Royal Order of Saint Michael of the Wing
Nenad M. Jovanovich
of Saint Michael of the Wing?
I see that it is still being awarded as a Dynastic Order, or am I
wrong?
So it's status might be simmilar to that of the Military Constantinian
Order of Saint George?
andor...@yahoo.com
"""Nenad M. Jovanovich писал(а):
It is not the same. The matter in establishing authority. This knightly
body was founded sevreal time, but the last time (present) by
non-ruling Head of the RH of Portugal. The COSG was founded in 1699 by
the Pope ( who always is ruling sovereign) for Duke of Parma
Franchesco Fernese, and now it is continue to be bestowed by several
lines of Farnese heritage inherited by Burbons ( RH of Two Sicilies, in
disput between franco-neapoletan and spanish-neapoletan lines, and DH
of Parma)
see the link
http://www.icocregister.org/list2004.htm
Other Institutions of Chivalric character
Ancient chivalric institutions, originally founded as orders,
subsequently revived by the dynastic successor of the founding
authority.
1. Portugal
House of Braganca (Catholic)
Saint Michael of the Wing
Founded: 1171/1848/1981[67]/2001 (Conferred since 1981)
Ribbon: Red.
Grand Master: H.R.H. Dom Duarte, Duke of Braganca (Duarte III, Titular
King of Portugal and the Algarves) (b. 1945).
Nenad M. Jovanovich
I have alredy seen this bit of information, but it's somewhat
ambigious.
For instance, the Montenegrene Order of Danilo I is listed as a
Dynastic Order despite the fact that it was recently reestablished by a
non-ruling Prince Nikola Petrovich-Njegosh (existed till 1918).
It seems to me that the Order of St. Michael of the Wing has as strong
a case as this one (if not even stronger).
How is it listed in the new book of Guy Stair Santy?
andor...@yahoo.com
"""Nenad M. Jovanovich писал(а):
Order of Danilo I was not reestablished, but HRH Nicola of Montenegro
just started (recently) its conferring. This Order is an Order of
Merit, but not an institution of chivalric character.It is different
things.
For example, the dynastical Order of St Joseph...
(in all classes conferred nobility, the third class- for life, the
second and the first classes - hereditary, of Tuscan GD House, it is
an surviving norm of its statute confirmed by Constitution of 1849,the
last major legal base for the Grand Ducal House of Tuscany,and
therefore may not be revoked any way)..
...was recently, in 1971 reconfirmed by grandfather of the present
Grand Duke Sigismondo, and was again started its conferring (after the
long period of non-using).The order was not reestablished, but just
reconfirmed.
For example, it is known that the Order of the Thistle exisied long
before the time of its reestablishment in present condition by the King
James VII of Scotland. James VII established the order when he was a
ruling sovereign. Dom Duarte of Portugal is not a ruling sovereign and
his recent establishing of the oredr of St. Michael of the Wing may not
be the same thing with an order established by ruling sovereign and
after reconfirmed by the heir of ruling sovereign.
George Lucki
news:1163866052.4...@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
It is a perfectly respectable order, but as I understand the status of this
order it is different than that of the Constantinian or St. Stephen of
Tuscany.
The first issue is its continuity. While its origin is ancient - it was
established in the 12th century its later history is quite obscure and it
likely had continued a nominal existence under the authority of the
Cistercian Order. There is some hidotrical documentation in this regard but
not a lot. It is clear that it was resurrected or reformed again in the
nineteenth century as a secret political-religious order opposed to
Portuguese anti-clerical, masonic, liberal movements. The Church put an end
to Catholic secret societies in the middle of the nineteenth century and it
continued as an opeb society for a time. Except for the head of the house of
Portugal who continued as a hereditary master there is no indication of
other knights being appointed. There was a private or unauthorized
rectivation of the order about 25 years ago in Portugal to which the Duke of
Braganca later assented but because of some difficulties the order was
reformed by the Duke and again reformed several years ago as a Catholic
Royal Confraternity (Royal Brotherhood of St. Michael of the Wing). The
Order itself exists as an order of honor within the confraternity. There
could be a case made for the continuity of the order - it was never
abolished and nominally continued, but such a case would be a bit tenuous
given the slim historical record, apparent discontinuities and the
significant changes in structure and purpose. The most conservative (and
most easily supported) interpretation would be to see it as the modern
revival of an ancient order of jbighthood by the successor of the founding
authority - in this it is differnt from modern orders created in exile by
non-reigning monarchs.
The second issue is its nature. In its most recent reformation it has been
restructured primarily as a royal brotherhood - a chivalric confraternity of
knights and this is the way in which Guy sainty listed it in Burke's - in
the section of "Nobillary, Chivalric and Royal Confraternities and
Institutions" which is a reflection of that structure, although a case could
be also made that there is within a chivalric order.
In any case both these issues make its character quite different than that
of other historic chivalric groups and differnt still than the Order of
Danilo I, which is a dynastic order of merit (more like the Portuguese Order
of Vila Vicosa). In terms of its standing - well that is also determined
really by the standing of the dynastic authority awarding the order and the
quality of its membership. I would not suggest that in this case you go by
only the foundation date of the order - as it is both ancient and really
quite new.
George Lucki
Nenad M. Jovanovich
But I still don't get it...
Regardless of the obvious difference between the Order for Merit and
Chivalric Order - why is it that we should consider Order of St.
Michael of the Wing to be - ''established'', and Order of Danilo I to
be ''reconfirmed''?
Both of the Princes are non-ruling heirs of the founding Rulers. Both
decorations were out of use for a perod of time...
Nenad M. Jovanovich
You've been helpfull as allways!
George Lucki је написао
pritch...@hotmail.com
The Royal Brotherhood of Saint Michael of the Wing is an active Roman
Catholic confraternity established by an ordinary according to Canon
Law with the Duke of Braganca as the hereditary Judge. The Royal Order
of Saint Michael of the Wing is an order (according to the Grand
Master, Dom Duarte Pio Duke of Braganca) and does nothing unto itself
as all activities are conducted through the Confraternity. In other
words, no one can be a member of the Royal Order of Saint Michael of
the Wing without first being a member of the Royal Brotherhood of Saint
Michael of the Wing. The changes in the Royal Order of Saint Michael of
the Wing from 1981 and 2001 are dramatic, the revived order of 1981 was
based upon the order founded by King Dom Miguel I of Portugal as a
political-military order to combat Socialism, Freemasonry and
anti-Clericalism in mid-ninteenth century Portugal. The colours of the
ribbon of this order, both 1848 and 1981, were red and blue which are
the colours of the House of Braganca while at war. The duke, wanting to
return the Royal Order of Saint Michael of the Wing to its origins as a
religious order of knighthood replaced the militant colours of red and
blue with a red ribbon which reflects the historic origins of the
Portuguese order as a former branch of the Spanish Religious Military
Order of Santiago.
As far as I know, the Order of Prince Danilo I is a straight forward
dynastic order. If an order has not been conferred for a very long
time, it is normal from time to time for the head of the royal house to
reconfirm that such an order still is within the gift of the head of a
house.
David
George Lucki
news:1163885050....@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>I would like to expand upon what George wrote about Sao Miguel da Ala.
> The Royal Brotherhood of Saint Michael of the Wing is an active Roman
> Catholic confraternity established by an ordinary according to Canon
> Law with the Duke of Braganca as the hereditary Judge.
David,
Are you sure about this?
I've looked at the statutes of the Order and it appears to fully conform to
the provisions of Canon Law in terms of private association of the faithful
(which is understandable given its historical roots as a Catholic chivalric
institution) but I'm not at all clear that it would have ever actually
required the approval of any ordinary because as a dynastic foundation it
would have not been under the jursdiction of the Royal House rather than any
diocesan ordinary. I also had understood that the authority establishing the
confraternity andcontinuing the order within the confraternity was the head
of the house of Portugal and not a local bishop. If it had been established
by a bishop it would be a wholly different foundation (an ecclesiastic body)
rather than a dynastic one. On the other hand it would not surprise me in
the least if the Duke of Braganca consulted the statutes with Church
officials given the Catholic roots of the order.
The Royal Order
> of Saint Michael of the Wing is an order (according to the Grand
> Master, Dom Duarte Pio Duke of Braganca) and does nothing unto itself
> as all activities are conducted through the Confraternity. In other
> words, no one can be a member of the Royal Order of Saint Michael of
> the Wing without first being a member of the Royal Brotherhood of Saint
> Michael of the Wing.
This makes sense - the confraternity would then be public or social
organization through which the order undertook whatever charitable or other
work and would be eligible to be registered as a private society in Portugal
or elsewhere.
The changes in the Royal Order of Saint Michael of
> the Wing from 1981 and 2001 are dramatic, the revived order of 1981 was
> based upon the order founded by King Dom Miguel I of Portugal as a
> political-military order to combat Socialism, Freemasonry and
> anti-Clericalism in mid-ninteenth century Portugal. The colours of the
> ribbon of this order, both 1848 and 1981, were red and blue which are
> the colours of the House of Braganca while at war. The duke, wanting to
> return the Royal Order of Saint Michael of the Wing to its origins as a
> religious order of knighthood replaced the militant colours of red and
> blue with a red ribbon which reflects the historic origins of the
> Portuguese order as a former branch of the Spanish Religious Military
> Order of Santiago.
I was not aware that the 1981 revival (renewal) of the order was as a
political-military order (Are the 1981 statutes published anywhere?), but
the choice of the colours would seem to be consistent with this. Who was
involved in this 1981 revival? In many ways such aims would have made sense
in Portugal where republican ideals have been heavily influenced by masonic
and anti-clerical perpectives.
George Lucki
George Lucki
news:JEM7h.340030$R63.46325@pd7urf1no...
> <pritch...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1163885050....@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>>I would like to expand upon what George wrote about Sao Miguel da Ala.
>> The Royal Brotherhood of Saint Michael of the Wing is an active Roman
>> Catholic confraternity established by an ordinary according to Canon
>> Law with the Duke of Braganca as the hereditary Judge.
>
> David,
> Are you sure about this?
> I've looked at the statutes of the Order and it appears to fully conform
> to the provisions of Canon Law in terms of private association of the
> faithful (which is understandable given its historical roots as a Catholic
> chivalric institution) but I'm not at all clear that it would have ever
> actually required the approval of any ordinary because as a dynastic
> foundation it would have not been under the jursdiction of the Royal House
> rather than any diocesan ordinary.
Oooops.
That should have been...
I'm not at all clear that it would have ever actually
required the approval of any ordinary because as a dynastic foundation it
would have *been* under the jursdiction of the Royal House rather than any
diocesan ordinary.
Sorry. I should have caught that error before posting.
George Lucki
jsj...@fastmail.fm
orders, and comes under the control of the state - being the President
under the current regime.
The colour of the ribbon is red, so presumably the Wing order would not
be an official order in Portugal.
George Lucki
news:1163895686.2...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
No, it is not a state order. Portugal is after all a republic. Nonetheless
I've been given to understand that the rapprochment between the Duke of
Braganza and the Republic is such that he lives in Portugal, his status as
the head of the Royal House is officially recognized by the state and his
awards may be worn on uniform, etc. The dynastic orders of the former Royal
House include Vila Vicosa for merit, a ladies order and St. Michael. The
other orders of the former monarchy are now state orders and I understand
that the Duke of Braganca would not take any action to award them himself.
George
George Lucki
with another military order and now a Portuguese state order - St. James of
the Sword is also red and of course St. Michael of the Wing has an early
historic association with this originally Spanish order. The modern ribbon
is lilac I believe.
George Lucki
pritch...@hotmail.com
I did not phrase that properly, a number of ordinaries who are members
of the order who reviewed and approved the revised statutes of 2001as
conforming to Catholic Canon Law concerning the establishment of a
confraternity under Dom Duarte (rather than under an ordinary
directly). Nothing seems to slip your eye George. I shall have to
triple check my posts in the future.
David
On Nov 18, 6:26 pm, "George Lucki" <georgelu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> <pritchard...@hotmail.com> wrote in messagenews:1163885050....@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>
> >I would like to expand upon what George wrote about Sao Miguel da Ala.
> > The Royal Brotherhood of Saint Michael of the Wing is an active Roman
> > Catholic confraternity established by an ordinary according to Canon
> > Law with the Duke of Braganca as the hereditary Judge
> David,
pritch...@hotmail.com
maroon.
David
On Nov 18, 9:57 pm, "George Lucki" <georgelu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> <jsjo...@fastmail.fm> wrote in messagenews:1163895686.2...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...> In Portugal the Order of Christ is one of the three great and ancient
> > orders, and comes under the control of the state - being the President
> > under the current regime.
>
> > The colour of the ribbon is red, so presumably the Wing order would not
> > be an official order in Portugal.I'll just add one other thing to the mix - the historical colour associated
jsj...@fastmail.fm
are -
Order of Christ - red
Order of St James - purple (lilac)
Order of Avis - green.
The President of Portugal, as Grand Master of the three orders - wears
a sash known as Sash of the Three Orders - Christ (AD1317), St James
(AD 1320), Avis (AD 1140), with three equal stripes of the three
colours.
The breast star shows all three orders. Some dates are in dispute,
but give an indication of antiquity.
There are several other major orders - the Tower and the Sword, blue
ribbon (AD 1459), the Order of Prince Henry (the Navigator), and some
others.
John Jones
pritch...@hotmail.com
president awarded the Sash of the Three Orders to a Portuguese
celebrity. Evidently no one thought that the order could be granted to
a normal person but rather that it was part of the regalia of the
Portuguese Presidency and only to be conferred on foreign heads of
state.
David
Photograph: http://www.omsa.org/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=3416
David
Guy Stair Sainty
andor...@yahoo.com says...
>
>
>"""Nenad M. Jovanovich писал(а):
>"""
>> Could anyone tell me more about the present status of the Royal Order
>> of Saint Michael of the Wing?
>>
>> I see that it is still being awarded as a Dynastic Order, or am I
>> wrong?
>>
>> So it's status might be simmilar to that of the Military Constantinian
>> Order of Saint George?
>
>It is not the same. The matter in establishing authority. This knightly
>body was founded sevreal time, but the last time (present) by
>non-ruling Head of the RH of Portugal. The COSG was founded in 1699 by
>the Pope ( who always is ruling sovereign) for Duke of Parma
>Franchesco Fernese, and now it is continue to be bestowed by several
>lines of Farnese heritage inherited by Burbons
Not founded in 1699; it was already existing by the mid-16th century with
numerous signs of papal recognition from the 1550s and Imperial and Spamnish
recognition during the 17th century. The Pope is not "ruling sovereign" of the
Order; it is nonetheless a subject of canon law and if the descendants of the
house of Bourbon-Farnese born of Catholic marriages became extinct in the male
line and there was no successor by nomination or election, the grand magistery
would revert to the Pope.
St Michael of the Wing is a confraternity, constructed like an Order, and the
successor of the traditions of the original Order but not directly linked to the
chivalric foundation.
--
Guy Stair Sainty
www.chivalricorders.org/index3.htm
Guy Stair Sainty
Jovanovich says...
and his sueccssors as a dynastic order of Merit.
The original Order of St michael of the Wing was a religious-military Order,
founded as a subject of canon law, that ceased to exist as such as under canon
law such institutions become extinct 100 years after the death of the last
person canonically admitted. Its modern foundation is as a confraternity, and it
was never an Order of either the Portuguese state or the Portuguese reigning
dynasty.
Guy Stair Sainty
andor...@yahoo.com says...
>
>
>> How is it listed in the new book of Guy Stair Santy?
>
>
>Order of Danilo I was not reestablished, but HRH Nicola of Montenegro
>just started (recently) its conferring. This Order is an Order of
>Merit, but not an institution of chivalric character.It is different
>things.
This was treated as a dynastic Order by the exiled king of Montenegro after
1918, and its recent revival was considered legitimate for that reason.
>
>For example, the dynastical Order of St Joseph...
>...was recently, in 1971 reconfirmed by grandfather of the present
>Grand Duke Sigismondo, and was again started its conferring (after the
>long period of non-using).The order was not reestablished, but just
>reconfirmed.
And it was awarded after exile and into the 1920s before its more recent
revival.
>
>For example, it is known that the Order of the Thistle exisied long
>before the time of its reestablishment in present condition by the King
>James VII of Scotland. James VII established the order when he was a
>ruling sovereign.
That "early existence" is pure mythology invented to give the new Order added
lustre.
Guy Stair Sainty
pritch...@hotmail.com says...
>
>I would like to expand upon what George wrote about Sao Miguel da Ala.
>The Royal Brotherhood of Saint Michael of the Wing is an active Roman
>Catholic confraternity established by an ordinary according to Canon
>Law with the Duke of Braganca as the hereditary Judge. The Royal Order
>of Saint Michael of the Wing is an order (according to the Grand
>Master, Dom Duarte Pio Duke of Braganca) and does nothing unto itself
>as all activities are conducted through the Confraternity. In other
>words, no one can be a member of the Royal Order of Saint Michael of
>the Wing without first being a member of the Royal Brotherhood of Saint
>Michael of the Wing. The changes in the Royal Order of Saint Michael of
>the Wing from 1981 and 2001 are dramatic, the revived order of 1981 was
>based upon the order founded by King Dom Miguel I of Portugal as a
>political-military order to combat Socialism, Freemasonry and
>anti-Clericalism in mid-ninteenth century Portugal. The colours of the
>ribbon of this order, both 1848 and 1981, were red and blue which are
>the colours of the House of Braganca while at war. The duke, wanting to
>return the Royal Order of Saint Michael of the Wing to its origins as a
>religious order of knighthood replaced the militant colours of red and
>blue with a red ribbon which reflects the historic origins of the
>Portuguese order as a former branch of the Spanish Religious Military
>Order of Santiago.
I believe one should look at this slightly differently. the use of the
Order as an award for legitimist loyalism by Dom Miguel was in no
way connected with the original canonical foundation. This was already
extinct under the norms of canon law.
The "order" that is part of the Brotherhood, like the latter is a new
foundation, and as far as I can see is essentially no different from it,
whatever the distinctions betweeb the ribbons. It is a different institution to
both the original religious-military foundation and the Miguelist award.
Guy Stair Sainty
>
><jsj...@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
>news:1163895686.2...@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
>> In Portugal the Order of Christ is one of the three great and ancient
>> orders, and comes under the control of the state - being the President
>> under the current regime.
>>
>> The colour of the ribbon is red, so presumably the Wing order would not
>> be an official order in Portugal.
>>
>
>No, it is not a state order. Portugal is after all a republic. Nonetheless
>I've been given to understand that the rapprochment between the Duke of
>Braganza and the Republic is such that he lives in Portugal, his status as
>the head of the Royal House is officially recognized by the state and his
>awards may be worn on uniform, etc.
I think "officially" is probably the wrong word, since there is no provision of
Portuguese law which would allow the government to officially recognise any
claimant to the throne. That said, Dom Duarte is always treated by the
authorities of the public as the representative of the royual dynasty and
invitations extended to him to participate in official ceremonies accord him his
royal titles. Furthermore, he is the beneficiary of a foundation established by
the dowager Queen and a counter-claim made by the late Hilda
Toledano (aka Maria Pia Duchess of Braganza) was decisively rejected by a
Portuguese court. His awards may not, however, be worn officially on uniform
and while they are tolerated (i.e. not specifically prohibited) it would be
incorrect to say that any Portuguese citizen has received official permission to
wear them.
Guy Stair Sainty
jsj...@fastmail.fm says...
>
>The colours for the three ancient - but still used - Portuguese orders
>are -
>Order of Christ - red
>Order of St James - purple (lilac)
>Order of Avis - green.
>
>There are several other major orders - the Tower and the Sword, blue
>ribbon (AD 1459), the Order of Prince Henry (the Navigator), and some
>others.
The apocryphal date for the foundation of the Order of the Tower and Sword
has no historical basis; when the Order was invented (to reward non-Catholics,
in particular British officers serving on the peninsular in the war against
Napoleon) it was felt proper to invent an earlier date, to give it some kind
of parity in antiquity with the Orders of Christ, Avia and St James, all of
which were limited to catholics and whose status had been changed in 1780 from
autonomous military religious Orders under the hereditary grand magistery of
trhe crown to Catholic Orders of State merit conferring privileges (the use of
commanderies, etc) and requiring nobility. Since the Order of the Tower and
Sword outranks the other three, it needed more substance - hence the imaginary
foundation date (rather as with the Thistle, discussed elsewhere).
Guy Stair Sainty
pritch...@hotmail.com says...
>
>There was quite an uproar in Portugal a few years ago when the
>president awarded the Sash of the Three Orders to a Portuguese
>celebrity. Evidently no one thought that the order could be granted to
>a normal person but rather that it was part of the regalia of the
>Portuguese Presidency and only to be conferred on foreign heads of
>state.
I do not think this can be correct; Dr D. Jose-Vicente de Braganca wrote the
essays on the Portuguese Orders in Burke's Orders of Knighthood and Merit was
until March of this year Secretary-General of the presidency of the Republic and
respoinsible for the Orders. He was very clear in his text that subsequent to
the reforms of 1962-63 the riband of the three Orders had never
been awarded to anyone other than ex-officio the President of the Republic.
Prior to that date it was awarded exclusively to heads of State and there are
only two living holders of the Riband given it before that date, HM Queen
Elizabeth II (given it in 1955) and HM King Bhumibol Adulyadej of Thailand given
it in 1960. It bis inconceivable that a President of the Republic would have
somehow attempted to have given it to someone other than a head of state, and
certainly not after 1963.
There was until 1963 also the Riband of the Two Orders (Christ and Avis) was
given to heads of states or heirs (the duke of Windsor received it in 1931).
This was abolished in the 1963 reforms.
pritch...@hotmail.com
I only recounted what was told to me by a Portuguese friend. It could
be that only the sash was presented by the president without the proper
doumentation and brevet or it could be that wiser persons prevailed
upon the president to nullify this conferral.
David
On Nov 19, 1:55 pm, Guy Stair Sainty <g...@sainty.org> wrote:
> In article <1163914700.013436.87...@f16g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
> pritchard...@hotmail.com says...
>
>
>
> >There was quite an uproar in Portugal a few years ago when the
> >president awarded the Sash of the Three Orders to a Portuguese
> >celebrity. Evidently no one thought that the order could be granted to
> >a normal person but rather that it was part of the regalia of the
> >Portuguese Presidency and only to be conferred on foreign heads of
> >state.I do not think this can be correct; Dr D. Jose-Vicente de Braganca wrote the
pritch...@hotmail.com
Michael of the Wing had no connection to the ancient canonical order of
the same name. It is interesting to note that a few years ago, HM Juan
Carlos I of Spain declared the long abbeyant Spanish branch of the
ancient Order of Saint Michael of the Wing to be officially extinct
(though it had long been extinct canonically) and that the only order
of that name presently extent in Iberia was the order of Dom Duarte
Pio, Duke of Braganca.
David
On Nov 19, 1:36 pm, Guy Stair Sainty <g...@sainty.org> wrote:
>I believe one should look at this slightly differently. the use of the
> Order as an award for legitimist loyalism by Dom Miguel was in no
> way connected with the original canonical foundation. This was already
> extinct under the norms of canon law.
> Guy Stair Saintywww.chivalricorders.org/index3.htm
jsj...@fastmail.fm
to be worn on Portuguese uniforms.
What is worn in civilian dress, other than at official functions, is a
matter for individuals - at least in the British system. I have no
knowledge of what is done in the USA and Europe generally
On presenting of the Band of the Three Orders, I doubt if the President
of the Republic would do as was suggested, even in a rush of blood to
the head. But I haven't kept in touch with Portuguese politics.
John Jones
George Lucki
news:1163975611.6...@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>I didn't think it likely that Portugal would allow any "private" awards
> to be worn on Portuguese uniforms.
As I understood from previous discussions in 2003 on rec.heraldry the Duke
of Wellington holds a Grand Cross of St. Michael of the Wing and had
obtained a Royal License to wear the Order (the same discussion also
mentioned the issue of wearing such awards on Portuguese uniform) - so I
hope someone can check and clarify both these points.
> What is worn in civilian dress, other than at official functions, is a
> matter for individuals - at least in the British system. I have no
> knowledge of what is done in the USA and Europe generally
I understand this varies from state to state - and that in the UK to be
correct one absolutely needs official permission to wear foreign decorations
and this - although again there is going to be considerable tolerance the
less official the setting. In Europe it varies - with countries like Sweden
allowing all manner of self-styled decorations to be worn on military
uniform and others like Italy puvblishing lists of proscribed self-styled
decorations and establishing civil penalties for their use.
>
> On presenting of the Band of the Three Orders, I doubt if the President
> of the Republic would do as was suggested, even in a rush of blood to
> the head. But I haven't kept in touch with Portuguese politics.
I agree with you and Guy. I also checked. The Government of Portugal
publishes a list of those awarded state orders - I've looked over the list
for 1975-2005 and while there are a few Portuguese individuals who have been
awarded three Grand crosses - none have been awarded this particular
combination of orders (Christ, Avis and St. James) and of course since the
early sixties the Banda das Tres Ordens has not been awarded to foreign
heads of states - the law reserves it to the President alone ex-officio.
George Lucki
jsj...@fastmail.fm
awards" etc can be worn in the UK.
However this only covers official occasions and there are no sanctions
that I know of - other than social pressures - that prevent persons
wearing what they like on private occasions. Even official civil
ceremonies are hard to police - Lord St John Stevas wore his St Lazarus
regalia at an opening of Parliament some years ago, and the only
mention of it was a report in the Daily Telegraph, which noted the
bright green ribbon.
Military dress is quite another thing, and the normal military
sanctions apply to anyone contravening dress codes. But even in
military circles, the rules are less rigid for "mess" dinners or
"mixed" occasions. Miniature of medals and decorations were a private
matter until quite recently, and were purchased separately from the
main award.
In Australia, for Australian awards, miniatures are now part of what is
presented in a special box and even an undress ribbon is provided.
I imagine that the Duke of Wellington is unlikely to wear military
dress nowadays so the Grand Cross of the Wing order is unlikely to
raise any comments. I can't see him wearing such a thing at - for
example - a Coronation, but who knows what might happen. I would be
interested to know if anyone has actually seen him wearing the Wing
regalia at an official function, particularly in the presence of HM.
George Lucki
news:ejq87...@drn.newsguy.com...
This is an interesting point. I've been trying to sort this one out in my
own reading.
What makes it difficult to really evaluate is the skimpiness of the
historical record.
There is clear evidence for the brief early existence of the order as a
religious-military order under Portuguese royal authority and references are
made to Papal approbation - although the specific Papal Bull is appararntly
not to be found. Peter Bander van Duren in The Cross on the Sword provides a
rather difficult to follow discussion of the issue of whether there was
proof that the Order of St. Michael of the Wing was founded/authorized by
Papal Bull but points to several good sources of confirmation. At the same
time it appears clear that this was an order whose headship is hereditarily
linked to the Portuguese crown and whose rule has had its own meanderings.
Edward Potkowski in Rycerze w Habitach notes that the 12th century rule of
the Order of St. Michael of the Wing was already very different than that
other military-religious orders and had a strong confraternal and
socio-political rather than military-monastic character. In this way the
Order was more similar to later mediaeval orders than either its Iberian or
Crusading contemporaries. The serving knights were for example married, and
threy made only a solemn promise of fidelity to God, Pope and King. They
were required to periodically gather for common prayers but had no other
religious obligations. Potkowski notes that they were at the outset more
similar to the later mediaeval monarchical chivalric orders or aristocratic
fraternities than to the military-monastic orders of that period. A strong
monarchical political role is not surprising given the way in which the
early Portuguese kings also used the military-monastic Order of Avis as an
instrument not only for the Reconquista but also the consolidation of power
against regional foes.
At some point the actual authority is apparently transferred to the
Cistercians and became perhaps more religious in character but again the
historical record is skimpy as to how active an existence the order has
(uncertain in terms of primary sources), although I've seen a secondary
source list grand-masters of the order into the late seventeenth century -
and these are the Kings of Portugal as of course the grandmastership of the
order was hereditary in the Portuguese throne. I can't tell when the last
knights were admitted but there is indication lay brothers were admitted
well into the 18th century. The question would then be as to whether the
military aspect of the order had simply fallen into disuse or whetehr the
order had become extinct and whether it was primarily Canon Law or Royal
Will that had governed the Order (and governed its legal continuity). There
just seems to be too little material available to know. On balance though it
would appear that it continued at the very least through the continued
existence of the hereditary grandmastership vested in the King and whatever
role the Abbots of Alcobaca had in maintaining its corporate existence. The
ambiguity of its nominal existence appears to have carried over to 17th
century foreign commentators such as Ashmole or Abbot Guistinian who both
describe the order yet respectively indicate it is in disuse or raise doubts
about its continuity. At the same time there are the published 1630 revised
statutes of and Guistinian's 17th century listing of masters and past
knights which speaks to some continuity.
The first clearer indication of its modern reconfirmation/reestablishment is
the 19th century Miguelist military-political order. Now the question here
seems to be whether it is a reform of a long dormant or nominally existing
confraternal royal order or the creation of a new military-political order -
but certainly Miguel's rule was autocratic and he would have been free to
create, restore, reform or reestablish according to his lights. The
potential challenges to seeing his actions as a reform and reconfirmation
might be as to his rightful rule (whether he or Pedro of Brasil were the
intended heir) and whether the Order existed to be reformed (in which case
it was a new creation) if the original Order were solely dependent on the
Holy See. The 19th century order would have been a significant departure
from a military-monastic order but of course less so for monarchical
military-political order. It is nonetheless clear that Miguel saw it as his
right to lead the order by virtue of inherited perogative. The 1848 statutes
of the Order are from the period after his overthrow but of course he had
not abdicated but continued to act from Austrian exile.
Guy appears to see the 12th century order in similar terms to contemporary
monastic-military orders and sees its existence as ended 100 years after the
last of its military knights had passed away (whever that was) as it was
essentially an entity of Canon Law. I am open, following the difference in
its 12th century rule to the view that it had a monarchical character and a
Catholic character that presaged later European monarchical foundations and
may be seen as nominally existing even when the King of Portugal was the
only knight and at teh same time master of the Order.
But I'll take one more stab at a Canon Law based principle of extinction:
Foundation 1147 (or thereabouts) - active in reconquista
End of military role (after 1280 or therabouts) - political role diminishing
Continued under Cistercian administration with new statutes 1630 (with both
a military and religious wing)
Last knight admitted ? Last serving brothers admitted before 1789
Secularization of religious military orders 1789
Restoration of St. Michael by Miguel as secret military-political order 1848
(apparently with Papal approval)
Last knight admitted circa 1912
Restored 1981 with the newest statutes in 2001
In strictly canonical terms - if we accept that it nominally continued and
admitted or potentially admitted some knights (otherwise the 1630 statutes
would have not included this element) to consider the order to be extinct it
would have had to have been sometime after 1630 after the last knight was
appointed and counting 100 years from last surving knight. Except that in
terms of the 1630 statutes (looking strictly from the Canon Law norm) the
corporate existence continued although the chivalric wing may have been in
abeyance without the admission of new knights except for the status of the
King as knight and Grand Master. After all the Canon Law standard referred
to relates really to the corporate existence. In fact a case can be made
that the 1630 statutes strengthened the Canon Law corproate continuity of
the order by allowing its continued existence as a corporate entity in
Church law even as the admission fo new knights went into abeyance.
Notwithstanding any of this if we accept the truth of the Papal approval of
the restoration of the order in 1848 (it was not continued by the monarchy
in 1789 as a secularised order) then that act would seem to overide any
other canonical provision and be an affirmation of Miguel's authority to
revive the order and alter its purpose. If the Pope assented to the revival
than clearly it was by definition canonically revivable (even if it was like
the revival of Lazarus - the biblical Lazarus not the order :) - couldn't
resist). The Pope is free to override any administrative provision of his
own laws.
Arguments can be made that there was no canonical extinction fo the order
(although again there is a speculative element).
>
> The "order" that is part of the Brotherhood, like the latter is a new
> foundation, and as far as I can see is essentially no different from it,
> whatever the distinctions betweeb the ribbons. It is a different
> institution to
> both the original religious-military foundation and the Miguelist award.
>
I wonder how this squares with the decree of Dom Duarte (I've copied this
from an earlier thread on rec.heraldry with the participation of Guy Sainty,
Pier Felice degli Uberti and carlos Evaristo)
DECRETO DE APROVACAO DE ESTATUTOS
Declaro que os presentes Estatutos da Real Irmandade da Ordem de São
Miguel da Ala, que constam de quarto Capítulos com tres Artigos, foram
aprovados por minha expressa vontade a 8 de Maio de 2001 e substituem
pos Estatutos de 1630, 1848 e 1981, anteriormente utilizados pela
Ordem de São Miguel da Ala.
Festa do Anjo Custódio de Portugal, 10 de Junho de 2001.
Dom Duarte Pio de Bragança
Juiz da Real Irmandade de São Miguel da Ala
Grão-Mestre Nato da Ordem de São Miguel da Ala
- wherein he seems to imply that the new statutes replace the earlier
Miguelist statutes which replace the earlier Alcobaca statutes - all quite
different and all at the same time connected to the same order. He also
reconfirms his hereditary status as Grand-Master. I would also note that in
1986 when he reconfirmed his claim to the three dynastic orders he specified
that his claim to Vila Vicosa and St. Isabel flowed by succession from King
Manuel and his claim to St. Michael flowed from King Miguel (reflecting the
reunion of the Miguelist and Manuelist succession in his father Dom Duarte
Nuno). It would seem that Dom Duarte would disagree with both David's and
Guy's positions on this point. The new statutes describe a chivalric
confraternity and within that confraternity the renewed chivalric order. The
Order is within a confraternity is not the same as the order is the
confraternity,
The same dual formulation of Judge of the Brotherhood and Grand Master of
the Order appears on the official web-page of the Royal House -
"É Grão Mestre da Ordem de Nossa Senhora da Conceição de Vila Viçosa, Grão
Mestre da Real Ordem de São Miguel da Ala e Juiz da Real Irmandade de São
Miguel da Ala, Bailio Grã-Cruz de Honra e Devoção da Ordem Soberana Militar
de Malta e possui o Tosão de Ouro, com que foi agraciado pelo Arquiduque
Otão de Habsburgo, entre outras ordens com que foi agraciado."
Now, I am aware that the Duke of Braganca has received a variety of
different bits of advice as to how to reform the Order based on different
people's notions or suppositions as to whether the Order was a solely a
subject of Canon Law and had become extinct or whether it continued a
nominal existence through its hereditary grandmaster. I'm not surprised by
these various interpretations given the skimpiness of the historical record
and the differences simply reflect the notions of their authors, about the
nature of the 12th century order, as they read into the skimpy record. If
the authors are convinced it was juridicially like the Templars or St. John
then it would be reasonable to believe it had become extinct as a subject of
Canon Law. If it was a creature of the monarchy it may have continued a
nominal existence in its hereditary masters at the very least. There is in
my mind no clear way to determine which of these positions is historically
more defensible and so I compromise calling it old and new at the same time.
Perhaps the deciding voice should go to the Duke of Braganca who certainly
sees a distinction between the Order and the Confraternity of the same name
the Order is now contained within. He uses distinct titles to distinguish
the two roles he has vis a vis the Confraternity and the Order. The
Confraternity is certainly a new vehicle for the social aspects of the order
and distinguishes between the religious-social functions of the brotherhood
and the chivalric order itself. The structure is a unique one, but that is
Dom Duarte's current choice.
That would suggest that as far as our view of the Order itself we have four
possible choices - the first would be to recognize it as Dom Duarte's
renewal (within a new confraternity) of an ancient long disused order that
has been hereditary in the throne of Portugal (and perhaps also as a reform
of the Miguelist nineteenth century political order); second to deny the
historical continuity of the order and see it as the brand new creation of
a non-reigning pretender (akin to the Savoy Civil Order of Merit); third to
gloss over Dom Duarte's statements that there continues within the Order and
maintain that it is simply a new grade within a new chivalric confraternity;
or simply deny that the chivalric awards of Dom Duarte or any non-reigning
monarch have chivalric standing.
My preference is toward the first interpretation which seems to align with
that of the Duke of Braganca, David's view also appears to favour the first
except bypassing the Miguelist heritage, Guy's argument seems to follow the
third option of glossing over the existence Order and focusing only on the
confraternity (based on his belief that the order is long extinct) and I'm
guessing that John might prefer the fourth.
Now if anyone has some compelling other information or argument I'm open to
revising my view.
George Lucki
barrassie
On Nov 18, 3:22 pm, "Nenad M. Jovanovich" <c...@yubc.net> wrote:
> Could anyone tell me more about the present status of the Royal Order
> of SaintMichaelof theWing?
>
> I see that it is still being awarded as a Dynastic Order, or am I
> wrong?
>
> So it's status might be simmilar to that of the Military Constantinian
> Order of Saint George?
HISTORY OF THE ROYAL ORDER OF SAINT MICHAEL OF THE WING
As told by H.E. Dr. Carlos Evaristo, Vice-Chancellor and Delegate for
the Foreign Delegation of the Royal Brotherhood of the Order of Saint
Michael of the Wing[1]
You will find above history of the order via google if yu search
above.
CMcK Hillhouse
Guy Stair Sainty
>
><jsj...@fastmail.fm> wrote in message
>news:1163975611.6...@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>>I didn't think it likely that Portugal would allow any "private" awards
>> to be worn on Portuguese uniforms.
>
>As I understood from previous discussions in 2003 on rec.heraldry the Duke
>of Wellington holds a Grand Cross of St. Michael of the Wing and had
>obtained a Royal License to wear the Order (the same discussion also
>mentioned the issue of wearing such awards on Portuguese uniform) - so I
>hope someone can check and clarify both these points.
Such permissions are not granted by royal license; in any case while one has
heard this story, I believe that such permission was given in a purely private
form by HM, and only in the presence of the Duke of Braganza.
Guy Stair Sainty
pritch...@hotmail.com says...
It is interesting to note that a few years ago, HM Juan
>Carlos I of Spain declared the long abbeyant Spanish branch of the
>ancient Order of Saint Michael of the Wing to be officially extinct
>(though it had long been extinct canonically) and that the only order
>of that name presently extent in Iberia was the order of Dom Duarte
>Pio, Duke of Braganca.
How, where and in what form was this declaration made? GSS