  Rock on, girl!

Thank you Miz Scarlet  ;)

In attempting to put the puzzle pieces together for what happened at Mayerling, there is one piece of evidence that seems to be ignored or vigorously denied, but unfortunately, of all the so-called evidence, it has perhaps the least reason to be discounted.  This testimony comes from Ferdinand IV of  Tuscany via the books of his children Archduke Leopold and Louise, ex-Crown Princess of Saxony.  Ferdinand IV or "Nando" as the emperor called him was probably the closest thing to what the emperor had in the way of a friend and referred to him as his "best friend".   (also in "Clash of Generations" by Cassels)  On the day Rudolph died, Nando received a telegraph from the emperor to come to Vienna, that Rudolph was dead.   He arrived the next morning on 1/31 at about 6:30am and found the emperor in a state of shock and unable to talk other than to say Rudolph..............Rudolf..........

Here's a photo of Ferdinand IV (front left) with his brothers.  Johann Orth is behind him on your left.

http://oi52.tinypic.com/2yl7huu.jpg

Apparently this was soon after Dr. Weiderhofer, the court physician, told FJ the truth about Rudolf's death and that he wasn't poisoned, or maybe the truth had just sunk in or maybe he could allow himself to all of a sudden feel in shock in the presence of his friend, since the day before, after hearing about the death of his only son, he was still functioning well enough to send out many telegrams.  

So Nando took the emperor by the arm and led him into the bedroom where Rudolf was lying and there saw Dr. Weiderhofer pulling long shards of green glass out of Rudolf's brain and surmised, or was told it was the remnants of a champagne bottle.

As a witness, Nando has to be one of the best available in the whole Mayerling Affair, since he was close/part of the Imperial family, but not so close that he would have any motive for telling other than the truth since he was not dependent on the court in any way.  Besides, he had a reputation for being a very truthful man with a wife and many children who loved and respected him to the highest degree.  IOW, there is no basis for ignoring this testimony of Ferdinand IV of Tuscany.

Now assuming that Rudolph did die at Mayerling, this puts everything into a whole new point of view.  Firstly, it mostly rules out the possibility of suicide, although Franz Judtman made a valiant attempt to explain how Rudolf could have killed himself with a champagne bottle!!  So much for the glories of a romantic suicide!   Next, it probably also rules out the exciting intrigue of some political assassination since who could imagine Roll Commando Sharpshooters resorting to something as plebeian as a champagne bottle as their weapon of choice?  

This is not to say that suicide was not planned (by someone) or even that some political assassination was not in the planning works, but they are just a coincidence to how Rudolf actually died at Mayerling.

So without suicide and without some political assassination, what would account for the death of Rudolf, while still accounting for all the accepted/official evidence?  
http://oi52.tinypic.com/r89tp0.jpg

Before and after the autopsy and correction with wax and paint.

It's late......................more later.

This picture doesn't look much like Rudolf, but then it doesn't look like a drawing or painting either so I'm not sure what to think about it?

http://oi52.tinypic.com/2gv108y.jpg

Besides the testimony of the Grand Duke of Tuscany, the other support for the glass in the brain theory include:

-- The Italian Ambassador in Vienna, Count Constantin Nigra, who was at Mayerling before the bodies were removed, according to Franz Judtmann in "Mayerling: The Facts Behind the Legend, 1968".

-- In a book published in 1898 called "Society recollections in Paris and Vienna, 1879-1904"  the author George Greville Moore claimed that the ADC of Archduke Ferdinand told him Rudolf was killed by a blow to the head from a champagne bottle.   I'm not sure who Archduke Ferdinand was unless it was the Emperor's nephew and younger brother of Franz Ferdinand?   This author also stated that a friend of the daughter of Bratfisch (Rudolf's devoted shadow-cabdriver) told him the daughter had told her it was a blow from a lantern that killed the crown prince.

--  In "The Secrets of the Hohenzollerns", 1914, the author who claimed to be part of Germany's secret service also said that Rudolf was killed by a champagne bottle.

Although Franz Judtmann seems quite good at gathering evidence, fortunately he doesn't spend a lot of time trying to interpret it in his book since the results can be rather funny.   For example, he valiantly tried to discredit all the witnesses for the glass in the brain, but with flimsy reasons, and perhaps realizing how lame he was sounding, yet still desperate to support the suicide theory, he came up with the final interpretation for the little problem of the champagne bottle............. ♪♫•*•♫♪ ....................Rudolf decided to kill himself by aiming his pistol through a champagne bottle!   Hahaha, I guess he thought Rudolf was just really into making a big splash!   :shifty:

     
The problem I have with the official position is  that they changed their story too often -- first death was by poisoning, then apoplexy and then heart failure before they settled on suicide.  Then they attempted to withhold any information about the presence of Mary Vetsera and fudged the autopsy results.  The Grand Duke of Tuscany never changed his story -- from the start to the end of his life.  I find it easier to trust someone with an impeccable reputation for honesty who states a direct observation than to believe second-hand hearsay and suicide notes and other documents that can be easily manufactured.  Grand Duke Ferdinand IV always maintained that  Rudolf's brain had glass shards sticking from it, Francis Joseph was in a state of shock the morning after, and that Rudolf's death had not been intentional. 

Not only were they willing to evade the truth before the official finding of suicide, but then many admitted in later letters that the truth was still not known:  (from Judtmann's book)

--The Emperor Francis Joseph to King Leopold II of the Belgians:  "Anything is better than the truth!"

--The Archduke Karl Ludwig in a letter to the Duchess Ludovika of Bavaria:  "The truth is so frightful that no-one can speak about it!"

--The Archduke Ludwig Viktor: "The whole truth is so frightful that one can never confess it."

--Prince Philipp of Coburg to his wife, the Princess Louise:  "...it is terrible, terrible!  I can't tell you anything about it!"

--Count Josef Hoyos to the Archduke Johann Salvator of Tuscany:  "His Highness is dead.  That is all I can say.  Do not ask me for details.  It is too frightful.  I have given the Emperor my word that I shall not say a word about what I have seen."

--Count Henrich Taaffee:  The son of Premier Eduard Count Taaffe said many years later that "the circumstances of the Mayerling affair are far worse than anyone imagines" and then would say no more.

--Hermann Widerhofer to Larisch in My Past:  "Dr. Widerhofer (court physician) was well accustomed to horrible sights in the exercise of his profession, 'but', he said, 'for the first time in my career I felt faint when Loschek threw aside the sheet which covered the basket.  There I saw the body of a woman -- nude except for a fine lawn and lace chemise, which had been pulled up over her head'..............."

--Leopold II of Belgium in a letter to his brother Philipp Count of Flanders:  "It is absolutely important to confirm and maintain the suicide version.  It may seem difficult in the eyes of our Catholic people to see a house with the views of the House of Habsburg insisting on the suicide version.  But suicide and disturbance of mind were the only way of avoiding an unheard-of scandal, the particulars of which I cannot entrust to my letter but which I shall relate to you in full detail.........."

--Dr. Heinrich Baron von Slatin, court secretary in the Lord Marshal's Office.   Slatin did the inventory for Rudolf's estate, and also was the one to write everything that the first and second commissions found at Mayerling:  "As a result, I had repeated contact with his domestic staff -- valets, hunt personnel, servants, etc............In consequence I gained a terrifying picture of the Crown Prince's nerve-racking way of life.  I do not wish to go into detail.........."

These men were all physicians and/or soldiers-hunters.  What could have been so unusual and frightening to them?

So considering the above, this once again brings me to the intrigue of the smashed door to Rudolf's bedroom which was on the ground floor.  According to both Loschek and Hoyos, there was some time that elapsed before they finally decided to smash in the door to find Rudolf and Vetsera dead on the bed in this ground floor bedroom.

However, Dr. Widerhofer, Henrich Taaffe and Grand Duke Ferdinand IV all indicated that Rudolf and Mary Vetsera were lying dead in the upstairs bedroom instead.  So what might this tell-tale smashed door be suggesting???

Rudolf with some of this dogs:
http://oi51.tinypic.com/1zecj92.jpg

One of the last photos taken of Rudolf:
http://oi51.tinypic.com/2n1u9gl.jpg
http://www.imageshugger.com/images/zmpwg0pzdjr2yc6d95q.jpg

From ONB:  15 year old Rudolf had a hard time in getting his tie on straight!
http://oi52.tinypic.com/15s99ir.jpg

=============================

Below is another photo of Rudolf with some men whose names I don't recognize except for one of his private secretaries:  standing in back on the left.

Arthur Giesl von Gieslingen was mostly involved with military intelligence it seems and was perhaps sent to keep tabs on Rudolf.  He started with him a couple years before his death.  The author of "The Last Days of the Archduke Rudolf" also clearly had ties with military intelligence and said he started as secretary to Rudolf a couple years before the events at Mayerling.  However, the author claimed to be several years younger than Rudolf whereas Gieslingen is a year or 2 older.   Here's an interesting bio on Giesl von Gieslingen:  

http://www.austro-hungarian-army.co.uk/biog/giesla.htm


According to this bio, Gieslingen was the true mastermind behind the Mayerling coverup -- insuring total confusion to hide the truth.

To enlarge, right click to select "view image" then left click for the + sign:

http://oi55.tinypic.com/alonba.jpg

http://oi51.tinypic.com/f107eg.jpg

The real story about the state of mind and health of Rudolf towards the end of his life is about as different from the official story as the photos above.
The one on the left is the real last photo of Rudolf taken according to Judtmann.  The one on the right is the drawing of this photo showing a countenance that has little to do with the reality.

Here's another contrasting example:

http://www.archive.org/stream/lastdaysofarchdu01gran#page/280/mode/2up

On page 245 of the above book link "The Last Days of the Archduke Rudolf", this is what the secretary had to say about a group of friends last meeting with Rudolf on January 26, 1889:

".....had the Archducal ménage been a source of fretfulness to him or even had his health of mind and body suggested anything like life-weariness, then I might have admitted a strong presumption for the view that he had premeditated self-destruction.  None of these conditions, however, pointed any way" to this view and ....................."the tragedy of Mayerling, to those who were with him in that final symposium, came with a shock that well-nigh unseated reason itself."

The man who wrote this book had to be Lt.  Victor Fritsche (younger than Rudolf by several years), listed as Secretariat Chancellor, in the last establishment of Rudolf's according to Judtmann's book "Mayerling: the Facts behind the Legend" from a draft prepared by Count Bombelles.  The other secretary was "Head of the Secretariat, Heinrich Ritter von Spindler, who had been with Rudolf for years and had grown children.  The other possibility was Giesl von Gieslingen who was about Rudolf's age, but was preferably known as an Aide-de-Camp.

Now here's the contrast!:  
In the book by Carl Lónyay, Stephanie's nephew-in-law, he repeatedly cites the statements and personal communication of both Victor Fritsche and Giesl v Gieslingen to say that not only was Rudolf seriously suicidal, but that he asked each of these men to join him in suicide!!  They supposedly told Rudolf they were flattered by the invitation but politely declined.   Fritsche also supposedly told Lónyay that Rudolf was so cruel, spiteful and insane towards his Archducal ménage that it was most difficult to find anyone willing to work in Rudolf's establishment/household.  Fritsche also told Lónyay that Rudolf would continuously brag about his romantic  conquests because he couldn't perform in bed.  (in the book by the secretary, he specifically said Rudolf never talked about his personal love life)  

Another tidbit I remember is that Giesl apparently told Lónyay that according to Rudolf's personal physician, Franz Auchenthaler, Rudolf had also given gonorrhea to Mary Vetsera.  However, in Judtmann's book, which is most thorough on documentation, Auchenthaler never did any autopsy/exam on Vetsera.

Unfortunately for the truth, the book by Carl Lónyay, "Rudolph: The Tragedy Of Mayerling" is often provided as a reputable source of facts about Mayerling.   The trouble here is that for whatever reason, justified or not, Carl Lónyay was so bitter and filled with hate towards the Habsburgs that most everything he said has to be suspect.  I don't understand why this point was/is not made about his book the same way it is readily made about those of Countess Larische and Princess Louise (sister of Stephanie) where it is often stated that whatever they say can be discounted because of their spite?  

Whether these secretaries or aids-de-camp to Rudolf who came from military intelligence were worshiping his memory as in "The Last Days of the Archduke Rudolf" or demolishing it in later statements to those only too willing to listen and document, they can't be faulted for their lack of credibility.  After all, those trained in military intelligence by definition are masters of the art of deception and they are trained to do a job as demanded by the powers of the day.  

My guess is "The Last Days of the Archduke Rudolf" was written in 1916 probably with the blessing of at least Emperor Karl who was trying to establish a separate peace with France, the US and other countries by an end run around Germany.  In this case it wouldn't hurt to establish in the minds of some that Emperor Wilhelm II was ultimately responsible for the death of the beloved Crown Prince Rudolf.

Then later, after WWI was long over, a different tune could be played as politically needed which obviously involved once again stressing the suicide of a distressed prince.

The one book I have thus far encountered for which I can find no doubt in its claims is that by Archduke Leopold Ferdinand of Tuscany, later Leopold Wolfling, who wrote "... from Archduke to Grocer".  He presented as a charming and endearing but hapless fellow incapable of duplicity.  He, along with his younger sister Louise, ex-crown princess of Saxony, and his one and only true love for life, the Infanta Elvira de Bourbon all experienced the greatest difficulties in living a little too openly and honestly.  (http://www.imageshugger.com/images/1caxco0e6wntq4y9ujp9.gif)

Here's a photo labeled as Archduke Leopold Salvator but I'm sure it's of the Archduke Leopold Ferdinand instead.

http://oi51.tinypic.com/2i9077.jpg

Here's another one of Leopold Ferdinand that is in his book:

http://oi55.tinypic.com/2vsnbye.jpg

The truth about Mayerling probably has a far darker side than anyone wants to see.  For instance, who else was killed that night besides Mary Vetsera?   According to many different sources, there were several people that disappeared from Austria the night of the Mayerling murders never to be seen or heard again.  As I mentioned before this included the servants Max and Otto according to "The Secrets of the Hohenzollerns".  There was also the "suicide" that morning of one of the gamekeepers by the name of Werner (The New York Times of Feb. 2, 1889).  Another death that very well might have happened at Mayerling that night was of Countess Anastasia Wimpffen.

The book, "The Last Days of the Archduke Rudolph" probably written by his secretary Victor Fritsch (rumored to be the illegitamate son of a king of Württemberg) refers to Countess Wimpffen as Madame "Larricarda" who was the hostess of the salon of "vaudeville gaiety" in Vienna that was frequented by Rudolph and his friends, and was the most common meeting place for Rudolph with Mary Vetsera.

The secretary relates how he took the train to Baden for a few days vacation while Rudolph was in Mayerling, and on the train, he saw Mary Vetsera with "Madame Larricarda".  He then noticed that the 2 women get off the train at Baden and got into an "ordinary hackney coach  of the provincial type; its direction was the road to Mayerling."   This of course contradicts the official story that Mary Vetsera was driven by Bratfisch in an imperial coach to Mayerling.

So here we have a report of 2 women traveling to Mayerling, and in a short time, they were both dead.  Madame "Larricarda" or Countess Anastasia Wimpffen was reported as a death by suicide (poisoning) about 3 weeks later.  Naturally, I have to wonder, considering all the official cover-up of actual events at Mayerling, when did Countess Wimpffen really die?

An interesting side-light about Countess Wimpffen is that through her, a decendent of the Baltazzi family  (Mary Vetsera's mother was a Baltazzi) was finally joined in holy matrimony to a decendent of the Habsburgs.  A few years after her death, her oldest son married the eldest daughter of Count Georg von Stockau, by his wife, Countess Eveline, daughter of Theodorus Evangelis Baltazzi, of Constantinople.  Their granddaughter, Countess Johanna von Wimpffen. b. at Budapest, Hungary, 25th May 1936. married at Vienna, Austria, 27th April 1957, H.S.H. Prince Otto Ernst Wilhelm zu Windisch-Graetz, grandson of Crown Prince Rudolf's only daughter.

http://4dw.net/royalark/Georgia/dadan3.htm

Back to the attempt to crack the Mayerling code haha!

What is it about Mary Vetsera that makes for the most mystery in Mayerling?   There's something strange about Mary.

To recap:  The unquestionable Grand Duke Nando with perfect means, motive and opportunity gave some indisputable truths about what happened at Mayerling:

1)  Rudolf died from a blow to the head from some strong glass object -- possibly a champagne bottle
2)  Rudolf's death was manslaughter -- there was no intention to kill him.
3)  The Emperor Francis Joseph was in a state of shock the morning after Rudolf's death when Nando arrived.

And something else I read this weekend according to telegrams seen by the excellent documentarian Fritz Judtmann, Grand Duke Nando
told Papal Nuncio Galimberti (also shown in the German Ambassador Ruess's report to Otto von Bismarck as well as a 2nd independent confirmation in Marie Larisch's "My Past' from what Dr. Wiederhofer told her) that:

4)  Mary Vetsera had a bullet wound at the top of  head as well as other wounds

The above gives a high probability that Rudolf did not kill himself, he was killed accidentally and there was no political assassination (although there may have been separate plans for that).   There is also a high probability that Mary was not killed accidentally -- in other words, one accidental killing is plausible.  A 2nd killing the same night in the same location is most unlikely to be accidental also.

So why would anyone want to murder Mary?  Sadly her death appears not to be a Love Kill from some Romantic Pact after all.  This is where it starts to get quite strange.

The popular myth is that Mary Vetsera only met Rudolf a few months before their deaths by writing him a letter professing her love.  Next, what do the best sources actually say about when Rudolf really met Mary Vetsera and why the rush to minimize their time together?

http://oi53.tinypic.com/103iov9.jpg

Above is a photo of Marie Valérie, Rudolf's younger sister and or Marie Larisch, Rudolf's first cousin.  

It's always intrigued me why Marie Larisch was banned from court forever for reasons that don't make a lot of sense.  She facilitated a few meetings between Rudolf and Mary Vetsera after their relationship was already established, and was possibly paid for doing so in part at least to pay off gambling debts.  (Access for cash to pay off gambling debts seemed to be a common practice for many aristocrats in those days including Rudolf as well as his good friend, Albert Prince of Wales, later Edward VII.)

By most reports, Rudolf was a libertine, a real Lothario who had many girlfriends – so many he couldn't remember their names.  This kind of behavior was more or less accepted among most archdukes since they were expected to marry for political reasons and so finding love elsewhere was typical.  Rudolf also had his main long-term mistress Mitzi Caspar and she was mostly accepted as a part of his life.  Stephanie may not have liked it, but then again, the Emperor and Empress seemed to not care a great deal what Stephanie wanted.  Why, of all Rudolph's girlfriends, was only his relationship with Mary Vetsera objected to with such urgency – by not only the Emperor, who usually winked at his amorous adventures, but also by the Empress who usually showed little interest in her son's love life?

Similarly, why did Josel Hoyos and Philipp of Coburg both go to such great lengths to deny any knowledge of the presence of Mary Vetsera at Mayerling even to the Emperor at first – considering it was common knowledge that Rudolph had entertained numerous women at Mayerling?  

Now where the story gets even more confusing or perhaps it's merely the flip side of the same coin is why did Marie Larisch become "demented" and go into a panic when she took Vetsera to see Rudolf, and he decided to keep her for a couple days contrary to what they agreed?  At first in reading her book "My Past" I just assumed this was her way of excusing herself by showing how distraught she was and that she had been misled – supposedly possible only in hindsight anyway.  However, Fritz Judtmann saw a couple of letters that Marie Larisch had written to the Police Chief Krauss who kept them in his secret files on Mayerling, and these letters asking him to help find Mary clearly showed that Marie Larisch was in a genuine state of panic.  

So what are the possibilities?

A.    Larisch was in a state of panic since her part in helping a romance between Rudolf and Mary might be exposed and considered to be unforgivable behavior on her part for some mysterious reason.

B.   Larisch was afraid for the personal safety of Mary.......of Rudolf........or for both?

C.   Both A and B

http://oi52.tinypic.com/35a3itv.jpg

Should Marie Larisch have the last word on when Rudolph and Mary Vetsera first became acquainted?

In an earlier post we saw where K Schratt (the Emperor's long-time girlfriend) in letters told how an upset Crown Princess Stephanie told her she refused to go to  Queen Victoria's Golden Jubilee in 1887 since she didn't want to have to witness Rudolph chasing after that school girl Mary Vetsera.   That was ~ 1.5 years before the official position on when they met.

In her book, My Own Affairs, Louise of Coburg (Stepanie's sister and wife of Rudolf's good buddy Philipp of Coburg) stated that Rudolph and Vetsera's affair had lasted for 3 years.  Princess Louise also said that the Emperor was so anxious for Rudolph to break it off with Mary Vetsera that he told Rudolph Mary Vetsera was his half-sister from an affair he'd had with her mother, but Rudolph just laughed it off.

In the book by Rudolph's private secretary "The Last Days of the Archduke Rudolph", the author made this observation:  "Many of those who were prominent in the personal entourage of the Empress were Greek men and women; some of her ladies of honour, one of her private secretaries, her favorite reader, were all Levantine Greeks.  The Empress often invited Mary Vetsera as a young debutante to their Monday "Home Days"", where Rudolph was usually also present.  Elsewhere, the author made the remark that Home Days were for the Imperial Family only!

Now, going back a few more years -- in "The Lonely Empress" by Joan Haslip, Countess Festetics, Sisi's stuffy lady-in-waiting, did not approve of how Hélène Vetsera was "in hot pursuit of the crown prince".  Countess Festetics related how she laughingly told Rudolph "that the lady could make her assignations with His Imperial Highness elsewhere, but not in her drawing room" when Rudolph was attempting to get her to receive them together.  This book also described how Franz Joseph would tease Rudolph about the attentions of Hélène Vetsera and found it all amusing, whereas the Empress was mostly indifferent. 

Then in "My Past", Marie Larisch said the Empress introduced her to Hélène Vetsera, and this was when Larisch was still a teenager.  (Larisch and Rudolph were the same age).  The Empress told Larisch that "Rudolph was generally supposed to have found Hélène Vetsera extremely sympathetic when his thoughts first turned to love".  When does a boy's thoughts generally first turn to love -- around age 12 or 13?

http://oi55.tinypic.com/2luf3w5.jpg

By Golly!   I do think I see a resemblance.....

Rudolf's older sister Archduchess Gisele on left and Mary Vetsera on the right.

A little more about the impressions of Marie Larisch -- here's one of their first encounters as described in 'My Past':

"When he entered the room I experienced a curious feeling of uneasiness. Perhaps my subconscious self knew the danger which Rudolph was destined to become in my life, and my nervousness increased when I saw that he watched me narrowly out of the corners of his eyes. The Crown Prince sat next to me and commenced to tease me unmercifully, and, boy though he then was in years, he seemed to possess the intelligence of a man. He was handsome, and for some time I racked my brains to remember what wild animal he recalled to me, for he had a curious look not altogether human. Then, I knew—Rudolph reminded me of a wolf; his eyes blazed green at times, and he seemed almost ready to spring. "Was he as cruel as a wolf?" I wondered, and then an icy chill went down my spine as I recalled the Empress's words to me before dinner when I had gone to show her my pretty gown. "Marie," she had said, "to-night you will see Rudolph. I warn you against him, because he will turn on you if ever he gets the chance.""

http://oi53.tinypic.com/24wr1mw.jpg            

http://oi52.tinypic.com/2n1vqfb.jpg

And then years later, during the mess with Mary Vetsera when he was enlisting the help of Larisch:

QuoteThe maid, who looked flustered, said to me in an agitated whisper, "The Crown Prince is here," and the words were hardly out of her mouth when a tall figure, dressed in a military cloak, walked into my room. It was my cousin.

Rudolph had turned up the collar of his cloak; he wore his kepi well down over his eyes, and for some moments I stared at him in astonishment. Then he stepped forward and kissed my hand, saying as he did so, "I hope you'll forgive this informal call, Marie." I was silent, and my cousin looked at me with his mocking smile.

Rudolf is usually referred to as tall -- I wonder how tall he was?   Anyway, here's the usual description of Rudolph as a tall, handsome and charming prince with impeccable manners -- but did it hide a soul of darkness combined with the ultimate in imperial arrogance?  

Later on at this same meeting was a most odd exchange:  http://tinyurl.com/2vjchem

QuoteRudolph:  "You know all about the little Vetsera girl and myself?"

Larisch:  "I know something," I replied, at once on my guard.  "Well, perhaps I do, but I am not too sure."

Rudolph:  "I hope you don't imagine that this is a platonic friendship?" said the Prince, "because if you do I had better disillusion you at once. The affair is not at all innocent; in fact I'm in the devil of a mess in more ways than one............................

Now I have to wonder why would Rudolph assume Marie Larisch could think the affair between him and Marie Vetsera should be only platonic?  

Your doing stalwart work here drezzle.   <3

You just watch -- I'm getting ready to crack this Ducker.   :banana:

Quote from: Hale on November 07, 2010, 11:42:49 PM
........................... the next day Arthur boasted and said,  "I have been deep in Spain".  

I like your sig picture.  Is it of Spain?   :teehee:

Schena buab!?   Yes you're right Lucien, Marie Larisch became a major problem for the Imperial Family.  One has to remember though that through no fault of her own, she was born into no-man's land.  She was the illegitimate daughter of the Empress's brother Ludwig Wilhelm, Duke in Bavaria and his actress girlfriend Henriette Mendel whom he later married morganatically.   Then the Empress wanted the young Marie with her in Austria -- partly for her horsemanship -- but it was a thoughtless arrangement that forever left Marie on the outside for all practical purposes.

Although Marie Larisch had beauty, brains, style, passion and was a bit of a wild child, her marriage prospects due to her birth were nil -- especially in the Austrian Court.  It's not hard reading between the lines to see that that Marie Larisch was probably in love with Rudolf, and under other circumstances, she might have been an ideal mate for him.  But there was to be no marriage for her to the Crown Prince.  In any case, Rudolf was duty-bound and he wanted to reach across the hated Germany and make an alliance with Belgium through marriage.  There was also to be no marriage to an Archduke for Larisch and she was not permitted to even marry for love.  Instead Empress Elizabeth arranged a marriage for her niece with a dull but good-natured fellow in the hopes that he would not interfere with Marie's primary duty to be a companion to the Lonely Empress.  Needless to say, this all had to be a very bitter pill for Marie to swallow, and it was probably a mistake on the part of the Imperial Family to assume that Marie knew the score in its entirety. 

It is interesting that by the time of Marie's marriage, she had already come to dread black pearls.  The Empress didn't like to wear diamonds but she loved pearls, especially black pearls.  Here's an excerpt about this from her book My Past: 

Quote
The Empress gave a soiree for me in the evening before my wedding, and just as I was coming down the staircase, I met the Crown Prince Rudolph, who was going up. He stopped and informed me that I was the very person he wanted to see. "I have something to give you—here it is," and, as he spoke, he handed me a flat morocco case. "Open it," he added, "and tell me whether my little souvenir meets with your approval."

I opened the case, which contained a brooch set with an enormous black pearl. I started in dismay, for I have always had a dread of wearing black pearls.

My cousin asked:  "My dear Marie, you are making your own misfortune in life by this foolish marriage; do you not honestly think it is a very mad scheme? Surely it is only to please mamma?"

The Larisch marriage was not a happy one and before long Marie found herself in a clandestine affair with Henrich Baltazzi:

http://nd01.jxs.cz/023/371/6cfe6c0d05_46581573_o2.jpg

Before or after this there developed a close friendship between Marie Larisch and Baltazzi's sister Hélène Vetsera, Mary's mother. 

Now there's an alliance made in hell:  Marie Larisch -- compelled to find justice for the cruel loss of her marriage prospects, and the cunning and Ambitious Hélène Vetsera!  Thick as thieves, they later turned on each other, so it wasn't hard to see from where they were coming.

So the fire was neatly laid and the two women quickly realized the match to light the bon-fire to destroy the marriage and reputation of the Crown Prince was the stars in the eyes of the young Mary Vetsera whenever she looked at Rudolph who in turn was too much of a gentleman to ever say no to a lady.

Now one has to realistically consider the question:  did Mary Vetsera as a very young and rather plump and unattractive yet experienced coquette put a love spell on the great Lothario or was it in reality Shake Down Time where Rudolph found himself eternally unable to shake off the amorous attentions of Mary Vetsera and this inability had little to do with love? 

Quote from: drezzle on November 08, 2010, 03:12:41 AM
You just watch -- I'm getting ready to crack this Ducker.   :banana:

:D      :curtsey:

No the pics is of poppy fields in Sussex.  It's my way of commemorating the November 11th Armistice which resulted in the ending of WW1   :flower:

Here's where a nugget of truth is revealed despite the author's best efforts to keep it hidden:  In Larisch's My Past

QuoteI could not shake off a feeling of uneasiness...........................I was accustomed to be made use of by my various relations, but their intrigues were generally romantic and harmless, and, better still, soon over and as soon forgotten. But the Prince was not like my amorous family, and I had hitherto not played with fire.

I recalled Elizabeth's words, "Beware of Rudolph." The Empress no doubt had some good reason for warning me against her son. He was not to be trusted, she had said, and he could be a dangerous enemy.

Throughout this book, Larisch insists she is the innocent one, merely doing what Rudolph or Mary Vetsera ask of her out of her fondness for them.  But in the above quote Marie Larisch admits to playing a dangerous game with none other than Rudolph and Rudolph only.   She's not worried about getting scorched by anyone else -- not the Emperor/Empress/her husband/Mary's mother -- no, she only admits to playing with fire where Rudolph is concerned.  Of course, she doesn't say what kind of treacherous game she has been playing with him, but we probably have a good idea by now eh? 

What Larisch probably didn't realize was what an impossible position she put Rudolph in -- she probably assumed she'd never get caught, and if she did, he would probably understand.  But he didn't.   Between Marie Larisch, Hélène Vetsera and the demands of Mary Vetsera -- they got on the last nerve of the high-strung Rudolph.   Marie Larisch probably finally understood what she had done when the following happened at her last meeting with Rudolph:

QuoteThe Prince violently put his hand over my mouth and dragged me back. " Do you want me to hurt you?" he asked with dreadful meaning in his voice..............................."Unless you swear to be quiet, I 'll kill you," hissed Rudolph.

He released my wrists, which he held as in a vice, and without another word he opened a drawer in his writing-table and took from it a little black revolver. He came to where I stood.

"Do you want me to shoot you ?" He caught me by the throat and pressed the weapon against my forehead.

So now it all makes sense -- why Marie Larisch was in a panic -- and why the Imperial Family banned her forever from court and from Austria. 

For some reason this photo reminds me of the late great Prince of Grunge of Nirvana. 

http://oi54.tinypic.com/15pml4o.jpg

I was surprised to see Rudolph was believed to have a true genius for the more grungy type of music ;)

QuoteCrown Prince Rudolph, was a composer of no
mean power and seemed at times to pour forth his entire soul in the
melodies which he coaxed from this instrument. Indeed he often sat at
the piano for hours, playing, in a manner indescribably expressive and
touching, airs improvised on the spur of the moment, which, while they
remained impressed on the minds and ears of those present, would seem
to fade at once from the memory of the prince himself. His was what
may be called a true genius for music

http://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/12548/pg12548.txt

Could this be another tell-tale sign?   This information is very similar to the book written in 1937 called "He did not die at Mayerling", but this news brief was from 1903.   Might they be separate confirmations of this possibility, or did the 1903 article feed the idea for the 1937 book?  The 1937 book was supposedly written by an attorney of the name of Deventer who was based in Philadelphia mostly and the South.  This medical review article is highly specific to medical practitioners only for their readership as well as being out of the way geographically from Deventer.   

The St. Louis Medical Review, Volume 47 in 1903

Quote
A Marinette, Wisconsin, paper is authority for a story to the effect that Professor Hoffman, who recently resigned from the faculty of the University of Iowa, is Crown Prince Rudolph of Austria, who was supposed to have killed himself fifteen years ago. Hoffman's resignation at the university was requested because he refused to reveal his identity after admitting that he was going under an assumed name. It is stated that "Professor Hoffman" visited in Menominee, Mich., at the home of a prominent woman who is a sister of the commander of an Austrian battleship. ' At the time that it was reported that the Crown Prince had killed himself in Austria, it is asserted, a corpse resembling him was made use of at the funeral, while the prince disappeared from the Empire. It is further asserted that Hoffman, professor of medicine, is none other than Prince Rudolph. The Crown Prince was considered one of the leading natural scientists of Austria. The story in part is confirmed by Dr. Redelings, of Marinette, and Attorney B. J. Brown, of Menominee.

Below is a composite of all those actually named to be romantically associated with Rudolph.   Could Mary Vetsera have been so irresistible and singular that Rudolph became willing to do anything to be with her all the time? 

http://oi53.tinypic.com/1zokwf6.jpg

Half the authorities on Rudolph's love life claim he did not love Mary Vetsera and the other half claim he did, but one thing they all agree on -- Rudolf was desperate to escape from this love affair. 

Here is how it is typically described:   "My Own Affairs" by Louise of Coburg

QuoteAt Ambassador Reuss's reception in late January 1889:   Rudolph noticed me and leaving Stéphanie came straight up to me.  "She is there," he said without any preamble;  "ah, if somebody would only deliver me from her !"

"She" was Mary Vetsera, his mistress of the ardent face.  I, too, glanced at the seductress.  Two brilliant eyes met mine.  One word will describe her.  Mary was an imperial sultana, one who feared no other favourite, so sure was she of the power of her full and triumphant beauty, her deep black eyes, her cameo-like profile, her throat of a goddess, and her arresting sensual grace. 

She had altogether taken possession of Rudolph, and she longed for him to be able to marry her.  Their liaison had lasted for three years...............................At the soirée I was struck by my brother-in-law's state of nervous exhaustion but I thought it well to try and calm him by saying a word or two about Mary which would please him, so I remarked quite simply:  "She is very beautiful.".......................Rudolph left me without replying.  An instant later he returned and murmured:  "I simply cannot tear myself away from her."

It's quite interesting that Princess Louise wrote the above quote in her book published in 1921 and  ~15 years later her sister, the former Crown Princess Stephanie published her book which claimed without a doubt that Rudolf had never loved Mary Vetsera -- he was only using her. 

While it's entertaining to think that Rudolph might have escaped to America with his only true love, and the above journal article is a 2nd confirmation (or idea source?) of the 1937 book "He did not Die at Mayerling"  -- the practical problems with that make it seem highly unlikely.  A more prudent question might be exactly how desperate was Rudolph to escape from Mary and Why?  Exactly what did Mary Vetsera / her mother propose Rudolph should do with his wife in order to marry his mistress in the ultra-conservative and very Catholic Austria?   Could his frustration have led to an overwhelming infuriation?

Unfortunately I have to qualify the remarks of Louise of Coburg about Rudolph and Mary Vetsera in the above post since in further reading of her book she is clearly filled with venom and bitterness against Stephanie.  "The Last Days of the Archduke Rudoph" also claimed Rudolph was hopelessly devoted to Mary Vetsera but then he was with MI so who knows about the political motive? 

The only other verification I can think of for this was in Larisch's My Past when she claimed the Baroness Vetsera asked her to tell  Rudolph something like ~~ if he was so in love with Mary, then maybe they could come to some kind of understanding.  But then in her Memorandum, the Baroness accused Larisch of extorting money from Rudolph, and so this might have merely been pay back.

So far, the best evidence I've seen about the true feelings of Rudolph for Mary Vetsera were in Fritz Judtmann's book where he said he saw telegrams from Rudolph to Mary and it was clear that although Rudolph was extremely polite and careful in his wording, he was truly trying to free himself of their relationship. 

Everyone does seem to agree though that both Rudolph and his father were quite anxious for him to break his ties with Mary Vetsera..................which leaves me wondering about the possibility that Mary Vetsera/her mother had sensitive information they might have been using against Rudolph? 

 :doublewave:  hey drezzle, have you ever thought of writing a book, novel  :shrug: about this subject only you seem to know your stuff on the subject.  I don't know a thing consequently it's hard for me to contribute. :hug:

 :doublewave: Hale...............actually I don't wanna have to write anything which would happen with writing a book.   This is my fun procrastination time and indulging a little of my long thwarted desire to have become a detective ;)  In fact I was just read the riot act this morning for procrastinating too much.   :biggrin:  So here's some more.

A great little book I was reading last night, "Recollections of a Royal Governess" published in 1916, confirmed some  previous posts in this thread  and in part  #1 and knocked others.  The author impressed me as a straight shooter and was appointed as governess to little Erzi (Rudolph's 5 year old daughter) in 1889 soon after the events at Mayerling and stayed in that position until Erzi married.   

The 1st topic that was quite interesting and something I had wondered about when reading "He did not Die at Mayerling" was what did Rudolf's daughter say about it since no one could expect a young child to go along with any fabrication imposed by the highly censored Austrian court?  When she first saw her father on his funeral bed, Erzi insisted it was not her daddy, and she continued to insist he did not die at Meyerling at least up until the time she married.   Imagine that!  Of course the governess said everyone tried to tell little Erzi that was ridiculous but she would not listen.  Who knows?  Maybe it was the hysterical denial of a distressed child, or maybe not?  The governess was generally positive about Stephanie, but did say she seemed totally indifferent to the death of her husband.

Then she discussed something I found highly entertaining -- about "The Martyrdom of an Empress" discussed in Part 1 of this thread.  That book was first published anonymously in 1899, and then by Marguerite Cunliffe-Owen in later editions and she was a newspaper reporter in New York.  I always thought the book contained far too much personal detail of someone too close to and extremely devoted to the Empress to be written by any newspaper reporter who had never even met the Empress.  The royal governess said this book was written by none other than Ida Ferenczy,  appointed as a reader to the Empress in 1864 and who gained more intimacy and influence over the Empress than anyone else (according to Joan Haslip in The Lonely Empress)!    Because of this, many thought adverse influence, the Austrian Court hated Ida Ferenczy and as soon as the Empress died, Ferenczy was kicked out of the palace, so she wrote this book as revenge.  I do remember this book said that there was no way Rudolph could have killed Mary Vetsera because "he loved her more than life itself".   So I'll have to amend my previous conclusion that Rudolph really didn't love Mary Vetsera all that much since this is the best evidence I have seen yet on that subject.  However, I still maintain that for some mysterious reason, Rudolph was still desperate to end their relationship.

The other topic I found quite sad but had already suspected was there were many people, including Stephanie's own sister Princess Louise of Coburg, who were absolutely determined to blow up the marriage between Rudolph and Stephanie.  Every betrayal of the marriage by Rudolph, real or fabricated, was communicated to Stephanie, who chose not to believe her husband's repeated denials.

Finally though I haven't finished the book yet, she did mention some aspects of what happened at Mayerling that I have long suspected but have heretofore never seen in print anywhere else.   Freaky stuff!


The Royal Governess:

http://oi53.tinypic.com/359zv4g.jpg

 :teehee:  You go girl.      :yesss:

An excellent (and affordable) book that thoroughly debunks the suicide theory is "The Mayerling Murders" 1969 by Victor Wolfson.

Here's a nice article about a guide's first-hand account of his relationship with Crown Prince Rudolph:

http://www.vlib.us/brugsch/chapter7.html     (Scroll down a bit)

Excerpts:

QuoteA special feature which I discovered with real pleasure in the character of the Crown Prince, and found confirmed daily, was the simplicity of his manners and expressing no wants, a rare quality of the great ones of the earth.

QuoteIn his conversation the Crown Prince displayed intelligence, keenness and wit. At the same time, he maintained a calm which had to impress even the older man. When he found himself in official company, he suddenly changed his nature as though by magic; his entire bearing showed a stiff formality which otherwise was not at all characteristic of him.

QuoteFollowing a handwritten invitation of my princely patron, I took up my abode for a few weeks in the Prague castle, whereby I had the honor to have daily contact with the noble princely couple. In this way, I had the opportunity to learn to know both in their domestic life and to admire the cordiality of their mutual relations.

I suspect the rumors of domestic discord in the marriage of Rudolph and Stephanie were greatly exaggerated. 

Quote..................because Russian soldiers had disturbed the remains of the young Baroness Maria Vetsera, looking for jewels, her body was ordered exhumed, and the pathologists were unable to find evidence of a bullet wound in her skull. That led to exhuming Rudolph, and he showed no evidence of being shot either. [The pistol recovered at the time of the incident, all six rounds fired, did not belong to the Crown Prince.] Instead, according to recent reports, both died of blunt force trauma, with evidence that they attempted to defend themselves with their arms and hands against the blows which killed them.
http://www.eurohistory.com/mayerling.html

This is the 1st time I've heard that Rudolph was also exhumed & I have no access to the eurohistory.com site.   Was that a misprint or what!?

http://www0.epinions.com/content_246576615044


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UO5KnaF01Qw

drezzle, I just clicked on that link and it comes up as 'not found' and remember I do reside in Europe.   :shrug:

Well Rats!  Thanks for checking Hale.  That's usually a good site from what I've heard.

Here's something about reading faces that can be quite entertaining and it works a lot of the time.   The right side is thought to be the socialized/controlled/acting side and the left side is the real/reacting/uncontrolled side.  It's a little hard to get any reading from a photo taken at an angle, so this is about the only straight-on one I could find for Rudolph:

http://oi56.tinypic.com/1zd9j85.jpg

The dichotomy of the images suggests a strong will and discipline by Rudolph.  

The left side also indicates a little dopey doper maybe, but from best I can tell from other photos, this was not his usual state.  It could be as Princess Catharine Radziwill claims in her "The Austrian Court from Within", that Mary Vetsera's "Oriental Methods" were actually some kind of Love Potion with which she was plying Rudolph to control him.  

Other than morphine and opium, amphetamines had just been synthesized a couple years before in 1887 Germany which had aphrodisiac powers along with inducing occasional psychotic breaks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lz_1w8OHDnU

The marriage of Crown Prince Rudolf and Crown Princess Stéphanie of Austria, Hungary and Bohemia set to Lady GaGa   :o

Rudolph wasn't always Schöner Bube..........sometimes he looked more gawky and geeky than handsome.  The shrewd but caustic observer
Princess Catharine Radziwill in "The Austrian Court from Within"  knew Rudolph during his early 20s and wrote that he was ~~ decidedly ugly but eminently attractive.  She also said that he refused to dance at the various balls given for him before he married Stephanie since he said he didn't want anyone speculating about his romantic life.  

http://oi51.tinypic.com/20k3lgz.jpg

This doesn't sound like the makings of the great libertine Rudolph was suppose to be.  In fact Bombelles was assigned to Rudolph specifically to make him more a "man of the world" since the not so good-looking Rudolph was more thrilled about science and politics than women, and that could be most inconvenient to the camarilla assigned to maintaining the Status Quo of the monarchy.

http://oi53.tinypic.com/34ye1vt.jpg

As Rudolph grew older he became much better looking -- or perhaps he learned better how to be a master of disguise for photos.  Certainly in his later years all I've ever seen in his photos is a smooth cool charm that betrays no emotion.  However, in the photos here taken of the teenage Rudolph, he shows an astonishing level of anger and impulsivity.  I can only describe this combination of above photos as giving the impression of dangerous.   Perhaps this is what his mother saw when she described Rudolph as dangerous, and she was suppose to know him better than anyone else.  Marie Larisch realized way to late, at least by the time she wrote her memoirs 25 yrs after Mayerling that she had been playing with fire.  Additionally, Fritz Judtmann in "Mayerling: The Facts Behind the Legend" wrote that Empress Eugénie had related how Empress Elizabeth also described her son as dangerous and unpredictable.

Given the fact that Marie Larisch was usually in financial straits from gambling (Police reports from Krauss in Das Mayerling Original), she was most likely blackmailing Rudolph for money.   Now the next question is with what (information) was she blackmailing Rudolph?  Interestingly enough, Francis Henry Gribble in his excellent book "The Life of the Emperor Francis Joseph" 1914, comes to a similar conclusion by a different method -- that Mary Vetsera was without a doubt blackmailing Rudolph.   But then Gribble speculates the source for this blackmail was that at sometime when drinking too much, Rudolph must have revealed to Mary Vetsera his plans of some coup for Hungarian Independence and promised to divorce Stephanie so he could marry again and crown Mary Vetsera as Queen of Hungary.  

There's a couple problems I have with Gribble's theory.   1)  By this time, Rudolph had become so accustomed to constant surveillance that he was extraordinarily careful about keeping his secrets private and covering his tracks.  He was paranoid -- and with good reason.  (see "My Life and History" by Berta Szeps).  There was no way he'd reveal such sensitive information to a young girl still under the control, at least in part, of people of questionable character.  2)  The entire Hungarian conspiracy was probably a red herring convenient for a lot of people including the imperial court.  One of the problems with this is that the 2 main proposed conspirators, Stephan (Pista) Count Karóly and Samuel Count Teleki von Szék, were nowhere near Mayerling that night as shown by telegrams (Fritz Judtmann in "Mayerling: The Facts Behind the Legend") and both remained on relatively good terms with the Emperor.  Similarly the suggestion by Larisch as well as certain court officials that it was John Orth who killed Rudolph because of some Hungarian conspiracy was again shown to be in error by Judtmann who displayed the telegram of condolence sent by Orth in his own handwriting from hundreds of miles away from Mayerling the afternoon of the deaths.

So by a process of attrition, with what are we left as fodder for an effective blackmail?  Keep in mind this must somehow involve Mary Vetsera.

Going back many years to when Rudolph was age 12 or 13, why was Heléne Vetsera, a sophisticated and married woman in her mid 20s, in hot pursuit of him -- a rather geeky and not very good looking boy who had other passions?  There's only one answer to that:  she was up to no-good with diabolical cunning.  But had the chickens finally come home to roost?  Remember in an earlier post in part 1 where it was related how in "Francis Joseph and his Court: from the Memoirs of Count Roger de Rességuier", the Emperor was carrying on affairs simultaneously with both Heléne Baltazzi and her younger sister, and each sister was led to believe they were his one and only mistress.   When they found out the truth, the younger sister drowned herself in the Danube and Heléne was quickly married to a newly created baron.  This experience did leave plenty of room for intent and plans of revenge, and what more effective plan than to evolve control over the vulnerable young son of the libertine Emperor?  

Rességuier was a child at the time of Mayerling and his mother was a lady of the court and his father was court chamberlain to Franz Joseph, so he wrote about what he heard.   One of his mother's friends was the unfortunate Countess Anastasia Wimpffen who accompanied Mary Vetsera to Mayerling on her last trip and who also died shortly afterward.  A Rességuier also married one of the sons of Archduchess Marie Valerie, but I'm not sure of the connection -- maybe a sister or cousin?

The success of Heléne Vetsera in seducing the young Rudolph was for all intents and purposes confirmed by Countess Festetics, a lady-in-waiting to the Empress, according to Joan Haslip in "The Lonely Empress".   What leverage!  This increased 100-fold when the "little Vetsera" as Rudolph referred to Mary, was born during this time. 

A profitable point of view must have just fallen into place for both Marie Larisch and Heléne Vetsera when they became close as a result of Larisch's affair with one of Heléne's brothers and also because of their shared and bitter resentment of  the Emperor by one and of the Empress by the other as well as the desperate need by both women for money.  Putting the plan into action involved first the effective sabotage of the marriage between Stephanie and Rudolph, and they were most certainly helped in this aim by many others, probably including unwittingly the Empress herself who thought Rudolph needed some hygienic countess as was the custom in those days.  Stephanie was bombarded with tales of Rudolph's "misdeeds", and he was stressed, distracted and ultimately frustrated in trying to explain himself.  Next the trap was set for his seduction by an experienced coquette. 

In the days before DNA testing or blood tests, paternity was usually assumed to be that of the lawful husband, and that's how it was probably left for many years, and that may have been the truth.  Of course a mother could always be expected to have some authority on claims as to who the natural father really was and if Helene Vetsera chose to use this ace up her sleeve against Rudolph, it would be no less than a political catastrophe to tell the world he was having an affair with his own daughter.  Rudolph was not the kind of man to take this lying down, and now the stage is set for the explosion that finally occurred at Mayerling. 

http://oi51.tinypic.com/2mqrayp.jpg

Just to be clear, it is quite unlikely Rudolph was the father of Mary Vetsera.   However, that is not the point.   What is important is did someone have the motive, means and opportunity to start a whisper campaign that would have destroyed Rudolph politically?  Someone with a reputation for being ambitious and cunning?  The answer to all 3 questions is yes.

1) Motive:   Yes,  Heléne Vetsera had motive for revenge if Franz Joseph had been two-timing her with her sister who subsequently killed herself according to Count Roger de Rességuier who has reasonable credibility.  Furthermore, Heléne Vetsera was in financial trouble according to Marie Larisch in "My Past" and also by evidence of her later financial instability after Mayerling.

2)   Means:  Yes, it was established by at least 2 independent sources that Heléne Vetsera and Rudolph had some kind of romantic liaison, and a child was born during this time.  Neither of Rudolph's parents seemed to mind this interlude.  It was Countess Festetics, lady-in-waiting to the Empress, who disapproved according to "The Lonely Empress".   The Empress also reportedly told Marie Larisch in "My Past" that Heléne Vetsera had been very kind to Rudolph when his thoughts first turned to love, which doesn't sound much like disapproval.

3)  Opportunity:  Yes.  Years later, it was common knowledge that Rudolph was having an affair with the above mentioned child of Heléne Vetsera.

Finally, one has to ask why both the Emperor and Empress were so anxious for Rudolph to end his affair with Mary Vetsera when they winked at or ignored all of his reported affairs with other women?  Does anyone remember any reports of pressure on Rudolph to give up Mitzi Casper for example?  Rudolph's ADC in "The Last Days of the Archduke Rudolph" claimed that the Emperor and Empress visited Rudolph many times reminding him to give up his affair with Mary Vetsera because it gave too much ammunition to his enemies.  Added to this milieu was the well-known newspaper war during the last months of Rudoph's life between him and Wilhelm II about who was really the most debauched (Frederic Morton in "A Nervous Splendor").

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ad8PoqaFK-c&feature=related

Moving on to the mystery of those blasted Taaffe papers -- an exercise in frustration ;)  They were pursued in exhaustive detail by Fritz Judtmann in "Mayerling: The Facts Behind the Legend" who went after them like a blood hound.  His book sounds similar to your Dutch book.  

I'm going to relate what I remember off the top of my memory since I don't want to get too stuck in that quagmire again.  Judtmann followed the official trail of the Taaffe papers from when the Austrian premier Eduard Taaffe died in 1895 and left them to his son, Heinrich Taaffe, until the trail finally went cold in the late 1960s when his grandson, Edward Taaffe, died unexpectedly in Ireland with no direct heirs.  

What I found most interesting about the tale of the Taaffe papers is in how they demonstrate how to do an Austrian cover up, or rather cover-out, in how to confuse and confound by the dissemination of false information in an endless array of miss-clues.  For the first few years the son Heinrich Taaffe seemed to take little notice of the Taaffe papers, and then he started to make official documents as to their location -- to the national archives, to the Vatican, to other places............they all proved false, or some location would have reported only empty envelopes instead of the real papers.  Then he started to report the papers as destroyed, then they would turn up several years later, and then another report of them as having all burned, and then they would show up again in another official report several years later.  My guess is Heinrich Taaffe was probably inundated with 100s of requests for information about the Taaffe papers, hence the constant move and false leads.

Then sometime in the 1910s, he offered to let the granddaughter of  Baron Krauss, Austrian Police Chief at the time of Mayerling, read the papers -- before he planned to burn them all, or so he claimed.  This granddaughter, a Countess Wassilko, was a cousin of Heinrich Taaffe's wife. Countess Wassilko stayed up all night and read them all and since she was not asked to keep them a secret, she made a report to the media -- referred to as the Wassilko Protocol.  At the time it was thought this was Heinrich Taaffe's way of getting around his promise to keep the papers secret -- by letting someone else report on the big secrets.  Judtmann came to the conclusion that what the Krauss granddaughter read were just bogus papers, again designed to mislead and confuse.  After Heinrich Taaffe died, Judtmann talked with his widow who told him that keeping the Taaffe papers secret and intact was the single most important thing in her husband's life and he never even let her read them, so it is unlikely he let anyone else read the real papers.

The Wassilko Protocol is interesting though in that it gives a more plausible scenario even though it's mostly a rehash of already well-known rumors.  The first thing I noticed about her report was that the bodies were discovered upstairs, which agrees with other credible sources but contradicts the claims of both Hoyos and Loschek.  (more on that in some later post)  Then she said a police surgeon did autopsies on both bodies, which disagrees with the official position of one autopsy done on Rudolf by court physicians.  She said these autopsy reports showed Mary Vetsera was killed by a glancing shot to the carotid artery so she bled to death.  Then Rudolf shot himself through the mouth, thereby explaining the large exit wound on the top side of his head.   This suggests to me that the aim of this Wassilko Protocol was to show that Mary Vetsera was killed by accident and then Rudolf killed himself in remorse.  She also reported the police autopsy claimed Mary Vetsera was 3 to 5 months pregnant........but nothing about any botched abortion attempt.

What makes this a more plausible scenario than the official position is that it is a well-known fact that Rudolph was often waving a gun around and was careless with it.   He accidentally shot himself in the hand one time and his mother nursed him back to health over weeks/months (The Lonely Empress).  Another time, Rudolph would have (accidentally) shot his father except that one of the Emperor's aids moved to protect the Emperor at the last second and he was shot in the arm instead.  The Emperor was so angry with Rudolph over this incident that he didn't speak to him for weeks, and it was again left to the Empress to make peace between her husband and son.  

------------------------------

Then in 1929 Edward Taaffe inherited the Taaffe Secrets from his father and from remarks he made in his correspondence with Fritz Judtmann, it can be concluded that the Wasilko Protocol as well as the official version were only more diversions from the truth.  As has been stated so often by others, he wrote to Judtmann:  "It is, however, entirely correct that I said what my father publicly stated before me -- the circumstances of the Mayerling affair were far more frightful than was imagined."

http://oi54.tinypic.com/mjpcav.jpg

..........................a little more on the 3rd Taaffe before getting into the gruesome details.   When the author Fritz Judtmann was corresponding with Taaffe in the mid 1960s, he told him that he still could not tell him anything about the papers although he was sorry about that since Judtmann was the first one he encountered who wanted to solve the mystery for purely scholarly purposes.   Hundreds of other people had begged or tried to trap or trick him into revealing the facts, either from curiosity or in order to make capital.  William Randolph Hearst had even offered him $2.5 million for information on the Taaffe papers.  Edward Taaffe said he had to refuse all because these were not his secrets to reveal, but he was merely keeping them in the capacity of trustee. 

The next question is -- if not for the name and reputation of the Taaffe family, then for whom were these secrets so meticulously kept?  This would seem to be answered by Baron von Mitis who claimed to see at least some version of the Taafee papers.  In his book "The Life of the Crown Prince Rudolph of Habsburg, with letters and documents found among his effects" Mitis states that:

QuoteThe contemporaries of the tragedy of 1889, above all the family of the unfortunate Habsburg Prince, still enjoy the right of all living persons and are entitled to receive from an enlightened age that protection of their persons to which any other citizen of the world lays claim.  It cannot therefore be part of the purpose of the present investigations to illuminate the problem in all directions.

So it would seem at least up until the mid 1960s, the Habsburg family still wanted the events at Mayerling to be kept secret.  By this time both Stephanie and Erzi and Rudolph's sisters were dead, so that leaves maybe some of Rudolph's grandchildren and/or the Empress Zita and her family.  Rudolph's oldest grandchild, Prince Franz Joseph zu Windisch-Grätz, collaborated in the book, "The Mayerling Murders" where Wilhelm II, Otto Bismarck and the Catholic Church were blamed for the deaths at Mayerling.   Empress Zita accused Georges Clemenceau, a prime minister of France, as the one responsible. 

Thus it would seem that one or the other or both still wanted the real events at Mayerling to be kept secret, but they were willing to blame other public figures for these deaths with only circumstantial evidence to back up their claims?  It's difficult to even imagine that what could have happened at Mayerling would be so bad it could interfere with some beatification process a 100 years later! 

Anyway, back to the cause of Rudolph's death.............................The following material came mostly from Bismarck's Reflections & Reminiscences, Mayerling Murders, Secrets of the Hohenzollerns and Diplomatic Mysteries.

Otto Eduard Leopold von Bismarck, Graf von Bismarck-Schönhausen (1815-1898)

Bismarck was ambitious to establish Prussia's leadership within Germany and eliminate the influence of Austria. He secured Austria's support for his successful war against Denmark then, in 1866, went to war against Austria and its allies (the Seven Weeks' War), his victory forcing Austria out of the German Bund and unifying the northern German states into the North German Confederation under his own chancellorship in 1867. He then defeated France, under Napoleon III, in the Franco-Prussian War 1870–71, proclaimed the German Empire in 1871, and annexed Alsace-Lorraine. He tried to secure his work by the Triple Alliance in 1881 with Austria and Italy but ran into difficulties at home with the Roman Catholic Church and the socialist movement and was forced to resign by Wilhelm II on 18 March 1890.

(http://oi56.tinypic.com/zkiwig.jpg)


It all came back to Bismarck, the blood and iron chancellor of the German Empire and the most effective leader since Napoleon.  Bismarck was a man of exceptional abilities -- highly intelligent with an iron will, resolve, pragmatism and persuasiveness but his greatest asset at least in carrying out his goals was a lack of conscience -- he had no scruples.  The Empress Frederick once wrote that Bismarck had no sense of right or wrong.

This was a man who was proud that he was able to cause the Franco-Prussian War of 1870 through forgery -- by rewriting the first Emperor William's peace-bringing dispatch into a crude call for war.  His lack of any moral sense showed in an absence of respect for human life.  People died when they got in his way.  Bismarck once said: "  I have had singular good luck in seeing the people who stood most in my way disappear at just the right time." It was fatal—to be an enemy of Bismarck.

Add to this mix the quick witted and outspoken Crown Prince Rudolph, who unlike his father had never forgiven or forgotten the Austrian defeat at the battle of Königgrätz when he was 8 years old.  Rudolph was a determined enemy of Prussia and Bismarck but at the same time, he showed no aversion to Russia and he paraded his love for France and England in his "Black and Yellow" journal as he called it, perhaps more out of wish to annoy Bismarck than anything else.

In many articles, Rudolph attacked the alliance Austria was forced to make with the new German power.  His bitter words for Bismarck read that when his day should come, it would give way to new European alliances.  He wrote, "The actual alliance is necessary for the moment, and under the circumstances, it was a wise policy to make.  Some day a wiser policy will unmake it".  There is a record of the temper in which Bismarck read this defiance.  The possibility of an alliance between Austria and France once Rudolph came to the throne haunted Bismarck at least 10 years before Rudolph's death according to letters from Bismarck to his son.  The thought of Austria and France in league with Russia and/or the Roman Curia became a nightmare for Bismarck and so he riveted his eagle eye on the Crown Prince Rudolph.

So long as Rudolph lived and might reign, all the life work Bismarck had given to building a strong and expansive German Empire would fail. The victory won in the battle of Königgrätz had to be completed at Mayerling.

Nor was there any first thought of killing.  That would be premature, and Bismarck had the infinite patience of a wild animal stalking its prey and could easily take years to set up his plans if that was necessary.  Bismarck couldn't risk leaving Austria with a martyred national hero.  He would first have
to destroy Rudolph's reputation before having him killed.  

The diverse races of Austria were knit together by one common loyalty to the house of Hapsburg. Vaguely it went out to the old emperor playing his card games in the Hofburg.  There was also some loyalty to the old empress, busy as she was with her ghosts, cigarettes and Heine's poems. But the hope and strength of this loyalty went most of all to Rudolph.  The loyalty of Austria centered on him and laid all their hopes upon him.  He was the people's prince and in return loved his country.  

Like all other great plans, Bismarck's project for dismembering Rudolph was simple -- he sent his Golden Cavalry to the very heart of the old empire.  One could trace their hoof-marks to the very door of the royal palace.  Their noise was heard on the stone flags of the Ballplatz.  (The Ballplatz in Vienna was a little stone square on the side of the foreign office which swarm with unscrupulous, purchasable men, idle aristocrats and " little brothers of the rich".)  Many a time the keen charge of the golden gulden hit its mark.  His mercenaries -- agents, spies and double spies were busy in every province and at every level of society.

Bismarck's organization in Austria was indefinite and powerful, and not all of these hacks were hired with money.  Ambition bought some. Others were sincere patriots, seeing in the downfall of Austria an opportunity for the freedom of a new Hungary or the creation of a new Slavic empire......................................

As Rudolph said to Moritz Szeps when the general distribution of the latter's paper was prohibited:  "We have been driven into darkness...........and it's partly the work of the Jesuits, who are closely connected with all the most influential members of the Imperial family.  I am not allowed to move, and I have grown so distrustful of everybody around me that life is becoming torture.  Soon I won't even trust old Nehammaer (his oldest and most devoted servant)."  What Rudolph didn't realize at this time is that it was Bismarck who had Szep's paper shut down knowing that Rudolph frequently wrote articles for it.

There were weak points to Rudolph's circumstances to which Bismarck could hack away.   I'm not sure how much of Rudolph's folly was real and how much was from Bismarck's treachery, but always a pleasure-loving man who likes to associate with all kinds is vulnerable.  Lord Salisbury wrote to an ambassador saying of the German Chancellor Bismarck:  "He has a vast corrupt influence over the press and can give enormous circulation to slanders."

In addition to a steady campaign of outright slander, here are some examples in Rudolph's life that gave vent to Bismarck's ability to further malign Rudolph:

1--One of the claims was that Rudolph was a liberal in theory only, not in practice.
Of course this statement could be made about anyone born and raised in an imperial family regardless of their social beliefs.

2--Bismarck also had help in the nature of Rudolph's wife.  Due to her unfortunate relationship with her dreadful father, she had a small reservoir of trust for any man, so when the whispers of Rudolph's many dalliances (real or imagined?) were duly reported to her, the domestic bliss to which Rudolph often referred when speaking of his marriage in the early years ended.  Stephanie also likedto make all her thoughts public which was another plus for Bismarck's aims.  Given these circumstances, one cannot even be sure what Stephanie said was true, or if she even knew what the truth was.

3--Another fact of Rudolph's life made full use by Bismarck -- especially in the explanation of his death -- was the taint of the famous Bavarian madness in his blood by which any potential extreme behavior can be attributed to Rudolph at no great surprise to anyone.

By 1888, time was running out for Bismarck.  Talk of revanche by France and more war talk from England made it clear that Germany had to secure its rear before it became involved in another war.   Bismarck had become so paranoid about a possible accession of Rudolph that early one morning in November 1888, he even showed up without warning at Schloss Laxenburg to confirm whether or not the rumor was true that Franz Joseph planned to abdicate in favor of his son.
--------------------------------------------------

Two important figures stand out in the undistinguished crowd recruited by Bismarck's Golden Calvary -- the most notable was Philip of Coburg. This sinister man was a brother-in-law of Rudolph, married to Princess Louise, sister of Stephanie.   Many a time Louise would flee back to Belgium with both eyes not only red from crying, but also black and blue.   Her wretched father always sent her back to her abusive husband.  Finally when she summoned the courage to leave him, she made the mistake of asking him for money.   He gave her forged bills of sale for some of her sister's jewels and as a result, Louise and her lover were charged with criminal theft and she was confined to an insane asylum for 8 years instead of jail, and her lover was thrown into jail.  Philip of Coburg was also close to his brother, Ferdinand of Bulgaria who gave as little thought to beating his wife as he did ordering an assassination, both of which he did with few, if any misgivings.

http://oi52.tinypic.com/ei05lk.jpg

The second figure fastened onto the Crown Prince was Count Josef Hoyos, an accomplished man of the world, a boon companion, and although his rank was high and he had fortune his wants always seemed to outrun his means. He was as ready as any other to take Prussian gold.  A Hoyos even married Bismarck's oldest son a couple years after Mayerling.  

http://oi56.tinypic.com/28i2hra.jpg

Another possibility was Mary Vetsera,—a woman with restless eyes and a bad reputation for being fast and easy in Vienna might also have been within this group, at least initially.  There are separate reports she was also involved romantically with both Philip of Coburg and Josef Hoyos at different times.

Even Mizzi Caspar had a lawyer friend named Florian Meissner who was a double agent in the pay of both Vienna and Berlin.  He reported Rudolph's activities not only to the local Austrian police but to the German Embassy as well.

On his final trip to Mayerling the Crown Prince went alone and many believe that no friend of his or true man ever saw him alive again.  

It is known that Philip of Coburg, Hoyos, and a Baltazzi were at Mayerling along with Vetsera and probably the German agent woman who accompanied her, but there were probably many others at Mayerling by the last night.

Neither the first night nor the next day was the prince seen. Then came the last night and outside, the lackeys drowsed among the horses. It was nearly midnight when they heard shouting within and pistol shots. Having looked in for a moment, they fled away, shrieking. They had seen what it is not well for lowly men to see.

Rudolph received a mortal wound from the titanic force of a champagne bottle crashing into his brain.    They carried him to an upstairs bedroom where he survived unconscious for many hours.  Many others died that night -- possibly from getting in the line of fire or to eliminate witnesses.

That was all.  Dawn arrived and the court quickly cast a veil of royal lies over the deaths.  Bismarck telegraphed his sympathy.

But what did Philip of Coburg, Count Hoyos and Loschek tell the Emperor, and why was the court willing to accept the obvious inconsistencies and discrepancies in their stories?

I doubt the Habsburg family knew about the Bismarck explanation of Rudolph's death.  Naturally nobody at Mayerling would have wanted to tell them this.  However, I think the Habsburg family finally figured it out since the above Bismarck version is basically the same as that described in "The Mayerling Murders" on which Rudolph's oldest grandchild, Prince Franz Joseph of Windisch-Graetz (1904-1981) collaborated.

Another reason I think the Habsburgs didn't know about this was because too many of them said the "truth" was far worse than the official version of suicide, and a political assassination would not have been worse than a deranged man killing his mistress and then himself. 

Also remember the Taaffe papers were kept secret to protect the Habsburg family according to von Mitis/Taaffe and not to protect the Bismarck family or anyone else.

----------------------------------

I doubt Wilhelm II had anything to do with Rudolph's death.  There was a report of Wilhelm's reaction to Rudolph's death in one of his bios -- and it described him as agitated/upset/confused for hours.   He couldn't understand how it could have happened. 

But remember how the private secretary in "The Last Days of the Archduke Rudolph" said how his friend and double agent Koinoff had proof that Wilhelm II and the Papal Nuncio Galimberti were plotting Rudolph's death (he'd seen a letter he wasn't suppose to see, and also the forgeries of Rudolph's handwriting).  He told Rudolph about it, who just laughed it off.  Wilhelm II probably deliberately put out false rumors of an assassination plot against Rudolph just to annoy him as part of their little personal war games they'd been playing with each other for sometime.  Galimberti was so disconcerted by Rudolph's death that he started his own one-man investigation since he was convinced it was no suicide. 

Wilhelm was young at the time too -- age 30 -- and he was brash and confident enough to think he could beat Rudolph fair and square in public instead.  No, the death of Rudolph as it was done was the end play of an old man with far more attention to detail and experience than that of Wilhelm II.

Bismarck was dismissed by Wilhelm II a little over a year after Mayerling, in March 1890.  Bismarck said he had no idea when Wilhelm first got the idea he wanted to be rid of him, but Bismarck first became aware of it when Wilhelm II accused him of making important decisions on his own behind his back.

http://oi54.tinypic.com/34q2pes.jpg

Only a coincidence might be that Wilhelm II dismissed Bismarck on Mar 19, 1890 which would have been Mary Vetsera's 19th birthday.   This takes on rich possibilites considering that Lady Paget in "Embassies of Other Days" wrote that one of the reasons for the bad blood between Rudolph and Wilhelm II was that they were fighting over the same woman.   (http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-shocked028.gif)

-------------------------------------------------

What did Prince Philipp of Coburg, Count Hoyos et.al  tell the Imperial Family about the deaths?  First Hoyos told them that Mary Vetsera had probably poisoned Rudolph, so the Imperial Court decided on an explanation of heart failure/apoplexy as a cause.  Then after the "truth" was more known, Hoyos generously offered to say that he accidentally shot Rudolph in a hunting accident and he was willing to take the blame and leave Austria.  I'm not sure since the court was going to do a cover up anyway, why they just didn't go with one of those possibilities.  The answer is probably along the line of that would have left Rudolph's reputation intact, and that was not the goal.  At some point the Emperor heard the "true story" of what happened at Mayerling -- something that was more awful than anyone could imagine and much worse than the secondary cover up of suicide.

There are several hints available about what this "awful truth" was.  The first comes from Philipp of Coburg's wife, Louise.   They were still married at the time, so it's reasonable to assume she might have heard something about her husband's version although Philipp of Coburg himself never made any statement other than that it was too horrible to discuss.

Here's an excerpt from a 1910 NYT article on what she said happened:

QuoteImagine the scene of a shooting-box.  After a day of pleasure in the open air, five or six couples are supping by candle light, great lords and beautiful girls.  And the heady wines of Austria and of France have flowed too freely.  The supper has reached the point when it is about to turn into an orgy.  He who is visibly the master of the house is seated opposite a splendid girl.  Suddenly he says:  "It is La Vetsera who has the most beautiful neck!"  Thereupon, they all rise in anger, the girls being jealous and the grands seigneurs excited.

"What do you know about it?" one cries.  "Is it not because La Vetsera is the mistress of an archduke?"  another shouts. 

But he, Lord of them all, does not tolerate contradiction, and besides, his brain is heated with the wine that he has drunk.  He looks imperiously at his beautiful mistress, who is seated opposite him, and gives her this order:  "Show them your neck!"   She cries, "Rudolph, you are mad!  mad!"

The archduke has always been eccentric and now he can no longer control himself.  He leans across the table and tears the corsage down. 

The young woman, thus insulted, also loses her head.  She takes up her glass which is half full, and flings it across the table at the face of her insulter.  The glass is broken and a little blood flows.  The wounded man no longer knows where his is.  He fancies himself on a battlefield, or fighting a duel.  Automatically, he puts his hand to a pocket of his tunic.  He extends his arm over the tablecloth, fires, and La Vetsera falls. 

Who would dare to put the second act of the drama on the stage -- this tumult, this tablecloth swept away, these candles which are being overturned, these girls who rush forward to support a dying woman, these intoxicated revelers who dash upon this unconscious murderer in whom they no longer see anything but a murderer, until the last blow, dealt with a candlestick, crashes into the base of the skull?

Who dealt this blow, this supreme blow, of which the Archduke Rudolf of Austria died?  Everyone and nobody.  The chastisement of the murderer was anonymous, like the whole of the cabaret scene. 

http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=9805E6D61730E233A25753C3A9679C946196D6CF

This story covers many of the basics -- it includes the eccentric and mad genes and it sullies the reputation of no one but Rudolph.  It's also believable in that it covers a vicious custom practiced at that time by the Hungarian and Austrian aristocracy which was to disgrace ones mistress in front of boon companions and it is worse than a consensual suicide-love-murder.  However, even this is probably a sanitized version of the real "truth"  told to the Emperor since it doesn't explain the broken down door to the main first floor bedroom, and it doesn't explain the other people who died at Mayerling that night.

It is more likely that Philipp of Coburg and Josel Hoyos told the Emperor something like this:  ~~ Rudolph suddenly without any obvious reason turned stark raving mad and started on a murdering rampage, shooting people at random and kicking down the bedroom door to find people hiding there (similar to that of Prince Dipendra to give it a modern context).   Nobody wanted to hurt Rudolph but someone had to stop him and so grabbed the nearest heavy object, a champagne bottle, and hit him over the head -- but with no intent to kill him~~.   

This explains many of the unexplained events around Mayerling -- for example, why the Emperor told the Grand Duke of Tuscany that Rudolph's death was an accident.   It also explains why the Emperor said:  "My son died like a tailor".  The man who had tried to assassinate Franz Joseph many years before was a tailor and that left a traumatic memory for the Emperor.   So he really meant:  "My son died like an assassin".   

(http://www.smiley-faces.org/smiley-faces/smiley-face-whistle-2.gif)

The only thing it doesn't give is a believable motive.

Search - Getty Images : UNS: Unique Romanov Family Pictures Coloured By Tsar's Daughters (http://www.gettyimages.com/Search/Search.aspx?EventId=185034356&EditorialProduct=Royalty)

QuoteElisabeth Amalie Eugenie von Wittelsbach was born on December 24, 1837 in Munich, second daughter of Duke Max in Bavaria and his wife Ludovika (whose siblings included King Ludwig I of Bavaria, Queen Marie of Saxony, Queen Amalie of Saxony, Queen Elise of Prussia, and Sophie, mother of Emperor Franz Joseph of Austria.) She grew up in Munich and at Possenhofen, on Starnbergersee (Lake Starnberg), which she loved. As a child, Sisi was never considered "special"--not particularly bright or pretty--and was very shy among strangers. She shared her father's love of the circus, the "lower classes", Elisabeth during her engagement long walks, horseback riding, and the zither. In 1853, her mother Ludovika and aunt Sophie decided that Sisi's elder sister Helene would marry Emperor Franz Joseph; Ludovika, Helene, and Sisi joined Sophie and her sons in Bad Ischl in order for the two cousins to get acquainted. Franz Joseph, however, fell in love at first sight with fifteen-year-old Sisi instead, and two days later (on August 18, his 23rd birthday) had his mother ask if Elisabeth would marry him. Less than a year afterwards, on 24 April 1854, at the age of sixteen and a quarter, Elisabeth became Empress of Austria, Queen of Hungary and Bohemia, etc, etc, etc.

Sophie never cared for Elisabeth, and her attempts to train Sisi to become a proper Empress did not take into account the girl's own wishes and needs. Franz Joseph was deeply devoted to his mother, and only rarely supported his wife against her. The couple's first two children, Sophie (born in 1855, and named by her grandmother without Sisi's being consulted) and Gisela (born in 1856), were installed in a nursery near Sophie's apartments, and raised by attendants chosen by--and loyal to--their grandmother (as were those who had been chosen to attend Elisabeth upon her arrival in Vienna); Sisi had little power over their upbringing, and little contact with the girls at all. She did insist that the children accompany her and Franz Joseph on a state visit to Hungary in 1857, during which they became ill and little Sophie died--a misfortune which became used as proof that the young Empress was unfit to be a mother.

Read more:
Empress Elisabeth of Austria: Bio (http://eljen.net/elisabeth/sisibio.html)

Sissi (1953)
Sissi (1953) - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHlYi3tD0Pw)

There's an European animation series based on the life of Empress Elisabeth. It's called "Princess Sissi". I only posted 5 episodes here and they are in English. You can watch more episodes of the series  on SuperConopida's channel.

Season 1 Episode 1 - Sissi Gets Her Way
Princess Sissi - Season 1 Episode 1 - Sissi Gets Her Way - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SSG2sooyB3M)

Princess Sissi - Season 1 Episode 2 - The Unexpected Guests
Princess Sissi - Season 1 Episode 2 - The Unexpected Guests - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=arT4Z6P739Q)

Princess Sissi - Season 1 Episode 3 - An Imperial Surprise
Princess Sissi - Season 1 Episode 3 - An Imperial Surprise - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8usZ50GB3yk)

Princess Sissi - Season 1 Episode 4 - Possi's Little Thief
Princess Sissi - Season 1 Episode 4 - Possi's Little Thief - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gqs_LRfg3mA)

Princess Sissi - Season 1 Episode 5 - Helena The Terrible
Princess Sissi - Season 1 Episode 5 - Helena The Terrible - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IV0jDE_jV5M)

In Long to Reign?, A. W. Purdue wrote:     
Hauntingly beautiful, Empress Elisabeth captivated her Emperor but could not abide the austere formality of the Habsburg court.

Yes, I'm afraid Elizabeth was neurotic and totally unsuited to be Empress of Austria. Her whole adult life seemed to be a cycle of running away from her obligations. She should have married a minor German princeling. If he had money she could have hunted and travelled to her heart's content. It would probably have made him unhappy but at least it wouldn't have affected a European empire.

Elisabeth of Bavaria, Empress of Austria | Unofficial Royalty (http://www.unofficialroyalty.com/elisabeth-of-bavaria-empress-of-austria/)

QuoteElisabeth Amalie Eugenie, Duchess in Bavaria, known as Sisi, was born on December 24, 1837 at Herzog-Max-Palais (Duke Max Palace) in Munich, Bavaria (now in Germany). Today the palace is the Munich headquarters of the Deutsche Bundesbank, formerly the State Central Bank of Bavaria, and there is a plaque on the building commemorating Sisi's birth.

QuoteEmpress Sisi

Her Royal Highness Duchess Elisabeth Amalie Eugenie was born on Christmas eve on 24 December 1837. She grew up at Possenhofen Castle on the shore of Lake Starnberg in Bavaria, Germany. The family called her Sisi.

Her father was  Maximillian, Duke in Bavaria ( since there could only be one Duke of Bavaria all the other members of the Wittelsbach family used the title Duke in Bavaria).

Read more:
Empress Sisi (http://www.palaces-of-europe.com/empress-sisi.html)

One of the men responsible for Crown Prince Rudolf's education came to Empress Elisabeth begging her for assistance. The gentleman feared that the military training of the delicate Crown Prince was endangering Archduke Rudolf's life.   
The Empress presented her husband with a written ultimatum: either she would be in charge of everything concerning the children until their majority or she would leave him. Franz Joseph gave in.

                           Empress Elisabeth: Paintings Galore   
                             Empress Elisabeth Of Austria - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPBTd2iCveM)

QuoteSissi (1953)

Sissi (1953) - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pHlYi3tD0Pw)

[mod]I merged two different threads about Empress Sissi together.[/mod] 

                         Dames and Ladies of Empress Elisabeth   
                          Dames and Ladies of the Empress Elisabeth of Austria, Sissi - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BTvwfsUuECg)

The baptism ceremony of Emperor Napoleon I's son, Napoleon François was held on June 9, 1811 in Paris' Notre-Dame Cathedral.   
At the baptism ceremony the Emperor took the infant from the arms of Empress Marie Louise and raised him up twice to the public.

Emperor Wilhelm II of Germany founded the Kaiser Wilhelm Society for the Encouragement of Scientific Research. He surprised his Uncle Edward VII by pontificating on the relative merits of petrol, diesel, and potato spirit as propellants for motor cars while staying at Sandringham.

Yes, stated by one of the possibly most self absorbed women of the last two hundred years, Sisi. Her husband, who adored her and put up with her wanderings must have been so flattered.

Elisabeth and Franz Joseph were married in St. Augustine's Church in Vienna.   
Imperial weddings were traditionally held in that church near the Viennese imperial court.

---

Double post auto-merged: November 18, 2016, 11:04:29 PM

---

When Adolf Hitler was appointed German chancellor in 1933, the Kaiser Wilhelm Society was the most important institution in German science.

When Elisabeth's father, Duke Maximilian visited the peasants of his neighborhood, he often would play on his zither and be accompanied by Elisabeth.

Who were the godparents of Napoleon II?

Princess Alexandra Amalie of Bavaria (1826-1875) was the daughter of King Ludwig I and Queen Therese of Bavaria.   
In 1852 Alexandra began a literary career. Her first book of stories was entitled Weithnachtrosen (Christmas roses).       
In 1853 she published Souvenirs, pensées et essais (Memories, thoughts and essays).

As young as 22, Empress Elisabeth regularly complained of being surrounded by her enemies.         
I find this upsetting for Elisabeth. Her father-in-law and mother-in-law were already related to her before she married Franz Joseph. Archduke Francis Charles and Archduchess Sophie were her uncle and aunt.

Quote from: Curryong on November 16, 2016, 12:02:07 AM
Yes, stated by one of the possibly most self absorbed women of the last two hundred years, Sisi. Her husband, who adored her and put up with her wanderings must have been so flattered.

well he adored her but he wasn't exacty a model husband.  I don't like her, and he had a lto to put up with, but he was not a great ruler or a wonderful husband

In the 1850s, Prince Louis Lucien Bonaparte asked King Ludwig I for Alexandra's hand in marriage. Louis Lucien was divorced from his wife. Ludwig I refused. He used Alexandra's delicate health as an excuse.

Alexandra certainly had delicate mental health, like several other members of the Wittelsbach family. She devoted herself to a literary career, but wore nothing but white clothing, had a fixation with cleanliness and suffered under the delusion that she had swallowed a glass piano.

How young was Princess Alexandra when she was to have swallowed the glass piano?

Alexandra was 23 when she first suffered the delusion, and said she had swallowed it as a child.

The reign of King Louis (1638-1715) lasted for 72 years. He reigned from 1643 to 1715.   
Facts You Didn't Know About King Louis XIV of France - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFUQ85wUeCQ)

At Versailles Louis XIV formalized strict etiquette that the court had to follow if they wished to remain there. The levee ceremony was one of the events.

Napoleon II was born on March 20, 1811. On the same day he was ondoyed (a French ceremony which is considered a preliminary, brief baptism) by Joseph Fesch with the name of Napoleon Francois Charles Joseph.

Empress Elisabeth took up fencing in her fifties.    :duel: :duel: :duel: :duel:

King Louis XIV took dancing lessons for twenty years daily.   
Ballet Evolved - At the court of Louis XIV - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LDtpDlCf94g)

When Empress Elisabeth gave birth to a girl in March 1855, her daughter was named Sophie by Archduchess Sophie for Archduchess Sophie. Did not Elisabeth have a say in the naming of her daughter?

Empress Elisabeth bristled at anyone actually looking at her. She hid her face behind a fan or parasol.

Marie Feodorovna (1847-1928) had already received lessons in Russian in Copenhagen, Denmark before leaving for Russia. Whenever she wrote a letter to Alexander (III), she would begin the first paragraph or two in Russian.

When Dowager Empress Marie Feodorovna begged her son to send Alexandra away so she could no longer interfere with political affairs, Nicholas abruptly dismissed his mother. Marie subsequently fled to Kiev.

Did Empress Elisabeth have anyone to help her learn about imperial protocol at the Austrian court? Did she confide to her mother about this?

During her first trip to Hungary with her husband, Empress Elisabeth fell in love with this nation that exhibited so much independence. She learned the Hungarian language.   
:cloud9: :cloud9: :cloud9: :cloud9: :cloud9: :cloud9: :cloud9: :cloud9: :cloud9: :cloud9: :cloud9: :cloud9:

The marriage of King Louis XIV of France and Maria Theresa of Spain was contracted in 1660. The diplomats sought to include a renunciation clause that would deprive Maria Theresa and her children of any rights to the Spanish succession.

King Louis XIV meeting his uncle King Philip IV of Spain concerning his intended marriage to Infanta Maria Theresa.   
King Louis XIV of France meeting Philip IV of Spain concerning his... News Photo | Getty Images (http://www.gettyimages.com/license/2636203)

King Louis XIV played billards.   
game, billard, King Louis XIV of France playing billard, copper Stock Photo: 58520939 - Alamy (http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-game-billard-king-louis-xiv-of-france-playing-billard-copper-engraving-58520939.html)

Baptism of the Dauphin, Louis XIV's son on March 24, 1668.   
Joseph Christophe Baptism of the Dauphin, Louis XIV's Son, in the... News Photo | Getty Images (http://www.gettyimages.com/license/850991204)

Empress Elisabeth wrote poetry. Did she ever try to get it published?

Louis Philippe (1773-1850) was King of the French from 1830 to 1848.   
The Chamber of Deputies assigned Louis Philippe, The Duke of Orleans to the French throne on August 7, 1830.   
http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-francois-joseph-heim-the-chamber-of-deputies-assigns-the-duke-of-orlans-165743454.html

A day in the life of Louis XIV   
A day in the life of Louis XIV | Palace of Versailles (http://en.chateauversailles.fr/discover/history/key-dates/day-life-louis-xiv)

Empress Elisabeth was permitted to mingle with only a few families and she had almost no friends.   
Franz Joseph rebuffed her efforts to offer advice.

In 1910 Empress Marie with Grand Duchess Xenia and Princess Nikita on the Islands of Petrograd.   
Empress Marie Feodorovna , wife of the Tsar of Russia, with Prince... News Photo | Getty Images (http://www.gettyimages.com/license/3254644)

The added color is a nice feature. It is pleasant to see the various photographs of the Imperial sisters and their brother Alexis.

King Louis XIV stated: "Laws are the sovereigns of sovereign."

King Louis XIV dedicated Puget's statue of Milo of Crotona in the Gardens at Versailles.   
King Louis XIV 1638-1715 Dedicating Pugets Milo of Crotona in the Stock Photo: 96083265 - Alamy (http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-king-klouis-xiv-1638-1715-dedicating-pugets-milo-of-crotona-in-the-96083265.html)

From 1920 Dowager Empress Marie Feodorovna spent most of her time in her villa. Her brother Prince Valdemar visited her almost every day.

The first photo of Princess Dagmar that Grand Duke Nicholas Alexandrovich received was when Dagmar was twelve years old.

Empress Elisabeth was permitted to see the children only when Archduchess Sophie gave permission.

The last Christmas tree at Gatchina Palace, the home of Empress Marie Feodorovna in 1916   
CHRISTMAS TREE OF THE IMPERIAL FAMILY OF RUSSIA | Russian | Pinterest | Imperial russia, Christmas and Russia (http://www.pinterest.com/pin/314196511483852402)     
 

Albert (1828-1902) was a German King of Saxony. He reigned from 1873 to 1902. He was the son of King John and Queen Amalie Auguste of Saxony.   
Albert served as a captain in the First War of Schleswig against Denmark in 1849.   
During his reign, King Albert took little public part in politics.

Empress Elisabeth donated to help a Protestant congregation to build a steeple.  :thanks: :thanks: :thanks:

Born in 1773 as the son of Louis Philippe II, Duke of Orleans, Louis Philippe was still young when the French Revolution began.       
Louis Philippe's reign became known as the July Monarchy. He proclaimed himself "King of the French" rather than "King of France".

On September 7, 1673, by issuance of letters patent, King Louis XIV formally legitimized his children by Athenais de Montespan.   

Empress Elisabeth liked to spend time in the Villa Achilleion on the island of Corfu. She had the Louis XIV secretaire transferred there from the Children's Room of Schonbrunn Palace.

King Louis Philippe rode through the gates of Versailles on horseback to inaugurate the opening of its history and art.   
French King Louis-Philippe riding through the gates of Versailles on Stock Photo: 83363893 - Alamy (http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-french-king-louis-philippe-riding-through-the-gates-of-versailles-83363893.html)

In October 1793 Louis Philippe was appointed a teacher of geography, history, and mathematics at a boys' boarding school. He taught under the name Monsieur Chabos.

Empress Marie Feodorovna, during the St. Petersburg cholera epidemic, visited hospitals and spent time with the sick and the wounded. She was also appointed President of the Russian Red Cross.

King Louis XIV ordered that table knives have rounded, not pointed ends, to stop them being used as daggers during mealtime arguments.

In 1870, Princess Alexandra produced Das Kinderheater (The children's theatre), a German translation of some French children's plays from Arnaud Berquin's L'ami des enfants.

In 1808 Louis Philippe proposed to Princess Elizabeth, the daughter of King George III of England, but though the Princess was taken with the dashing Frenchman she refused because of the opposition of her parents to marrying a Catholic.

Empress Marie Feodorovna took the air on her estate in Petrograd in 1885.   
Russian Royals taking the air on the Empress's estate in Petrograd... News Photo - Getty Images (http://www.gettyimages.com/license/3253340)

One reads such conflicting stories sometimes. In one biography Marie Feodorovna comes across as being jealous of Alexandra becoming the Tsarina, being mean to her even to the point where she would not hand over jewels that the Tsarina was now supposed to have. But you also hear how close she was to her grandchildren and how she wouldn't leave on the ship George V sent to rescue her until everyone else who had escaped to the Crimea was on board. And then in the end she lost almost everyone...how sad for someone in her waning years to experience such tragedy.

Hardly surprising.  She was like a lot of mother's in law, didn't get on with her daughter in law... and considering how dreadful Alix was as Czarina she had a point.  But it didn't mean she did not love her children and grandchildren and Im sure the massacre of her son, his wife and their children must have destroyred her peace in Old age...

Yes, though the precedence of the Russian Court which placed the Dowager above the reigning Tsarina didn't help. Of course, Marie and Alix had very different personalities, little in common at all. And later, like the rest of the Romanovs, Marie was appalled by the influence Radputin had over the Tsarina (even if it was primarily due to his being able to soothe Alexi when he was suffering with his haemophilia.)

I have read that for a very long time after the War ended Marie convinced herself that Nicholas and his family were still alive but being kept somewhere within Russia, and her daughter implied that she never really admitted to herself or others that they had been killed, even when evidence was forthcoming in the mid 1920s.

Quote from: Curryong on September 16, 2019, 07:19:34 AM
Yes, though the precedence of the Russian Court which placed the Dowager above the reigning Tsarina didn't help. Of course, Marie and Alix had very different personalities, little in common at all. And later, like the rest of the Romanovs, Marie was appalled by the influence Radputin had over the Tsarina (even if it was primarily due to his being able to soothe Alexi when he was suffering with his haemophilia.)

I have read that for a very long time after the War ended Marie convinced herself that Nicholas and his family were still alive but being kept somewhere within Russia, and her daughter implied that she never really admitted to herself or others that they had been killed, even when evidence was forthcoming in the mid 1920s.

Poor Minny. I don't think she was an angel but it was a dreadful thing and I suppose perhaps the only way she could cope was to try and believe that they were sill alive.. perhaps ill treated but still alive.
And really Alix was inexcusably stupid..  Of course Alexis's illness was a tragedy.. but if she hadn't inssisted on the RIF sticking with the autocracy and stiffening Nicky's resolve to be an absolute ruler, it might not have been so terrible.  with a move TOwards a consitutional monarchy, and possibly leaving out her family as heirs..(because of the haemophilia problem) the monarchy might have been saved..and she and her children and Nicky might have lived

I tend to believe that the autocracy of the Tsar's really should have been tackled by them themselves much earlier in the century, around the time of the Decembrists, to make any sort of difference. However none of the subsequent Tsars possessed the foresight to change, except perhaps for the 'Liberator' Alexander II. And so the chance passed.

I do think the Romanovs were a doomed dynasty from the mid century on, and anything Nicholas II could have done in the way of democratising the system would have been too little too late, not that he ever showed any intentions of doing so voluntarily, anyway.

I do agree though that both Nicholas and Alexandra were absolute disasters as ruler and consort and Alix's constant bolstering her husband up in his stubbornness and autocracy in order to preserve the position of 'Baby', as she called Alexi, was just blind stupidity.

Quote from: Curryong on September 16, 2019, 10:59:15 AM
I tend to believe that the autocracy of the Tsar's really should have been tackled by them themselves much earlier in the century, around the time of the Decembrists, to make any sort of difference. However none of the subsequent Tsars possessed the foresight to change, except perhaps for the 'Liberator' Alexander II. And so the chance passed.

I do think the Romanovs were a doomed dynasty from the mid century on, and anything Nicholas II could have done in the way of democratising the system would have been too little too late, not that he ever showed any intentions of doing so voluntarily, anyway.

I

Do you think it was so hopeless?  The People still had some loyalty to their "Litlte Father" - and after all it was only 50 years sicne they had ended what was virtually Slavery - so tackling autocratic rule as well was a big undertaking.  But I think there wasn't a hoep in Hell that Nicky would do it.. even without Alexandra pushing him to Maintain the autocracy.  and poor little "Baby".  What a burden for him.  I think if they had made some changes, the best solution woud be for Nicky to pass on his own family as heirs and let the Position of Tsar go to one of his brothers or cousins.

If you look at the domestic lives of both Alexander II and his son Alexander III they and their families lived almost as prisoners in their gorgeous palaces. They had the most incredible security whenever they went out of their homes, and even then both men survived at least three attempted assassinations. (Alexander II was of course blown up by a bomb.) A bomb exploded actually inside the dining room of their St Petersburg residence in the 1880s and it was only that there had been some delay that they had not all been sitting down to dinner. There was a bomb on the Railway line that wrecked the Royal Train and it was only Alexander III's  superhuman strength in lifting the carriage up that allowed his wife and children to escape.

Nihilists were active from the 1840s onwards and caused the Secret Police to be substantially increased. Stalin's older brother was one of those hanged for revolutionary activity. So yes, I do think they were a doomed dynasty for generations before it all actually fell.

It wasn't so much the rural peasants, (who did believe in the Tsar as Little Father, though it's notable that during the celebrations of Nicholas's twentieth anniversary on the throne few came to cheer him and his family when they went on tour.) It was the revolutionary ideas that spread among the wretched urban workers that spurred the unrest of the last thirty to forty years of the 19th century within Russia.

If there had been some hope of reform in earlier reigns, the setting up of some sort of parliamentary system in mid century, even then the dynasty might have escaped its fate, but it's a big 'might' IMO.

Quote from: Curryong on September 16, 2019, 12:18:57 PM
If you look at the domestic lives of both Alexander II and his son Alexander III they and their families lived almost as prisoners in their gorgeous palaces. They had the most incredible security whenever they went out of their homes, and even then both men survived at least three attempted assassinations. (Alexander II was of course blown up by a bomb.) A bomb exploded actually inside the dining room of their St Petersburg residence in the 1880s and it was only that there had been some delay that they had not all been sitting down to dinner. There was a bomb on the Railway line that wrecked the Royal Train and it was only Alexander III's  superhuman strength in lifting the carriage up that allowed his wife and children to escape.

Nihilists were active from the 1840s onwards and caused the Secret Police to be substantially increased. Stalin's older brother was one of those hanged for revolutionary activity. So yes, I do think they were a doomed dynasty for generations before it all actually fell.

It wasn't so much the rural peasants, (who did believe in the Tsar as Little Father, though it's notable that during the celebrations of Nicholas's twentieth anniversary on the throne few came to cheer him and his family when they went on tour.) It was the revolutionary ideas that spread among the wretched urban workers that spurred the unrest of the last thirty to forty years of the 19th century within Russia.

If there had been some hope of reform in earlier reigns, the setting up of some sort of parliamentary system in mid century, even then the dynasty might have escaped its fate, but it's a big 'might' IMO.

I didn't realise that they were quite suc prisoners.  However the Nihilists etc were still only probably a tiny minority.. I suppose that yes by the time of World War I, things were going os badly and the urban working classes had lost any loyalty they might have had to the old regime and there wasn't much of a midle class?

In Nicholas and Alexandra, Robert K. Massie wrote: To Marie, Alexandra was still an awkward young German girl, only recently arrived in Russia, with no knowledge or background in affairs of state.

Marie didn't like Alix very much We do know Alix was socially awkward and aloof and that characteristic remained.

However,  I don't know where she was supposed to have gained knowledge or background in affairs of state or from whom. Hesse and by Rhine was quite liberal but it was one of those pocket sized states in the old Germany which was run almost as a fiefdom, with a strong personal bond between ruler and people who saw a lot of each other. Denmark, where Marie originated, was like that too. Russia wasn't like that at all.

Louis, Alix's father, wasn't a politically aware man but one who liked army life, and Hesse had chosen the wrong side in the Prussian-Austrian war, resulting in a loss of territory. Probably if her mother Alice had been around for her adulthood there might have been more political discourse around the dinner table but in general Hesse wasn't the place to absorb the affairs of state and nations.

Plus, to be fair, most women at that time, unless they were heirs to kingdoms or were vitally interested in politics, didn't take lessons in statecraft.  Marie didn't and Alix didn't. And I don't know how much Alexander III had confided in his wife regarding affairs of State. She had been lucky in that her father in law lived for years after she had married the Tsarovich Alex and she grew to know something of Rusdian life gradually. (Vicky in Prussia was an exception in knowledge of politics. She was also exceptional in that she and Fritz had each other's entire confidence.)

Alix and Nicky also implicitly trusted each other. However, neither were experienced, (Tsar Alexander III hadn't taught Nicky much at all and died almost immediately before their wedding)  neither really knew the true state of affairs in Russia, and unfortunately for them and for their dynasty, Alix's advice often made a bad situation worse, as for instance in encouraging Nicky to mistrust certain ministers.

A lace fan that used to belong to Empress Elisabeth of Austria     
A Museum Is Devoted To Empress Sissi In Hofburg Palace. On May 1,... News Photo - Getty Images (http://www.gettyimages.com/license/109120440)

This 1901 menu from King Albert of Saxony is from the pre-Christmas celebrations at the royal palace in the capital of Dresden.   
king albert of saxony - Christmas dinner - 1901 (http://www.royal-menus.com/royal-menu---king-of-saxony)

A thread dedicated to the history of former monarchies in Europe: France, Germany, Prussia, Russia, etc..

Charles V was the son of King John II of France. Charles was left with the task of governing France while his father was a prisoner in England. He also had to raise an enormous ransom for John II's release at a time when France was ravaged by both the Hundred Years' War and the Black Death.

Peter I was the Tsar of Russia. He reigned from 1682 to 1721.   
During his reign Peter created a strong navy. He secularized schools. He administered greater control over the Orthodox Church. He introduced the Julian calendar.   
Did Peter deserve the title of Peter the Great?

In the War of the Spanish Succession, King Louis XIV did not really want to extend his rule to include Spain, but to ensure the throne for his grandson Philip, Duke of Anjou, the grandnephew and heir to the late, childless Charles II of Spain.

Louis Philippe I as the leader of the Orleanist party arriving in England. He fled to England where he lived out his life in exile.     
Louis Philippe I (1773 ? 1850), King of the French from 1830 to 1848 Stock Photo: 117561388 - Alamy (http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-louis-philippe-i-1773-1850-king-of-the-french-from-1830-to-1848-as-117561388.html)

Jean-Baptiste, Marquis de Seignelay, French statesman with King Louis XIV at Versailles     
JEAN-BAPTISTE French statesman, Marquis de Seignelay, with King Stock Photo: 105319116 - Alamy (http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-jean-baptiste-french-statesman-marquise-de-seignelay-with-king-louis-105319116.html)

After her coronation in 1883, Marie Feodorovna with Tsar Alexander III lived in Gatchina Palace. Marie did not like it because it was large. However, it was easier to be guarded.

Quote from: Curryong on September 20, 2019, 02:03:30 AM

Louis, Alix's father, wasn't a politically aware man but one who liked army life, and Hesse had chosen the wrong side in the Prussian-Austrian war, resulting in a loss of territory. Probably if her mother Alice had been around for her adulthood there might have been more political discourse around the dinner table but in general Hesse wasn't the place to absorb the affairs of state and nations.

Plus, to be fair, most women at that time, unless they were heirs to kingdoms or were vitally interested in politics, didn't take lessons in statecraft.  Marie didn't and Alix didn't. And I don't know how much Alexander III had confided in his wife regarding affairs of State. She had been lucky in that her father in law lived for years after she had married the Tsarovich Alex and she grew to know something of Rusdian life gradually. (Vicky in Prussia was an exception in knowledge of politics. She was also exceptional in that she and Fritz had each other's entire confidence.)

Alix and Nicky also implicitly trusted each other. However, neither were experienced, (Tsar Alexander III hadn't taught Nicky much at all and died almost immediately before their wedding)  neither really knew the true state of affairs in Russia, and unfortunately for them and for their dynasty, Alix's advice often made a bad situation worse, as for instance in encouraging Nicky to mistrust certain ministers.

Alice (Alix's mother) was an intelligent woman who took an interest in social and Politcal issue.  Possibly if she'd lived Alix would have been given a broader persepetcive on life and politics and not developed that impassioned attachment ot "autocracy".  But then again, maybe not. I think that Alix was a very silly stubborn woman and might have gone that way regardless of her mother's influence.   ANd Nicky was no genius and had not been educated in statecraft at all by his father.  He would likely have been a lot happier to be a consitututional monarch leaving the work to his ministers and confining himself to charity and social duties but he believed he had a duty to be an autocratic tsar

In 1865 Empress Elisabeth riding a horse. She is hiding her face behind a hand.     
Kaiserin Elisabeth von ?sterreich riding a horse. She is hiding her... News Photo - Getty Images (http://www.gettyimages.com/license/89778060)

Elisabeth's parents Duke Maximilian Joseph and Duchess Ludovika in Bavaria     
Idee von Postcard from Paris auf ??? Duke Maximilian Joseph in Bavaria | Maximilian (http://www.pinterest.com/pin/350928995934187044)

Tsar Peter I cutting the long sleeves of the boyars symbolically reducing the powewr of the nobles   
Tsar Peter I cutting the long sleeves of the boyars symbolically Stock Photo - Alamy (http://www.alamy.com/tsar-peter-i-cutting-the-long-sleeves-of-the-boyars-symbolically-reducing-image7675582.html)   

Tsar Peter I beheaded one of the rebel Streltsky in front of his nobles.     
Circa 1700, Peter the Great , Tsar of Russia, beheading one of the... News Photo - Getty Images (http://www.gettyimages.com/license/51243056)

King Charles V of France established the first permanent army paid with regular wages.

The relationship of Empress Elisabeth and her mother-in-law Sophie was complicated. Elisabeth's mother Ludovika was often called in as mediator.

Financial constraints prevented Princess Dagmar's parents from attending her wedding. In their stead, they sent her brother, Crown Prince Frederik of Denmark.

Yes, the Romanov dynasty lived, and entertained in unbelievable opulence, (though baths, WCs and even running water were scarce in their palaces. British visitors who were guests a decade or so later at the wedding of Alfred Duke of Edinburgh and Pudding Face couldn't believe the heat, discomfort and grubby surroundings they encountered.)

The DRF have never been wealthy compared to other royal Houses and every banquet, every reception attended, every expensive gift received would have required reciprocation from King Christian and Queen Louise. They would doubtless have had to hire or borrow a palace with requisite servants from a Russian noble family and it would have cost so much anyway they would have been bankrupted. Frederik however would have been a guest everywhere and maybe just hosted a few dinners for Minnie's new family.

The Duc d'Enghien presented his victories at Thionville and Rocroi to King Louis XIV.   
DUC d'ENGHIEN presenting his victories at Thionville (1639) and Stock Photo - Alamy (http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-duc-denghien-presenting-his-victories-at-thionville-1639-and-rocroi-49608868.html)

Empress Elisabeth of Austria at Christmas ca. 1875     
http://i.pinimg.com/originals/02/ec/70/02ec70911dc1c50c5568fb669303d7ac.jpg

The wedding of King Louis XIV and Infanta Maria Theresa of Spain     
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/b/b1/Louis_XIV_wedding.jpg

Tsar Peter I endeavored to stop arranged marriages. This affected him personally as his own arranged marriage to Eudoxia Lopukhina was disastrous.

Louis XIV made sure Maria Theresa was treated with respect even as he paraded his mistresses around court.   
Louis XIV and Maria Theresa | BIO Shorts | Biography - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXsKIy7npFg)

King Louis XIV of France could eat a whole pheasant, a partridge, a large plate of salad, two slices of ham, and a plate of pastry.

Quote from: LouisFerdinand on June 06, 2021, 10:38:37 PM
King Louis XIV of France could eat a whole pheasant, a partridge, a large plate of salad, two slices of ham, and a plate of pastry.

That would have been just a midnight snack to King Edward VII.

And the amuse bouche for Henry VIII

Quote from: Macrobug67 on June 06, 2021, 11:05:14 PM
And the amuse bouche for Henry VIII

Yes indeed, though Queen Vic added another little something to the aperitifs and the whole meal. She added Bilgers Invalid Food to her meals after her doctors recommended that she ate less and replace one or two courses with the invalid formula!

Jeez.  No wonder her waist measured 54 inches. 

Quote from: Macrobug67 on June 06, 2021, 11:41:55 PM
Jeez.  No wonder her waist measured 54 inches.

Or that her coffin was more of a square that is usual.

i've read a novel about Q Vic, where the Invalid food thing is mentioned and she said that there's not much point bieng queen if you can't at least EAT what you like....

Some of these don?t look all that bad.  Some look hideous. Invalid cookery : a manual of recipes for the preparation of food for the sick and convalescent : to which is added a chapter of practical suggestions (https://archive.org/details/63841060R.nlm.nih.gov/page/n11/mode/2up)

Victoria tricked her doctors into thinking she was obeying orders, at least for a while, but I really can?t blame her for eating up. The commercial invalid food they wanted her to take was mixed with hot water into just a thin gruel.

Tsarevich Alexis Petrovich was interrogated by his father Tsar Peter I.   
Peter I. Interrogates Tsarevich Alexei Petrovich' . Alexei Petrovich,... News Photo - Getty Images (http://www.gettyimages.com/license/1144559442)

Tsar Peter I built the first Russian navy. He hired foreign experts to help him to build his new fleet.   

The Christmas Truce was the unofficial cease-fire that occurred along the Western Front during the First World War (December 24-25, 1914). Emperor Wilhelm II of Germany sent Christmas trees to the front in an effort to bolster morale. 

The meeting of King Philip IV of Spain and King Louis XIV of France at Pheasant Island on June 6, 1660   
Meeting of Philip IV of Spain and Louis XIV of France at Pheasant... News Photo - Getty Images (http://www.gettyimages.com/license/142086059)   

King Charles V received an illuminated Bible from Jean de Vaudetar.     
Fresco of Charles V of France receiving an illuminated Bible from Jean de Vaudetar. Painted by Jean Bandol. Dated 14th Century Stock Photo - Alamy (http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-vharles-v-of-france-receiving-an-illuminated-bible-104967342.html)

George V (1819-1878) was the last King of Hanover. He reigned from 1851 to 1866.     
The Prussian government formally annexed Hanover on September 20, 1866.

In 1531 King John III of Portugal had Pedro Nunes to be in charge of his brothers, the Infante Luis and the Infant Henrique.

Emperor Napoleon I of the French was known for adorning Josephine a Peridot jewel as a declaration of his love.   

Was Empress Josephine of France an outcast?   
History avenges France?s famous outcast empress Josephine de Beauharnais (http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/history-avenges-france-s-famous-outcast-empress-josephine-de-beauharnais-1.1721008)

King Friedrich Wilhelm II of Prussia made an appeal in Breslau: An nein Volk, To my people, on March 17, 1813.   
King Frederick William II of Prussia makes an appeal in Breslau; An mein Volk; To my people; 17 March 1813 Stock Photo - Alamy (http://www.alamy.com/king-friedrich-wilhelm-ii-makes-an-appeal-image335956967.html)

Tsar Peter III of Russia did not have himself crowned in the Moscow Kremlin. He did not even set a date for the coronation ceremony.

This article declared:     
Marie Feodorovna (1847-1928) Russian empress, known as the "Lady of Tears"     
Marie Feodorovna (1847?1928) | Encyclopedia.com (http://www.encyclopedia.com/women/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/marie-feodorovna-1847-1928)

Did Emperor Frederick III try to back his wife Victoria with their daughter Princess Victoria Moretta's wish to marry Prince Alexander of Battenberg?

The first Romanov Tsar is Michael I who was crowned on July 22, 1613. However, no male descendants in the Russian imperial family were named Michael until Grand Duke Michael Pavlovich, the son of Paul I of Russia, was born in 1798.

Arolsen Castle in Arolsen, Principality of Waldeck and Pyrmont has served as a residence for the ruling family of the Principality of Waldeck and Pyrmont.   

In 1856 Princess Alexandra of Bavaria published Feldblumen (Fieldflowers). Princess Alexandra donated the proceeds to the Maximilian Orphanage.

Emperor Franz Joseph I of Austria's master of etiquette enforced the protocol on Sophie Chotek, the spouse of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. Sophie was not raised to royal status.Sophie had to stand with the ladies-in-waiting at receptions and sit in a separate box in the opera.

King Leopold II of Belgium spoke French, English, German, and Dutch. He was not allowed by his ministers at the time to openly speak Dutch.  They considered Dutch to be an inferior language.

When you look at pictures of the four Grand Duchesses before their father abdicated, you wonder what would each daughter's life have been like if she had married a foreign prince or king.

King Albert of Saxony and Prince Regent Luitpold of Bavaria at a maneuver     
Prince Regent Luitpold of Bavaria and King Albert of Saxony at a maneuver Stock Photo - Alamy (http://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-king-albert-of-saxony-and-prince-regent-luitpold-of-bavaria-at-a-maneuver-36991826.html)

King Alexander of Serbia did without a coronation ceremony. He thought that a ceremony with Orthodox rites would be an affront to Catholic and Muslim subjects.

Was King Constantine I of Greece named after a Constantine in early Greek history?

Constantine I of Greece was the eldest son of King George and Queen Olga.  He was named for his maternal grandfather Grand Duke Konstantin Romanov of Russia.

Constantine I of Greece - Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constantine_I_of_Greece#Early_life)

The baptism of Crown Prince Rudolph of Austria in 1858   
http://www.ceciliazhangqiqi.tumblr.com/post/16696164201/the-baptism-olf-crown-prince-rudolph-1858-the

Prince Jean Christophe Napoleon Bonaparte and his wife attended the Royal Versailles Ball.     
http://www.avenuemagazine.com/user-content/uploads/BFA_35056_4804731-1024x819.jpg

Queen Marie of Romania often rode for hours on end and was deeply admired by army officers for her ability to handle the most difficult horses.

At one time it was considered to marry Archduke Ludwig Viktor of Austria to his first cousin, Duchess Sophie in Bavaria. She was the youngest sister of Empress Elisabeth of Austria. Duchess Sophie refused to marry Ludwig Viktor.

Holy Roman Emperor Leopold I claimed headship of the Order of the Golden Fleece. The headship had hitherto belonged to the Spanish sovereign. Leopold began investigating new knights even before King Charles II of Spain's demise.

King Istvan (Stephen) I was crowned in the St. Adalbert Cathedral in Esztergom, Hungary in 1000.     
Biggest Church in Hungary | Basilica Esztergom - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uxK4wf_idVY)

King Afonso VI of Portugal's reign saw the end of the Restoration War (1640-1668) and Spain's recognition of Portugal's independence.

I so wish that there were more of the former monarchies alive in today's world, bring back the histories of many countries and restore the buildings, the heritage and traditions so lost now.

Quote from: Nightowl on August 12, 2022, 03:47:53 AM
I so wish that there were more of the former monarchies alive in today's world, bring back the histories of many countries and restore the buildings, the heritage and traditions so lost now.

But apart from bombings in WW2, especially in Germany, most royal palaces are still around and in good repair. Some Palaces were converted to State public buildings and some became a bit decrepit in Russia for example, but even these are now in an excellent condition, and have collections of the former royal families? clothing, uniforms etc. The Swan King Ludwig III of Bavaria?s castles and places like Versailles are visited by millions of tourists every year, and they are certainly in better nick that Buckingham Palace has been in the past fifty years. Ironically, it?s been Britain that has seen most royal homes disappear. Tudor palaces and Whitehall for example are no more.

9 Medieval Palaces That Were Tragically Lost to Time | Evan Evans Tours (https://evanevanstours.com/blog/medieval-palaces-tragically-lost-time/)

Including several used by Scottish monarchs.

Quote from: Curryong on August 12, 2022, 05:01:14 AM
9 Medieval Palaces That Were Tragically Lost to Time | Evan Evans Tours (https://evanevanstours.com/blog/medieval-palaces-tragically-lost-time/)

Including several used by Scottish monarchs.

@Curryong, Excellent information! Would you say that the name of Nonsuch Palace would be considered a whimsical name?

Quote from: LouisFerdinand on August 12, 2022, 11:44:06 PM
     
@Curryong, Excellent information! Would you say that the name of Nonsuch Palace would be considered a whimsical name?

I?ve often wondered about the provenance of the name myself, LF. Apparently, per Wikki it was a building project meant to stun and travellers or visitors, a one-off, none like it anywhere!

Work started on 22 April 1538, the first day of Henry's thirtieth regnal year, and six months after the birth of his son, later Edward VI.

?Within two months the name "Nonsuch" appears in the building accounts, its name a boast that there was no such palace elsewhere equal to it in magnificence. Construction had been substantially carried out by 1541, but it took several more years to complete.?

Now that is interesting, wonder how he supported himself or did he live as an ordinary every day citizen and not tell anyone who his family was?  Think it is time to research this topic.

He had money of his own, and Im sure he was not living anonymously.

Quite an interesting story of the fate of the German princely family Hesse and the theft of the family fortune.  It?s a 4 parter

The Hesse Heist: The Family von Hessen | The National WWII Museum | New Orleans (https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/hesse-heist-family-von-hessen)

The Hesse Heist: The Fate of the Family von Hessen | The National WWII Museum | New Orleans (https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/hesse-heist-the-fate-of-family-von-hessen)

The Hesse Heist: The Jewels Are Stolen | The National WWII Museum | New Orleans (https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/hesse-heist-jewels-are-stolen)

The Hesse Heist: The Accused Are Tried | The National WWII Museum | New Orleans (https://www.nationalww2museum.org/war/articles/hesse-heist-accused-are-tried)

Yes, and the theft of the Hesse jewels is an awful story of petty callous greed. And after it all and the convictions several historic pieces from the collection were not recovered and almost certainly are lost forever.

Is it just me? I know the jewels were stolen and they were the property of the Hesse family, but I feel a bit iffy that they were ex Nazis, who were going to hold onto their jewels when Germany was in ruins...
it would be nice if one thought that the family would use some of their jewels to help their fellow Germans

Quote from: Amabel2 on December 31, 2022, 06:11:08 PM
Is it just me? I know the jewels were stolen and they were the property of the Hesse family, but I feel a bit iffy that they were ex Nazis, who were going to hold onto their jewels when Germany was in ruins...
it would be nice if one thought that the family would use some of their jewels to help their fellow Germans

I don?t know that the entire Hesse family were ex Nazis, in fact it?s extremely doubtful that most of them were. The two who were the most virulent, Christoph, married to PP?s sister, and one of his brothers, certainly fell into the camp of believing that the Nazis were the way out of Germany?s humiliations after WW1.

Both seemed to believe, in the beginning, anyway, that Hitler would restore the nobility and royal Houses of the former Imperial Germany, something many former Imperial royals believed, including at least two of Kaiser Bill?s sons. There is some evidence though that Christoph was disillusioned by the time he was killed in a flying accident in Italy in 1943. PP remembered him as a soft spoken and rather gentle sort of character.

I don?t think that the Hesses were alone at all in hiding and burying jewellery, plate and other precious possessions as the war progressed. They may well have been terrified of Nazi looters, then the Russians and the probable chaos of another defeat.

I don?t know either that the Hesses of that particular branch were tremendously wealthy. The jewels may have been thought of as collateral if they lost everything else. And I don?t know that robbing others is fine and dandy if the victims are not the greatest people in the world. That?s questionable to say the least, isn?t it?

I did not say that at all

Tsar Alexander II of Russia set up the zemstvo system, which allowed for the local self-government, and ended some of the privileges of the nobility.

Quote from: LouisFerdinand on March 02, 2023, 08:48:57 PM

Hugh Capet (c. 939-996) was the King of the Franks from 987 to 996.   
Immediately after his coronation, Hugh began to insist for the coronation of his son Robert.   
The archbishop answered that two kings cannot be created the same year.

Lol old post, but I just saw it and it made me chuckle. Such interesting and dynamic times?

Quote from: HistoryGirl2 on May 26, 2023, 12:53:00 AM
Lol old post, but I just saw it and it made me chuckle. Such interesting and dynamic times?

No guarantees in those days. That thought popped into my head the other day when I was reading up on the death of Alfred the Great. I guess you just did anything possible to bolster the argument for your chosen successor, but things could always change once a ruler died.

Quote from: LouisFerdinand on July 09, 2023, 10:17:36 PM

Whatever happened to Napoleon I's only legitimate son?   
Whatever Happened To Napoleon's Only Legitimate Son? - YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pw_Ir5ecOYE)

What happened to him was that he died very young, in Austria his mother?s country, away from France where he had not lived since toddlerhood. His cause of death (at 21) was probably some form of TB. He was unmarried and had no children. He did not resemble his father physically or mentally, and is really a footnote in history.

Quote from: LouisFerdinand on July 10, 2023, 11:08:50 PM

If Napoleon II had lived longer, would he have had supporters for him to want the empire restored?

In France, you mean? Undoubtedly. Whether the Austrian Emperor and Chancellor Metternich would have allowed him to visit that country in any sort of official capacity is debatable, however. Not to mention the other Coalition powers that had defeated Bonaparte, GB, Russia, Prussia etc.

Those countries had had enough trouble with a military leader who wanted to begin a new French Empire in the first 15 years of the 19th century, without facing another representative of the family wanting to do the same in the very unsettled Europe of the 1830s and 1840s.

Not that I think that Napoleon?s son had the same sort of charisma or military genius of his father. From what I?ve read of him he appears to have taken after the Hapsburgs rather than the Bonaparte family, though he was very proud of his father. However, best not to let him try to replicate anything!

Quote from: Curryong on July 10, 2023, 12:28:31 AM
What happened to him was that he died very young, in Austria his mother?s country, away from France where he had not lived since toddlerhood. His cause of death (at 21) was probably some form of TB. He was unmarried and had no children. He did not resemble his father physically or mentally, and is really a footnote in history.

Its hardly a mystery. His short life is well known

Quote from: Amabel2 on July 11, 2023, 09:01:58 AM
Its hardly a mystery. His short life is well known

Who said it was a mystery? I was merely giving a short overview of what LouisFerdinand originally posted.

Quote from: LouisFerdinand on September 07, 2023, 12:26:47 AM

Madame Royal was a style used for the eldest living unmarried daughter of a reigning French monarch.

Yes it was and it encouraged Queen Henrietta Maria, the French wife of Charles I, to press for an English title for the eldest daughter of the monarch. She couldn?t believe there wasn?t one, and so the styling ?the Princess Royal? was begun.

Quote from: LouisFerdinand on October 15, 2023, 10:28:15 PM

Tsar Nicholas II of Russia had bank accounts in Germany. He could not close them.   
They were frozen because Germany and Russia were at war.   

:mil5: :mil5: :mil5: :mil5: :mil5: :mil5: :mil3: :mil3: :bignono: :bignono: :bignono: :bignono: :bignono: :bignono:

I?m not so sure that was the case. It was said in several books about Nicholas for many years that the Tsar had bank accounts in Europe and in London until his death (hence the very great interest in the many legal moves of Anna Anderson aka GDss Anastasia in between the wars) but more recent research has concluded that in fact as soon as war between the European Powers was even mooted Nicholas?s bankers had all foreign funds withdrawn and brought back to Russia.

There wouldn?t have been huge amounts of money deposited in Germany anyway. For at least ten years before the war relations between Russia and Germany were quite cool as Russia and France (and the UK) formed close formal alliances and understandings. And cousins Nicholas and Willie weren?t exactly great friends. Wilhelm thought Nicholas was a stupid person ?fit only to grow turnips? and Nicholas?s beloved wife Alexandra (yet another cousin) could not stand the Kaiser, like many of his relatives.

Quote from: LouisFerdinand on October 16, 2023, 11:14:50 PM

It was unfortunare Empress Alexandra could not stand Wilhelm II.   
At one point Wilhelm liked her sister Princess Elisabeth of Hesse and by Rhine.

He might have fancied her but I don?t think she was that keen on him. He used to visit Hesse Darmstadt when he and all the sisters and Ernie their brother were children and order them to play games he devised. When the bossy little twerp wanted to stop whatever game then they would have to sit and listen to him read. Ella quite liked the Russian Grand Duke Serge from the time she was quite young (his mother Marie was Tsarina and the wife of Alexander the Liberator and she would regularly visit her old family home as she had been a Hessian Princess.

And a very sad story really. Hard times. No successful relationship or children and a suicide at the end. I think she inherited an unstable temperament and depressive tendencies from her father and possibly her paternal grandmother as well.

Quote from: LouisFerdinand on March 26, 2024, 07:46:38 PM

The First Mexican Empire, established in 1821, with Augustin de Iturbide proclaimed as Emperor Augustin I in 1822, was abolished in 1823.

Mexico has not been kind to monarchies (which have inevitably been imposed by conservative and external powers.) Witness Augustine's execution in 1824 after his return from exile and  the execution of Emperor Maximilian nearly forty years later.

Quote from: LouisFerdinand on April 13, 2024, 10:59:20 PM

When Prince Frederick Charles of Hesse was King of Finland, what was the title of the heir to the throne?

Crown Prince was the title, between Oct 1918 and Dec 1918, after which all concerned considered it a bad idea and the monarchy was abolished. He was married to Vicky's daughter Mossy by the way. Fritz Carl never reigned anyway, and lost his royal status within Germany as did members of all the other royal Houses in that country. He and Mossy lost half their six sons in World Wars 1+2.

Quote from: LouisFerdinand on April 26, 2024, 09:05:58 PM

Toward the end of his reign, King Frederick II of Prussia physically connected most of his realm by acquiring Polish territories in the First Partition of Poland.

Poland must be one of the most unfortunate geographically placed countries in recorded history. I have always been so glad that I was born and have lived on islands, including an island continent. No chance of nearby foreign nations slithering over into the country, acquiring some of this and bits of that by any and all means possible. With apologies to all who've had it done to them by GB!