When we historians sat down to watch a film set in the era we were studying, we felt a poignant discomfort. The same thing happens to us with historical serials or comedy programs last broadcast on the radio. A real occupational disease. How is it possible that such a mistake is made in fences and situations, we ask ourselves. We seem unforgivable in the face of caricatures or simplifications of complex characters and subjects, anachronisms, and stupid manipulations of presentist approaches. After years of archiving, many researchers were outraged by the poor quality of the most widespread reports. Some, however, manage to calm down and distinguish different genres: on the one hand, the story, which must stick to the verifiable, without trying to be attractive; on the other, fiction, which allows you to invent anything that can improve a plot.
The hit series Wow. Queen Victoria Eugeniebroadcast by Televisión Española, provoked the same reactions. Centered on the life of this young British woman who came to Spain in 1906 to marry King Alfonso XIII and who remained in the south until the fall of the monarchy in 1931, it is full of inaccuracies. And it’s not just about names or events; also explanatory, which took place on the political scene. The marriage, a state operation approved by Edward VII of England, appears to be a rebellious enterprise of the princess, delivered to the sympathetic Spanish galán. Alfonso accuses his weakness before politicians and Parliament, when he exercised key constitutional functions and tended to elect his ministers. He was even surprised by the coup d’état announced by General Primo de Rivera, confused in its progress and criticized by the liberal English kingdom. Meanwhile, the charming Ena strives to modernize a rancid and unhealthy Spain, even if she must constantly ask permission from the authoritarian and ruling mother, María Cristina. Mateo Morral, terrorist who caused a massacre, became a hero; the satyr Borbón, with his companion the omnipresent Count of Romanones, as a producer of pornographic films.
However, as fiction, the series is effective and stands out for its means and the solvency of the team. The title confirms its character: it is based on a novel. In addition, it conveys credible messages. That the queen was mistreated by her husband, in an unhappy marriage marked by the hereditary illness of her children and manly infidelities, does not leave much doubt. Ena’s commitment to Cruz Roja and her responsibility in the nursing profession as well. It’s not The crownthe magnificent portrait of the sugar rats of British royalty, but it has continuous details, like Primo de Rivera’s entries in the double paso compass Sighs of Spain. In reality, its biggest problems come, in this work as in other similar works, from the pretension of truthfulness demonstrated by its authors, underlined this time by the educational desire of the creator, who imposes himself on the civic task of telling in the public channel the story that the Spaniards should know, and by the opinions of the advisers and specialists of hams in the attached documents. There, the narrative is supported and, in the face of this, the historians’ questions are justified. If the novelist recreates morbid details difficult to verify, another expert claims to have documented thousands of lovers of King Alfonso, whose sex addiction requires interventions. “Según se dice”, “suitcases in ten languages” abound. The script incorporates rumors that spread.
The most interesting thing is that this television phenomenon coincides, perhaps by chance, with a notable exhibition on the same character at the Galería de las Colecciones Reales, next to the Royal Palace of Madrid. In it, the figure of Queen Ena is also recovered, but in a different way: through a spectacular set of pieces of different types, from paintings to photographs, dresses and jewelry up to the cart that took her to the church in 1906. Those responsible for the museum, good connoisseurs of those who manage the national heritage, have carried out an excellent work of documentation, also visible in the catalog. Moreover, Enamania today is undermined by the impact of memories of Juan Carlos I, hungry for recognition for his services to democracy, but unwilling to remedy his lack of equality or pay taxes in his beloved homeland. There is no shortage of parallels drawn between the mistakes of Victoria Eugenia and Sofía, altruistic professionals who inexhaustibly supported her. Compassion induces empathy with real people. We project onto them a relevant feminist perspective, which defuses the patriarchal culture in which its protagonist and protagonist evolve, on everything that is symbolic and representative.
If we open the field of vision a little more, we will see that this wave of interest in the history of corona in Spain has its place in the full proliferation of neo-Cortesian strategies – or national-Cortesian, as Santos Juliá calls it. No, among aficionados of dynastic cotilleos, but among professors of a certain prestige. Excel in academies, networks and publications dedicated to singing the excellences of monarchies, their identity with nations like Spain or their constant connection with democratic regimes, which gives them great advantages over republics. France, Italy, Portugal or Germany should take note. In this career, Alfonso XIII presents himself, against his own admissions, as a humanitarian titan with political ambitions tangential to the European war and as a third guardian of the constitutional system. History and fiction come together, and not only because of the narrative qualities of historiographical work. It is more important to debate with balance and restraint, without excessive apriorisms, even if these royal paladins, who behave as if the current monarchical order were in serious danger, manage information that others ignore.
Coming back to Ena, it should be remembered that, unlike its predecessor, it did not intervene in the relevant decisions and that its so-called constitutionalism only transcended. We were also able to highlight her implications in the reactionary and militaristic drift of her husband and those around him. For example, in favor of the colonial war in Morocco, whose legitimacy contributed to incessant beneficial activity, with patriotic and imperial tones, and with gestures like the unprecedented outfit of honorary cavalry commander in 1921, just before the annual catastrophe. Or in her links with Catholic civil society, within which she was influenced by elitist and illiberal sectors, which earned her homage as an exemplary mother and defender of the Church, a religious activism which sometimes transformed into denial. Their Cruz Roja damasks fueled Spanish propaganda, but also received criticism that harassed them, such as that of the feminist writer Margarita Nelken, who in 1919 denounced the exhibitionism of señoritas who posed in uniform in illustrated magazines. The image of the queen, much less popular than that of her husband, conforms to a traditional gender role in charity work or embroidery with her daughters at the palace. That is to say, many disruptive attitudes are attributed to him. In any case, let us welcome the conversation on these themes which, however long or frivolous they may be, do not only concern historians, but which, through more or less accomplished fictions, allude to socio-cultural values and political options of extraordinary relevance.
About The Author
