This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/21/world/europe/royal-familys-nazi-salute-in-1930s-stirs-debate-in-britain.html

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Royal Family’s Nazi Salute in 1930s Stirs Debate in Britain Royal Family’s Nazi Salute in 1930s Stirs Debate in Britain
(about 7 hours later)
LONDON — The grainy black-and-white home movie lasts about 17 seconds. It shows a young Princess Elizabeth, the future Queen Elizabeth II, raising her hand in the air in the style of a Nazi salute, an apparent youthful pantomime. The Queen Mother and Elizabeth’s uncle, Prince Edward, who would become King Edward VIII, also make the gesture. LONDON — The grainy black-and-white home movie lasts about 17 seconds. It shows a young Princess Elizabeth, the future Queen Elizabeth II, raising her hand in the air in the style of a Nazi salute, an apparent youthful pantomime. The queen mother and Elizabeth’s uncle, Prince Edward, who would become King Edward VIII, also make the gesture.
Three days after the footage of the royal family, taken in 1933 or 1934, was published on the website of The Sun, the images of the young Elizabeth continued to reverberate throughout Britain on Monday. The story — under the headline “Their Royal Heilnesses” — has stirred debates about the limits of press freedom and royal privacy; the imperative of historical transparency; and whether an 89-year-old monarch should be judged for a gesture made when she was 6 or 7 years old.Three days after the footage of the royal family, taken in 1933 or 1934, was published on the website of The Sun, the images of the young Elizabeth continued to reverberate throughout Britain on Monday. The story — under the headline “Their Royal Heilnesses” — has stirred debates about the limits of press freedom and royal privacy; the imperative of historical transparency; and whether an 89-year-old monarch should be judged for a gesture made when she was 6 or 7 years old.
Indeed, some critics have assailed The Sun for publishing the video, saying it unfairly sullies the image of a future queen who was too young to understand the meaning of what she was doing. There has also been an outpouring of support for the queen, a beloved and unifying figure, on social media.Indeed, some critics have assailed The Sun for publishing the video, saying it unfairly sullies the image of a future queen who was too young to understand the meaning of what she was doing. There has also been an outpouring of support for the queen, a beloved and unifying figure, on social media.
But other commentators have praised the newspaper for prodding a historical reckoning, saying it could enhance understanding of the royal family’s attitudes toward Nazi Germany, in particular those of Prince Edward, who has been accused of sympathizing with the Nazis. As Edward VIII, he renounced the throne in December 1936 to marry the American divorcée Wallis Simpson.But other commentators have praised the newspaper for prodding a historical reckoning, saying it could enhance understanding of the royal family’s attitudes toward Nazi Germany, in particular those of Prince Edward, who has been accused of sympathizing with the Nazis. As Edward VIII, he renounced the throne in December 1936 to marry the American divorcée Wallis Simpson.
“It is disappointing that film shot eight decades ago and apparently from H.M.’s personal family archive has been obtained and exploited in this manner,” Buckingham Palace said in a statement. It is not clear how The Sun obtained the footage.“It is disappointing that film shot eight decades ago and apparently from H.M.’s personal family archive has been obtained and exploited in this manner,” Buckingham Palace said in a statement. It is not clear how The Sun obtained the footage.
Mayor Boris Johnson of London defended the queen and argued that the royal family could not have foreseen Hitler’s future barbarism. “It makes my blood boil to think that anyone should use this image in any way to impugn the extraordinary record of service of Her Majesty to this country,” Mr. Johnson wrote in The Telegraph. “She was a child, a tiny child, and she is making that parodic salute long before her family could possibly have grasped what Hitler and Hitlerism was really all about.” Mayor Boris Johnson of London defended the queen and argued that the royal family could not have foreseen Hitler’s future barbarism.
“It makes my blood boil to think that anyone should use this image in any way to impugn the extraordinary record of service of Her Majesty to this country,” Mr. Johnson wrote in The Telegraph. “She was a child, a tiny child, and she is making that parodic salute long before her family could possibly have grasped what Hitler and Hitlerism was really all about.”
The Sun defended its decision to publish the images, saying it was a matter of history and in the public interest. “We publish them today knowing they do not reflect badly on our queen, her late sister or mother in any way,” it said.The Sun defended its decision to publish the images, saying it was a matter of history and in the public interest. “We publish them today knowing they do not reflect badly on our queen, her late sister or mother in any way,” it said.
The film shows members of the royal family at their Balmoral estate in rural Scotland in 1933 or 1934. At the time, the Hitler salute was being mocked in some quarters in Britain, and making the gesture did not necessarily signal support for him or his policies. “Families of all kinds larked around aping the stiff-armed antics of the faintly comic character with the Charlie Chaplin mustache who won power in Germany,” The Sun wrote. The film shows members of the royal family at their Balmoral estate in rural Scotland. At the time, the Hitler salute was being mocked in some quarters in Britain, and making the gesture did not necessarily signal support for him or his policies. “Families of all kinds larked around aping the stiff-armed antics of the faintly comic character with the Charlie Chaplin mustache who won power in Germany,” The Sun wrote.
But some commentators have countered that by 1933 the Nazi Party was already on the rise. There had already been attacks on Jewish businesses, and the first anti-Semitic laws were passed in April of that year. Ben Judah, who is writing a book on London and the changing British identity, noted that in 1933, newspapers in Britain had accounts of Nazi repression. “Waking up to the image on The Sun made me feel that in the 1930s there was a whole world and depth of anti-Semitism about Jews being hidden behind regal demeanor and gentle froideur,” he said. But some commentators have countered that by 1933 the Nazi Party was already on the rise. There had already been attacks on Jewish businesses, and the first anti-Semitic laws were passed in April of that year.
Simon Fowler, a lecturer in history at the University of Dundee, who studies the First and Second World Wars, noted that the Holocaust would not reach its murderous climax until years later and that many in Britain in 1933 saw a strong Germany as a bulwark against communism. “People didn’t realize the extent of fascism,” Mr. Fowler said. Ben Judah, who is writing a book on London and the changing British identity, noted that in 1933, newspapers in Britain had accounts of Nazi repression. “Waking up to the image on The Sun made me feel that in the 1930s there was a whole world and depth of anti-Semitism about Jews being hidden behind regal demeanor and gentle froideur,” he said.
Much of the coverage in the British news media of the affair has focused on the extent to which the footage suggested that members of the royal family could have been sympathetic to Hitler or Nazi Germany. Much of the coverage in the British news media of the affair has focused on the extent to which the footage suggested that members of the royal family could have been sympathetic to Hitler or Nazi Germany. The BBC wrote that in October 1937, Edward and his wife visited Germany, entertaining the notion that Edward could become “a figurehead for an international movement for peace on Hitler’s terms.” The couple met with Hitler, the BBC said.
The BBC wrote that in October 1937, Edward and his wife visited Germany, entertaining the notion that Edward could become “a figurehead for an international movement for peace on Hitler’s terms.” The couple met with Hitler and had dinner with his deputy Rudolf Hess, the BBC said. The queen mother and her husband, King George VI, have been revered in Britain for their stoicism during World War II, in part because of their resolve to stay in London.
The Queen Mother and her husband King George VI have been revered in Britain for their stoicism during World War II, in part because of their resolve to stay in London, where they visited sites bombed by the Germans during the Blitz.