The Most Insane Royal In History?


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Spain produced some odd characters.

I think a particularly sad one was Juana la Loca. Her husband treated her badly, but she was so in love with him she became obsessed... and refused to let him be buried after he died. So sad.
 
I wanted to reproduce here what was written about "Sissi" in the book, so here goes an abridged version:

Elizabeth (1837-1898). Empress of Austria and a stunnng royal beauty. Yet her looks, however striking, were not nearly so breathtaking as the lengths she went to in order to improve and preserve them. Not for her the half-hearted diet or the quick going-over with soap and water; instead she subjected herself to every cosmetic torture known to a woman--and a few that had hitherto not even been imagined. As a result, she held for decades her position as the most attractive and stylish royal in the world--a kind of nineteenth century Princess Diana.

As with that lady, nature had been more than kind to Elizabeth. She had a magnificent head of chestnut hair, finely proportioned features, a lustrous complexion and an extraordinarily trim figure. It was this slender shape that at heart was her most outlandish obsession. Trim was not good enough; nothing less than perfection, with an 18-inch waist and everthing else to match, would ever satisfy Elizabeth. To achieve this, her diet verged on the self-destructive. . . with glasses of meat juice, dry biscuits, and raw eggs. . .

Elizabeth supported these outrageous efforts with a fearsome programme of exercise. She took a daily walk of anything up to 20 miles. . and had gymnastic equipment installed in her private apartments at Laxenburg . . She bathed daily in distilled water but if she felt her body was in danger of losing its unique suppleness, she would immerse herself in warm olive oil. . in an effort to maintain her waist, she slept with wet towels around her middle.. . . There was nothing ordinary about the way she washed her hair--the shampoo was 20 bottles of the best French brandy mixed wth yolks of a dozen eggs and Elizabeth forbade the use of any artificial drying method. . . . .

Indeed, as one who had always inspired admiration rather than love, she increasingly became a rather lonely figure as she moved from haunt to haunt. She had never been very willing to play the public role of the Emperor's wife and by her mid-forties she had effectively ceased to act out the part in private either. Nor could she count on the love of her two children. . .she had taken little interest in their upbringing. . she did suggest that the nerves of her son Rudolph might be trained to withstand shocks by having pistols fired off suddenly near his ear.. .

So as she moved into late middle age, Elizabeth's life was more and more that of the introverted and wealthy tourist. . .In September 1898, an Italian anarchist with a grudge against royalty. . . .stabbed her in the chest. Somehow she managed to stagger a hundred yards, but the weapon had pierced her heart and she collapsed and died, aged 61.

**Copied from David Randall's Crazy Kings and Kooky Queens.

--
From what I've read, it looks like a lot of Sissi's self esteem was tied to her looks, which is one reason her husband chose to marry her; she was introverted, independent, extremely vain, competitive about her beauty -- maybe to help keep her husband -- and had "restricting type" anorexia (with restricting calories and excessive exercise). Anorexics are about power. They often feel powerless in their everyday lives but they can control what they eat and their exercise. I've read articles in the past that mention how difficult it was for Sissi to perform properly in the highly restrictive and disciplined Austrian court of the time. Sissi's mother-in-law had Sissi's children taken away so they would be raised according to the Austrian court standards. After awhile Sissi wanted to escape her highly disciplined life, rarely seeing her offspring, wanted freedom, independence, and traveling was the way she chose to escape. She also believed her son and his girlfriend were murdered. A lot of important things were out of Sissi's control. She needed a reprieve and chose to escape by traveling and seeing the world. She was lucky to have had the money and that the royal family finally allowed her to do so. She was obsessive, independent, anorexic, determined, willful, but to say she was crazy seems harsh to me. I think she adjusted the best way she could and worked very hard at keeping one thing that was obvious to the public that she excelled at and helped her self esteem -- and that was her looks.
 
Of course, Sissi was the cousin to King Ludwig of Bavaria, who had a mania for building and seems to have been a Howard Hughes-type character. We have him to thank for the lovely fairy tale castle, Neuschwanstein.
 
Has anyone mentioned HIH Jean-Bédel Bokassa? President of the Central African Republic, declared himself Emperor Bokassa I on December 4, 1976. Bokassa spent the equivalent of over 20 million United States dollars, a quarter of the country's government annual income, on his coronation ceremony.

If that ain't mad I don't know what is.
 
... but Abdul_Hamid_II is equal to worse.
Sultan Abdul Hamid II (1842-1918)?? Are you sure you've got the right Sultan?
Here's what Wiki has to say:

"He was a striking amalgam of determination and timidity, of insight and fantasy, held together by immense practical caution and an instinct for the fundamentals of power. He was frequently underestimated. Judged on his record, he was a formidable domestic politician and an effective diplomat."

Abdul Hamid II was also an amateur carpenter who personally crafted his own furniture. He was interested in opera and wrote the first-ever Turkish translations of many opera classics as well as hosting performances of European opera singers in his palace.

None of this classifies him as "insane".

* * *

As to Vlad III, Prince of Wallachia, he's considered a national hero in Romania for the courageous defence of his principality against repeated Ottoman attacks and invasions. The stories of his atrocities (impaling babies on their mother's breasts, skinning and boiling people alive etc) were spread throughout Western Europe in the form of pamphlets produced by his Saxon enemies in Germany. They were encouraged and abetted by Vlad's rival Matthias Corvinus, King of Hungary, who's own efforts in fighting the Ottoman armies were somewhat lacklustre compared to those of the Wallachian Prince. Matthias Corvinus also needed to bolster his own position vis a vis Vlad as the King had misused the large sums of money given to him by the Pope, Venice and most of the Catholic states of Europe for the express purpose of fighting the Ottomans.

Lastly, the impaling of one's enemies was an Ottoman method of execution, first witnessed by Vlad while he was in Turkey as a boy hostage.
Vlad III was a ruthless, cruel and absolute ruler, but those qualities were required by those on the front line in defending the margins of Europe against the relentless Ottoman advance. He was definitely not insane.
 
Ivan the Terrible was pretty bad, and Peter the Great had his own son murdered.
 
Thanks Warren,
www.ourararat.com/eng/e_sultan.htm
Maybe not insane but enough to question that sanity of his deeds.
Hope this the right one.It states there Sultan Abdul Hamid the Second.
Questioning his deeds then would not make him insane-he has to be certifiable.
Not insane then.Maybe just a bit off..........when it struck him.
Like his oars weren't always in the water.
 
I'd vote for:
1. Elisabeth (murdered 600+ virgins and bathed in their blood) who was selfish and vain, without compassion or value for life; probably the biggest serial killer in the world.
2. Ivan the Terrible (ate meals while watching people being empaled) also had no compassion or value for life. He did not have to "eat" while watching such things to intimidate his enemies. Just empaling would have done the job. ----------
----------
I have wondered about handsome "Mad" King Ludwig II. He did not seem "Mad" to me. He was a character born into a ruling position with little interest in politics, economics or war but was naturally introverted, sensitive, extremely creative, imaginative, artistic, romantic, gifted and passionate about creating architecture, loved to be surrounded by beauty, grand architecture, nature, Wagner's music -- and Wagner. I see him as naturally an architect/artist forced to be a King. I think I read somewhere that his father was very harsh with him. Who knows when his imagination and desire for escapism arose. In any event, its possible King Ludwig II chose to often escape from his Kingly responsibilities to be true to himself by creating and surrounding himself with incredible beauty and fantasy amusement park settings and situations that Walt Disney would be proud of. How many of us, if we had the wealth, would create a world for ourselves that others would think strange -- to include period costume parties and midnight sleigh rides? How many people have created an Avatar and have a Second Life (fantasy life) on the computer -- because they can? How many people would love to work at one of Walt Disney's theme parks because they'd like to spend a lot of time there? Some say King Ludwig II was bankrupting the Bavarians by using their funds to build his castles, the Swan grotto, etc., while others say the money was actually from his "Wittlesbach" family. Its very possible his political and economic enemies wanted him to stop spending and used the term "Mad" to discredit him with the hope it would stop his actions. In the end, his creations are great gifts, famous worldwide, and tourism has brought and will continue to bring great wealth to the Bavarians. I wish he could have been appreciated while he lived. In today's world, we probably would not think he were "Mad."
 
It was probably no worse a senator than most. Not worse than those other senators who allowed it anyway. :cool: :lol:

Agree.

It's more likely he wanted to taunt and humilliate the senate and publicly display how impotent and powerless the senators were. - To some extent he failed, as it's now seen as an example of how completely nuts he was.

The image of his successor Emperor Claudius has been very much distorted by the "I Claudius books and later TV-series. - In reality he was very different from Dereck Jacobi's magnificent protrayal.

So we have to look with very critical eyes at how people are percieved now. A lot of it is most likely based on successful character assassinations.
One of the must successful propaganda feats in history is how we until the last couple of decades have percived Karthage as decadent, greedy and depraved.
The Romans won - and they wrote the epitaph.
 
I think a particularly sad one was Juana la Loca. Her husband treated her badly, but she was so in love with him she became obsessed... and refused to let him be buried after he died. So sad.
An other queen whose behaviour after her husband's death was a bit unstable was Maria Eleonora of Bradenburg, the mother of queen Christina of Sweden. Maria Eleonora of Brandenburg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Among other things she made her seven year old daughter sleep in a bed over which her father's heart was hung in a golden casket.
 
Isabella "She Wolf" of France.

Why? Wanting to see her children again doesn't seem all that mad to me. A mother scorned is likely to be rather strong in her desire to get her children back. Being married to Edward was no walk in the park - but being a strong woman, willing to lead an army, is not a sign of insanity.
 
I vote for King George III of UK.
 
King George III wasn't crazy - he was ill with Porphyria -
 
I definitely consider as the most insane and dangerous royals ever,the Roman emperors,Nero and Caligula,who besides all were very cruel and committed themselves many crimes and contributed to the death of their own people.
 
Juana 'la Loca' was not so much insane but was in the way of her own father, and later her son - After her mothers death SHE was the righfull Queen - but her father didn't want to let her have any power - so she was locked away and it the story of her beeing mad was fabricated.

There are a lot of historic persons who where alowed zu visit her: there ist much evidence that she wasn't mad at all - at first she was very much upset by the death of her husband - but that was just all.
 
--
From what I've read, it looks like a lot of Sissi's self esteem was tied to her looks, which is one reason her husband chose to marry her; she was introverted, independent, extremely vain, competitive about her beauty -- maybe to help keep her husband -- and had "restricting type" anorexia (with restricting calories and excessive exercise). Anorexics are about power. They often feel powerless in their everyday lives but they can control what they eat and their exercise. I've read articles in the past that mention how difficult it was for Sissi to perform properly in the highly restrictive and disciplined Austrian court of the time. Sissi's mother-in-law had Sissi's children taken away so they would be raised according to the Austrian court standards. After awhile Sissi wanted to escape her highly disciplined life, rarely seeing her offspring, wanted freedom, independence, and traveling was the way she chose to escape. She also believed her son and his girlfriend were murdered. A lot of important things were out of Sissi's control. She needed a reprieve and chose to escape by traveling and seeing the world. She was lucky to have had the money and that the royal family finally allowed her to do so. She was obsessive, independent, anorexic, determined, willful, but to say she was crazy seems harsh to me. I think she adjusted the best way she could and worked very hard at keeping one thing that was obvious to the public that she excelled at and helped her self esteem -- and that was her looks.

I completely agree,I have read a lot of books about the Empress and I travelled to many places she´d been in her life and she doesn´t cease to amaze me...however I would not call her crazy but rather excentric and unconventional.She was a very intelligent,educated woman with many interesting hobbies but unfortunately most people of her time didn´t understand her or took her serious.Empress Elisabeth inherited her father´s love of nature,riding and travelling but when she married she was expected to be an obdenient wife who´s only duty is to give birth to an heir and look elegant.Her children were taken away from her and her life was very restricted and controlled,but she could manage to take care of her image and so she tried everything to look as magnificient as possible.Being so beautiful and adored also gave her some power which she wisely used-for instance to support the Hungarians who were asking for more freedom and political influence.
Her excessive beauty rituals might seem very odd to modern people,but we have to keep in mind that most authoritarian royals used to spend ridiculous sums of money on clothes,jewellery and beauty.
 
Crazy royals..well emperor Caligula and king George III comes to mind and czar Ivan of Russia who murdered his own son.
 
I don't think Queen Ranavalona I of Madagascar has been mentioned. If stories about her are to be believed I think she qualifies for a mention in this thread.
 
concerning George III and his descendants with porphyria

Tiaraprin, you have quoted a good source on King George's insanity. It was a shock to his family, as in youth he seemed to be fine, and had produced fifteen children, twelve of whom survived to adulthood, but few of whom had legitimate heirs. Another excellent book on royal porphyria is The Purple Secret, the author of which I don't remember now.

George's son, the Duke of Kent, may have given it to Queen Victoria, or it could as easily have come from her Hanoverian mother (I think her mother was Hanoverian?--at least she was a cousin of the Duke of Kent). The proof that either Victoria or Albert had it is in the DNA extracted (with permission and great thanks) from the bones of Victoria's daughter Vicki, and Vicki's daughter Charlotte. Proof positive that these ladies had Variegate Porphyria (VP).

In modern times, the best documented victim was the Duke of Gloucester, brother of the present Duke. He was not known to be insane in any way but his mother noted lesions on his face, and had him diagnosed by a British physician, and also he was dx'd in South America by a physician there, where he was a business attache. He died young in a plane accident. I have no evidence that his relatives, the present Duke of Gloucester, Richard, or his children or grandchildren are affected. Facial lesions sometimes appear in Variegate Porphyria, and are often induced by too much sun exposure.

As for Princess Margaret, that is a mystery. She did have "numb feet", which probably caused her to put her feet into too hot water, which contributed to her death (I am not clear in this case). Numb feet is common in patients with long standing Porphyria, due to permanent damage to the peripheral nerves by the toxic by products of a Porphyria attack. I have Porphyria of a different strain, Hereditary Coproporphyria, and my feet have been numb for years, but I'm still walking, and one reason I'm walking is that I learned what the basic triggers are, and how to avoid them, and I did avoid them now for about 16 years, since diagnosis (but I had gone many years prior to dx with symptoms). HCP may possibly be a strain in the Stuart royal family, but I do not know if they had a different strain than VP. Porphyria does mutate a LOT. That is a complete mystery at this time; it would be excellent if DNA studies could be done on Mary Queen of Scotts' relics. Mary could have gotten porphyria from several sources, including the Tudors as well as the Stuarts. The Tudor gene was probably brought to England by Katherine of Valois.

Many victims are NOT insane, as the disease affects different parts of the body and brain. I am sure the present day royals probably know all the triggers and avoid them assiduously. And are healthy and not crazy in most cases.

George III's case may have been triggered by arsenic in his powdered wig.
 
I hadn't read the whole thread when I wrote this on Porphyria. I should have emphasized more that not all people with porphyria are "mad" in episodes like King George III. Some very normally mental people have it. It can affect any part of the body, including the brain, but does not always affect the brain. Charles VI of France was severely affected in the brain, and I think he gave it to the Tudors through his daughter Katherine of Valois.
 
I am starting to wonder if Elizabeth Bathory was really insane or just a sociopath. They are 2 different things IMO, she reminds me a little of Henry VIII. People say he was mad or insane but he was a man who was given too much leeway and too much authority. When you are allowed to do whatever you want a majority of people will end up doing bad things. Similarly, Elizabeth was given too much power and freedom to do what she wanted and she abused it to the tenth power, but does that make her insane?
 
Juana 'la Loca' was not so much insane but was in the way of her own father, and later her son - After her mothers death SHE was the righfull Queen - but her father didn't want to let her have any power - so she was locked away and it the story of her beeing mad was fabricated.

There are a lot of historic persons who where alowed zu visit her: there ist much evidence that she wasn't mad at all - at first she was very much upset by the death of her husband - but that was just all.

Other than the fact that Juana dragged her husband's corpse around for quite some time (not days) refusing to bury him......
 
Other than the fact that Juana dragged her husband's corpse around for quite some time (not days) refusing to bury him......

FWIW, there's a really good podcast on Juana by the How Stuff Works/Stuff You Missed in History Class podcast.
 
Back
Top Bottom