9 of the worst monarchs in history

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
48,391
1,666
113
What do Caligula, King John, Ivan the Terrible, Queen Ranavalona I and Mary, Queen of Scots have in common?

They are all amongst the worst monarchs in history.


9 of the worst monarchs in history


Historian Sean Lang kicks off our Kings & Queens Week by rounding up nine of the most disastrous monarchs in history…

Monday 27th July 2015
Sean Lang
BBC History Magazine

History has no shortage of disastrous rulers; this list could easily have been filled with the Roman Emperors alone. Rulers have been homicidal, like Nero or Genghis Khan; incompetent, like Edward II; completely untrustworthy, like Charles I; or amiable but inadequate, like Louis XVI of France or Tsar Nicholas II.

Some royal stinkers were limited in their capacity to do serious harm: the self-absorbed Edward VIII by his abdication, the narcissistic prince regent and king, George IV, by the constitutional limits on his power. And the mass murderer and self-proclaimed ‘Emperor’ Jean-Bédel Bokassa of the Central African Empire might have featured on this list had his imperial status been international recognised, but it wasn't.

Nearly-rans include the French Emperor Napoleon III, whose delusions of competence led to disaster in Italy, Mexico and finally defeat at the hands of Bismarck, and the German Kaiser Wilhelm II, a ludicrously gauche and immature ruler but not actually responsible on his own for launching Germany, and the rest of Europe, into the First World War.

The nearly-rans also include the extravagant waste of money and space that went by the name of King Ludwig II of Bavaria; and absentee monarchs like Richard I of England and Charles XII of Sweden – both of them great military leaders who spent much of their reigns away at war, including time in captivity, instead of seeing to the affairs of their kingdoms.

Here, then, is my list of the nine worst monarchs in history…


Gaius Caligula (ruled AD 12–41)



There are plenty of other contenders for worst Roman Emperor – Nero and Commodus, for example – but Caligula's mad reign sets a high standard. After a promising start to his reign he seems to have set out specifically to intimidate and humiliate the senate and high command of the army, and he gave grave offence, not least in Jerusalem, by declaring himself a god; even the Romans normally only recognised deification after death.

Caligula (real name Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, "Caligula" being a nickname meaning "little soldier's boot") instituted a reign of terror through arbitrary arrest for treason, much as his predecessor Tiberius had done; it was also widely rumoured that he was engaged in incest with his sisters and that he lived a life of sexual debauchery, and this may well be true. The story of his making his horse a consul, meanwhile, may have been exaggerated, but it was not out of character.

Caligula’s unforgivable mistake was to jeopardise Rome's military reputation by declaring a sort of surreal war on the sea, ordering his soldiers to wade in and slash at the waves with their swords and collecting chests full of seashells as the spoils of his ‘victory’ over the god Neptune, king of the sea, and by his failed campaign against the Germans, for which he still awarded himself a triumph. He was assassinated by the Praetorian Guard in 41.

Caligula’s successor, Claudius, was an improvement but, despite the favourable picture in Robert Graves's famous book I, Claudius, not by much.

Pope John XII (954–964)



Even by the lax standards of the medieval papacy, John XII stands out as a disaster of the highest order. He was elected pope at the ripe old age of 18 as part of a political deal with the Roman nobility, and he inherited a conflict for control of Italy between the papacy and the Italian king Berengarius.

John had the support of the powerful German emperor Otto I, who swore to defend John's title, but John himself was too taken up with a life of drunken sex parties in the Lateran to care too much either way. He recovered from his hangover enough to accept Otto's oath of undying loyalty and then promptly linked up behind Otto's back with his enemy, Berengarius.

Understandably annoyed, Otto had John overthrown and accused, among other things, of simony (clerical corruption), murder, perjury and incest, and he replaced him with a new pope, Leo III. However, John made a comeback and had Leo's supporters punished ruthlessly: one cardinal had his hand cut off and he had a bishop whipped.

Full-scale war broke out between John and Otto, until John unexpectedly died – in bed with another man's wife, or so rumour had it.

King John (1199–1216)



The reign of King John is a salutary reminder that murder and treachery may possibly be forgiven in a monarch, but not incompetence.

John was the youngest and favourite son of Henry II, but he had not been entrusted with any lands and was mockingly nicknamed John Lackland. He tried unsuccessfully to seize power while his brother Richard I (the Lionheart) was away on crusade and was sent into exile upon Richard's return.

On his accession John had his own nephew Arthur murdered, fearing Arthur might pursue his own, much better, claim to the throne, and he embarked on a disastrous war with King Philippe-Auguste of France in which he lost the whole of Normandy. This singular act of incompetence deprived the barons of an important part of their power base, and he alienated them further with arbitrary demands for money and even by forcing himself on their wives.

In exasperation they forced him to accept Magna Carta; no sooner had he sealed it, however, than he then went back on his word and plunged the country into a maelstrom of war and French invasion. Some tyrants have been rehabilitated by history – but not John.


c1215, the seal of King John of England to the agreement with the barons. (Photo by Hulton Archive/Getty Images)


King Richard II (1377–99)



Unlike Richard III, Richard II has good reason to feel grateful towards Shakespeare, who portrayed this startlingly incompetent monarch as a tragic figure; a victim of circumstances and of others' machinations rather than the vain, self-regarding author of his own downfall he actually was.

Learning nothing from the disastrous precedent of Edward II (his great-grandfather), Richard II alienated the nobility by gathering a bunch of cronies around him and then ended up in confrontation with parliament over his demands for money.

His reign descended into a game of political manoeuvre between himself and his much more able and impressive uncle, John of Gaunt, before degenerating into a gory grudge match between Richard and the five Lords Appellant, whom he either had killed or forced into exile.

Richard might have redeemed himself by prowess in war or administration, but he possessed neither. His cousin Henry Bolingbroke's coup of 1399, illegal though it no doubt was, brought to an end Richard's disastrous reign, with Bolingbroke becoming King Henry IV. Richard II has his defenders nowadays, who will doubtless take issue with his inclusion in this list, but there really is very little to say for him as a ruler.


Ivan IV ‘the Terrible’ (1547–84)



Prince Ivan Vassilyevitch grew up at the hazardous court of Moscow, his life often in danger from the rivalry of the boyars – nobles. It gave him a lifelong hatred of the nobility and a deep streak of ruthless cruelty – aged 13 he had one boyar eaten alive by dogs.

Ivan was Prince of Muscovy from 1533, and in 1547 he was crowned Tsar (Emperor) of all Russia – the first ruler to hold the title. He crushed the boyars, stealing their lands to give to his own followers; he also condemned millions of Russians to a permanent state of serfdom.

Ivan took a vast area of Russia as his personal domain patrolled by a mounted police force with carte blanche to arrest and execute as they liked. Distrusting the city of Novgorod he had it violently sacked and its inhabitants massacred, and he embarked on a disastrous and ultimately unsuccessful series of wars with Russia's neighbours.

Ivan beat up his own pregnant daughter and killed his son in a fit of rage. Ivan was in many ways an able ruler, but his ruthlessness, paranoia and taste for blood earn him his place in this list.

Mary, Queen of Scots (1542–67)




We are so familiar with the drama and tragedy of Mary's reign that it is easy to overlook the blindingly obvious point that she was absolutely useless as queen of Scotland. Admittedly, ruling 16th-century Scotland was no easy task, and it was made harder still for Catholic Mary by the stern Presbyterian leader, John Knox, and her violent, boorish husband, Lord Darnley.

Nevertheless, Mary showed none of her cousin Elizabeth I of England's political skill in defusing religious or factional conflict, and she headed into pointless confrontation with Knox and the Presbyterians. At a time when female rule was generally regarded with suspicion in any case, she played up to the stereotype by appearing to live in a cosy world of favourites – including her unfortunate Italian guitar teacher, David Rizzio.

Mary’s suspected involvement in the spectacular murder of Darnley on 10 February 1567 was a political mistake of the first order; her marriage three months later to the main suspect, the Earl of Bothwell, was an act of breathtaking stupidity. It is hardly surprising that the Scots overthrew Mary and locked her up.

Having escaped, she was mad to throw away her advantage by going to England, where she could only be regarded as a threat, instead of to France, where she would have been welcomed with open arms (she was France's queen consort from 1559 to 1560 by her marriage to Francis II). In 1587, she was executed at Fotheringhay Castle in Northamptonshire after being found guilty of plotting to assassinate Elizabeth and take her throne.


Emperor Rudolf II (1576–1612)



Some historians are kinder to Rudolf than in the past, but by any standards he was a disastrous ruler. He was elected Holy Roman Emperor in 1576, though he was prone to long bouts of deep depression and melancholia and he spent most of his time dabbling in alchemy and astrology.

A staunch Catholic, Rudolf tore up the religious settlement that for the past 20 years had kept Germany's Catholics and Protestants from each others' throats, and embarked on a crusade to eradicate Protestantism from Germany's towns and villages.

When the Protestants formed a self-defence league, the Hungarians rose in revolt and the Turks launched an offensive, Rudolf shut himself up in Prague Castle and refused to speak to anyone. Eventually the Habsburgs had to agree to replace Rudolf with his brother, Matthias, who restored the religious peace in Germany and signed treaties with the Turks and Hungarians, only for Rudolf to fly into a rage and start up the Turkish war again.

Rudolf reluctantly signed the letter of majesty granting freedom of worship to Protestants in Bohemia but then embarked on a programme of persecution. The Bohemians appealed to Matthias for help, and in 1611 Rudolf was forced to hand power over to his brother. He died a year later, having laid the foundations for the disastrous Thirty Years’ War that would tear Europe apart within six years of his death.


c1590: Rudolf II, Holy Roman Emperor from 1576, as Vertumnus, ancient Roman god of seasons who presided over gardens and orchards. From the Stoklosters Slu tt, Balsta, Sweden. (Photo by Art Media/Print Collector/Getty Images)


Queen Ranavalona I of Madagascar (1828–61)



At a time when the Europeans were spreading their colonial holdings around the world, Queen Ranavalona was able to keep Madagascar free of British and French control, but she did so by establishing a rule so ruthless that it has been estimated that the population of her kingdom was halved during her reign.

Queen Ranavalona maintained her power by retaining the loyalty of the Malagasy army and imposing regular periods of forced labour on the rest of the population in lieu of taxation. On one notorious occasion she organised a buffalo hunt for herself, her nobles and their families and followers, and she insisted that an entire road be built in front of the party for them all to advance to the hunt in comfort: an estimated 10,000 people died carrying out this particular piece of folly.

Queen Ranavalona faced several plots and at least one serious coup attempt; as she grew more paranoid she forced more people to undergo the notorious tangena test: eating three pieces of chicken skin before swallowing a poisonous nut that caused the victim to vomit (if it did not actually poison them, which it often did). If all three pieces were not found in the vomit, the victim was executed.

Having encouraged Christianity at the start of her reign, Queen Ranavalona changed policy and instituted ruthless persecution of native Christians. She survived all plots against her and died in her bed.

King Leopold II of Belgium (1865–1909)




Leopold's place in this list results not from his rule in Belgium, but from the crimes committed in the enormous kingdom he carved out for himself in Congo. He obtained the territory by international agreement and named it the Congo Free State; it was not a Belgian colony, but the king's personal fiefdom.

The CFS was presented to the world as a model of liberty and prosperity, devoted to the elimination of slavery. Only gradually did the world learn that it was in fact a slave state in which the Congolese were ruled by terror.

As Leopold raked in the riches from Congo's enormous reserves of copper, ivory and rubber, the Congolese were forced to work by wholesale mutilation of their wives and children, usually by chopping off their hands or feet. Mutilation was also widely used as a punishment for workers who ran away or collected less than their quota.

An investigation by the British consular official Roger Casement revealed that the Belgian Force Publique regarded the Congolese as little more than animals to be killed for sport. The king fought a high-profile legal battle to prevent details of his regime in Congo from being made public, and it took an international campaign to force him to hand Congo over to the Belgian government.

Leopold's name is forever associated with the Congolese reign of terror, and that alone justifies his inclusion in this list.


Who do you think is the worst monarch in history and why? Share your thoughts by commenting below, by tweeting us @HistoryExtra, or by posting on our Facebook page.


King John, Ivan the Terrible and Mary, Queen of Scots: 9 of the worst kings and queens in history | History Extra
 
Last edited:

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
What do Caligula, King John, Ivan the Terrible, Queen Ranavalona I and Mary, Queen of Scots have in common?

They are all amongst the worst monarchs in history.

9 of the worst monarchs in history

Historian Sean Lang kicks off our Kings & Queens Week by rounding up nine of the most disastrous monarchs in history…

Monday 27th July 2015
Sean Lang
BBC History Magazine

History has no shortage of disastrous rulers; this list could easily have been filled with the Roman Emperors alone. Rulers have been homicidal, like Nero or Genghis Khan; incompetent, like Edward II; completely untrustworthy, like Charles I; or amiable but inadequate, like Louis XVI of France or Tsar Nicholas II.

Would Obama or George Bush qualify? :) :)
 

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
I would have thought Henry the eighth would have been high on this list.t
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
I would have thought Henry the eighth would have been high on this list.t

That's what I thought until fairly recently when I read somewhere that he was considered by some to be a hero. Being devoutly religious seems to fool some people. :) As far as I'm concerned he was a real A##hole and hard on women.
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
The poor, deluded Yanks will probably add George the Third to your list.

Yeah, there's controversy about him too. He ruled for 60 years and many think he was crazier than a sh*t house rat, but I've heard from others that was only in his waning years and previous to that he was a good monarch.
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
48,391
1,666
113
Would Obama or George Bush qualify? :) :)


They'd be two of the worst presidents, beyond a shadow of a doubt. Especially Obama Barack.

I would have thought Henry the eighth would have been high on this list.t

Henry VIII was one of the BEST monarchs there has been.

The poor, deluded Yanks will probably add George the Third to your list.


George III was also a great monarch. He took a great interest in, and encouaged, the agricultural industry and it was in his long reign - from 1760 to 1820, third-longest only to his granddaughter Victoria and his great-great-great-great-granddaughter Elizabeth II - that the British Agricultural Revolution hit its peak. It wasn't for nothing that he earned the nickname "Farmer George."

One of the most cultured of monarchs, George III started a new royal collection of books (65,000 of his books were later given to the British Museum, as the nucleus of a national library) and opened his library to scholars.

In 1768, he founded and paid the initial costs of the Royal Academy of Arts (now famous for its exhibitions).

He was the first king to study science as part of his education (he had his own astronomical observatory). He was a great patron of science and maths. His collection of mathematical and scientific instruments is now housed in the Science Museum, London; he funded the construction and maintenance of William Herschel's 40-foot telescope, which was the biggest ever built at the time. Herschel discovered the planet Uranus, which he at first named Georgium Sidus (George's Star) after the King, in 1781.


Funded by George III, the "40-foot telescope", also known as the "
Great Forty-Foot" telescope, at Observatory House in Slough, Berkshire, was the biggest telescope in the world between 1789 and 1840. William Herschel used the telescope to discover Saturn's 6th and 7th moons - Enceladus and Mimas - in 1789


Photograph of the 40-foot telescope's frame taken in 1839 by William Herschel's son, John Herschel, shortly before it was dismantled



George III's collection of scientific instruments on display at the Science Museum, London


British scientist William Herschel discovered Uranus in 1781, which he at first named Georgium Sidus (George's Star) after King George III
 
Last edited:

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
48,391
1,666
113
7 forgotten monarchs

The likes of Henry VIII, Queen Victoria and Elizabeth I immediately spring to mind when we think of past monarchs. But a number of other royals have, over the centuries, been overshadowed by their more famous counterparts. Here, we take a look at seven of them…


Friday 31st July 2015
Jessica Hope
BBC History Magazine
BBC History Magazine - 5 issues for £5



King William II is often overshadowed by his Norman father, William the Conqueror. (Credit: Fine Art Images/Heritage Images/Getty Images)


1) William II (reigned 1087–1100)

As the third son of William I (the Conqueror) and Matilda of Flanders, it is thought that William II was born in around 1056, yet little is known about his upbringing. Upon the death of his father in 1087, William was bequeathed the Kingdom of England, while his elder brother, Robert Curthose, inherited the Duchy of Normandy.

In 1088, a baronial revolt took place against William’s rule in the hope of putting Robert on the English throne. This was led by William’s uncle, Odo of Bayeux. However, the rebellion quickly failed. In retaliation, William waged war against his brother in 1089 in an attempt to claim Normandy for himself and expand his territories. William was successful, and his brother, Robert, later mortgaged Normandy to the king after William levied great taxes on the English people.

William Rufus, as he became known because of his ruddy complexion, faced difficult relations with the church during his reign. He clashed with Archbishop Anselm, took over the revenues of Archbishop Lanfranc after his death in 1089, and purposely kept bishopric positions open in order to make revenue from them.

While out hunting one day in the New Forest in 1100, William was shot by an arrow and died from his injuries. Recorded at the time as an accident, it has since been suggested that the incident could have been an act of assassination on the orders of William’s younger brother, Henry, who consequently ascended to the throne as Henry I.

2) Henry I (reigned 1100–35)



Henry followed his brother, William II, onto the throne of England after his death in 1100. Just days after his brother’s death, Henry had himself crowned before their elder brother, Robert, could stake his claim.

Robert invaded England in 1101, but to no avail, and he later found himself facing Henry’s troops in Normandy at the battle of Tinchebrai, in 1106. Henry successfully conquered Normandy, and Robert spent the last 28 years of his life in imprisonment.

During his reign, Henry was successful in developing the exchequer and increasing royal revenues. He also secured the northern border with Scotland through his tactical marriage to the sister of the king of Scotland, Matilda (aka Edith), in November 1100.

In 1120, Henry’s son and heir, William Adelin, died while aboard the White Ship after it sank in the English Channel. The death of his son provoked debates over who should succeed the throne after Henry’s death.

Henry’s daughter, Matilda, who was the wife of the Holy Roman Emperor Henry V at the time, was put forward as the next legitimate heir. However, resentment over the idea of a woman inheriting the throne prompted Matilda’s cousin, Stephen of Blois, to usurp the throne for himself after Henry’s death in 1135. This sparked what would become known as ‘The Anarchy’: civil war raged in England and Normandy for the next two decades.


The Great Seal of Henry I. (Credit: Universal History Archive/UIG via Getty Images)


3) Stephen (reigned 1135–54)



As the grandson of William the Conqueror, Stephen held a claim to the English throne when he seized it from Henry I’s daughter, Matilda, in 1135. While he did not have the popular support of the nobles and the people of England, many of the bishops refused to accept a woman as their ruler and therefore backed Stephen’s claim to the throne instead.

Being a woman in this period, Matilda could not lead troops into battle, and so in 1138 her half-brother, Robert, the Earl of Gloucester, raised an army against Stephen. After a number of battles, in September 1139 Matilda decided to invade England and quickly gained control of the west of England.

Over the next nine years, battles and tactics would play out between Stephen and his cousin in the fight for the throne. Stephen was captured by Matilda’s supporters in early 1141 at Lincoln, yet he was exchanged for the Earl of Gloucester in November of the same year, who had been captured by the opposing forces.

Over time, Stephen gradually won more battles than Matilda, and she left England in 1148, unsuccessful in claiming her throne. Yet this was not the end of Stephen’s endeavours. Matilda’s second marriage to Geoffrey Plantagenet, Count of Anjou, produced a son, Henry, in 1133. In 1149 and 1153, Henry invaded England in an attempt to depose Stephen and his son Eustace for good.

In the end, Eustace’s death in 1153 led to the creation of the treaty of Wallingford, whereby Stephen called for peace and acknowledged Henry as his heir after his death.

4) Henry III (reigned 1216–72)


Despite being one of the longest reigning monarchs of England, Henry III tends to be overshadowed for his predecessors, such as his father, King John, and his uncle, Richard the Lionheart.

Henry became king when he was just nine years old, in 1216. The kingdom was controlled by a number of regents until Henry officially took over the throne in 1234. Henry soon faced tensions from his nobles: many disliked the influence of his relatives on governmental decisions, and others disapproved of the arranged marriage between Henry’s youngest sister, Eleanor, and the noble Simon de Montfort, in 1238.

Furthermore, Henry led unsuccessful military campaigns in France in 1230 and 1242, which led to a disgruntled nobility and greater tax demands on the public. In 1258, the Provisions of Oxford were established, whereby a privy council of 15 men who had been specially selected by the barons were to advise the king and control the administration of the kingdom.


A 13th-century depiction of the coronation of King Henry III in 1216. (Credit: Universal History Archive/UIG via Getty Images)


However, disputes between the Earl of Gloucester and Simon de Montfort led the nobles and barons’ alliances to separate. Henry then abandoned the Provisions, and civil war broke out. Initially, de Montfort and the barons were successful and Henry was even captured at one point. However, in 1265 de Montfort was slain at the battle of Evesham by royalist forces led by Henry’s son, Prince Edward.

After the rebellion had ended, Henry looked to reconcile his courtiers and regain their support. He reestablished royal authority in 1267 with the Statute of Marlborough, where Henry promised to maintain Magna Carta.

When Henry III died in 1272 his son, Edward, took to the throne as Edward I.

One permanent legacy left by Henry was Westminster Abbey in London, where the king was buried in 1272. Throughout the 13th century, Henry rebuilt the abbey from its Norman construction in the gothic architectural style and established it as a shrine to his hero, St Edward the Confessor.

5) Queen Anne (reigned 1702–14)


The last Stuart monarch, Queen Anne oversaw significant political and cultural change throughout her reign, and became the first sovereign of Great Britain after the Act of Union in 1707.

Born in 1665, Anne was the second daughter of the future James II and VII. Anne and her elder sister, Mary, were brought up as Protestants, despite their father’s conversion to Catholicism. His religious sympathies and conflict with parliament would lead ultimately to his deposition in 1688, when Mary and her husband, William of Orange, took the throne as the only joint monarchs England has ever had (Mary II and William III). As William and Mary had no children, Anne became the next legitimate heir.

Anne became queen in 1702, just months before the War of the Spanish Succession broke out. John Churchill, the Duke of Marlborough, led a series of military victories during the conflict - including the famous battle of Blenheim against the French in 1704 - which dominated a great deal of Anne’s reign. Blenheim Palace in Oxfordshire was built to be given to John Churchill as a gift from a grateful nation. John's descendant, Winston, was born at the palace in 1874.

James VI of Scotland had succeeded the English throne in 1603 and became ruler of both nations, yet it was Anne who oversaw the unification of England and Scotland as one kingdom, which was confirmed in 1707. The Act of Union stipulated that one parliament should meet in Westminster; a combined coinage would be established, and a common flag would be created.


A portrait of Queen Anne, attributed to Godfrey Kneller. (Credit: Universal History Archive/Getty Images)


Despite becoming pregnant 18 times, Anne suffered numerous miscarriages and her only child to survive infancy, Prince William, died at the age of 11 in 1700. As it became quite likely Anne would not have any more children who could succeed her, parliament passed the Act of Settlement in 1701, which established a Protestant line of succession to the throne.

After her death in August 1714, Anne was succeeded by Prince George, the Elector of Hanover, beginning the Hanoverian line of monarchs.

6) George II (reigned 1727–60)



Prior to George I’s succession in 1714, Prince George and his father suffered very strained relations over their differences in political ideas and Prince’s George’s popularity with the public. George’s London residence became the centre for political rivalries among the court: members of the Whig party – who opposed the traditional political system – were entertained there.

Under the advice of his mentor, John Carteret, George led England into the War of the Austrian Succession in 1740. This influenced many at the time to argue that George was more interested in government issues in Germany than that of Britain. At the age of 60, George II became the last British monarch to lead a military campaign during the battle of Dettingen in 1743 against French troops in Germany.

As a result of his alliances at court, especially with politician Robert Walpole, George faced no major opposition in government from either the senior Whigs or Tories during the Jacobite Rebellion in 1745, whereby the ‘Young Pretender’ Charles Edward Stuart attempted to take the throne. George’s troops successfully defeated the final threat from the Jacobites after facing the pretender at the battle of Culloden in 1746.

George’s reign also witnessed a rise in the population in Britain, a growth in agriculture and trade, and an expansion in industries such as shipbuilding and coal. George also oversaw the expansion of Britain’s authority in India and Canada, after military leaders Robert Clive and James Wolfe directed significant campaigns there.

As George’s son, Frederick, died in 1751 (the cricket fan may have been killed by being hit with a cricket ball), George’s grandson, George III, inherited the throne after his death - just after his morning cup of hot chocolate and just after sitting on his toilet - on 25 October 1760 at Kensington Palace.

7) William IV (reigned 1830–37)

Succeeding to the throne at the age of 64, William IV is to date the oldest monarch to ascend to the throne, after his brother, George IV (who also ruled as Prince Regent since 1811 due to his father's madness), died without a surviving heir in 1830.

Prior to his accession, William had enjoyed a successful career in the Royal Navy, which he joined at the age of 13, and in 1811 he became admiral of the fleet. He spent time stationed in the West Indies and in America, and after his accession to the throne, many referred to him as the ‘sailor king’.


William IV in the Order of the Garter robes. Portrait by Sir Martin Archer Shee. (Credit: Universal History Archive/Getty Images)


After George IV’s only daughter, Princess Charlotte, died in 1818, George’s brothers jumped at the chance to get married and produce an heir. It was in this year that William married Princess Adelaide of Saxe-Meiningen, but his two daughters both died in infancy, and William had no legitimate heir. He did, however, have 10 illegitimate children with his long-term mistress, Dorothea Jordan, with whom he lived between 1791 and 1811.

After ascending the throne in 1830, William’s reign was dominated by the Reform crisis and political factions between the Tories and Whigs. After a struggle between the House of Commons and Lords surrounding the Reform Bill, William established the minimum number of Whig peers needed in the House of Lords in order for a bill to pass through. The resulting 1832 Reform Act extended the voting franchise to more people in Britain than ever before, and it abolished some of the abuses of the electoral system.

On 20 June 1837, William IV died without an heir. His niece, Victoria, ascended the throne just short of a month after her 18th birthday, and therefore avoided another regency.

Prime Minister David Cameron is a great-great-great-great-grandson of William IV and Dorothea Jordan.




7 forgotten monarchs | History Extra
 
Last edited:

Sons of Liberty

Walks on Water
Aug 24, 2010
1,284
0
36
Evil Empire
All monarchs (that are alive) should be boiled in hot oil, given first aid and let them heal a bit so we can have a do over. If it wasn't for the brain washed populous, they would understand that nobody deserves any special privilege simply based on a bloodline. It's pointless to even have a conversation, luckily, in the future "royal" families will be eradicated and/or long forgotten.

I get it, you're all ill thinking they deserve special privileges.
 

JLM

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 27, 2008
75,301
547
113
Vernon, B.C.
All monarchs (that are alive) should be boiled in hot oil, given first aid and let them heal a bit so we can have a do over. If it wasn't for the brain washed populous, they would understand that nobody deserves any special privilege simply based on a bloodline. It's pointless to even have a conversation, luckily, in the future "royal" families will be eradicated and/or long forgotten.

Yeah, I tend to agree but customs are hard to break.
 

Sons of Liberty

Walks on Water
Aug 24, 2010
1,284
0
36
Evil Empire
Yeah, I tend to agree but customs are hard to break.

It's referred to as a revolution, I know Canadians have zero revolutionary blood in them, at least your monarch is way the **** away from Canada.

And who would you replace Elizabeth II with? President Harper?

You're too narrow minded to even converse with on this topic, your Head of State is chosen for all of you and you can't say a dam thing about it, determine first that freedom is a journey then MAYBE we can talk about it.
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
48,391
1,666
113
Pioneering Royals

By Christopher Winn
History Today


Portrait of Richard II of England, mid-1390s. He was the first monarch to use a spoon, unlike his Plantagenet forebears who used their hands whilst eating. It was one of his many (at the time) unusual traits which led many of his barons to consider him girly


On June 2nd, 1953 Elizabeth II was crowned in Westminster Abbey in the first coronation service to be televised. Here are more pioneering Royals:

The first English king to use a spoon at meal times rather than his hands was Richard II. He also built the first royal bath-house at the Palace of Westminster and is credited with inventing the handkerchief, being recorded in contemporary documents as using square pieces of cloth to wipe his nose.


Rather than eat with his hands and wage war against the troublesome French and Scots, like the other Plantagenet monarchs, Richard II instead preferred to use a spoon and invent the handkerchief

The first monarch to wear silk stockings was thought to be Elizabeth I, who was given a pair by her ‘silk woman’, Alice Montagu, in 1560. They can be seen in Hatfield House, where Elizabeth spent much of her childhood. Her successor, James I, attempted to exploit the fashion for silk stockings by planting a mulberry orchard next to St James’s Palace in London to feed silk worms. The plan never took off and the site of the orchard is now occupied by Buckingham Palace.

The first monarch to travel by train was Queen Victoria, on June 13th, 1842, when she travelled from Slough station, near Windsor, to Paddington in a specially adapted royal carriage drawn by a new steam engine called Phlegethon, named after one of the five rivers of the Greek Underworld. Victoria was also the first British monarch to be photographed, when she had her photo taken with her eldest daughter in 1845.



The first British monarch to travel in a motor-car was Edward VII who in 1896 as Prince of Wales was taken for a ride in England’s first automobile, a Panhard Levassor owned by the Hon. Evelyn Ellis of Datchet in Berkshire.

The first monarch to broadcast a Christmas message on the radio was George V, who gave a speech, scripted by Rudyard Kipling, from the Sandringham estate in Norfolk in 1932.

The first British monarch to fly in an aeroplane was Edward VIII, who in 1936 flew from Sandringham to London to be proclaimed king. He took his own twin-engine Dragon Rapide, which in July that year became the first aircraft of the newly created King’s Flight.



Christopher Winn is the author of I Never Knew That About Royal Britain


Pioneering Royals | History Today



your Head of State is chosen for all of you

Only with our consent.

and you can't say a dam thing about it
Who says so? The English, and then the British, have risen up many times when our monarch's authority has overstepped its bounds, producing things like Magna Carta and the 1689 Bill of Rights. That's why we have been ruled for centuries by a constitutional monarch which has had to get permission from parliament to do things like wage war and levy taxes, whilst the French and everyone else in Europe were ruled by tyrannical, all-powerful absolute monarchs who could do what they liked.


determine first that freedom is a journey then MAYBE we can talk about it.
The average Briton is much freer than the average American. The British have long been the freest people on Earth, and still are.
 
Last edited:

Curious Cdn

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 22, 2015
37,070
6
36
Pioneering Royals

By Christopher Winn
History Today


Portrait of Richard II of England, mid-1390s. He was the first monarch to use a spoon, unlike his Plantagenet forebears who used their hands whilst eating. It was one of his many (at the time) unusual traits which led many of his barons to consider him girly


On June 2nd, 1953 Elizabeth II was crowned in Westminster Abbey in the first coronation service to be televised. Here are more pioneering Royals:

The first English king to use a spoon at meal times rather than his hands was Richard II. He also built the first royal bath-house at the Palace of Westminster and is credited with inventing the handkerchief, being recorded in contemporary documents as using square pieces of cloth to wipe his nose.


Rather than eat with his hands and wage war against the troublesome French and Scots, like the other Plantagenet monarchs, Richard II instead preferred to use a spoon and invent the handkerchief

The first monarch to wear silk stockings was thought to be Elizabeth I, who was given a pair by her ‘silk woman’, Alice Montagu, in 1560. They can be seen in Hatfield House, where Elizabeth spent much of her childhood. Her successor, James I, attempted to exploit the fashion for silk stockings by planting a mulberry orchard next to St James’s Palace in London to feed silk worms. The plan never took off and the site of the orchard is now occupied by Buckingham Palace.

The first monarch to travel by train was Queen Victoria, on June 13th, 1842, when she travelled from Slough station, near Windsor, to Paddington in a specially adapted royal carriage drawn by a new steam engine called Phlegethon, named after one of the five rivers of the Greek Underworld. Victoria was also the first British monarch to be photographed, when she had her photo taken with her eldest daughter in 1845.



The first British monarch to travel in a motor-car was Edward VII who in 1896 as Prince of Wales was taken for a ride in England’s first automobile, a Panhard Levassor owned by the Hon. Evelyn Ellis of Datchet in Berkshire.

The first monarch to broadcast a Christmas message on the radio was George V, who gave a speech, scripted by Rudyard Kipling, from the Sandringham estate in Norfolk in 1932.

The first British monarch to fly in an aeroplane was Edward VIII, who in 1936 flew from Sandringham to London to be proclaimed king. He took his own twin-engine Dragon Rapide, which in July that year became the first aircraft of the newly created King’s Flight.



Christopher Winn is the author of I Never Knew That About Royal Britain


Pioneering Royals | History Today





Only with our consent.

Who says so? The English, and then the British, have risen up many times when our monarch's authority has overstepped its bounds, producing things like Magna Carta and the 1689 Bill of Rights. That's why we have been ruled for centuries by a constitutional monarch which has had to get permission from parliament to do things like wage war and levy taxes, whilst the French and everyone else in Europe were ruled by tyrannical, all-powerful absolute monarchs who could do what they liked.


The average Briton is much freer than the average American. The British have long been the freest people on Earth, and still are.

I would say that about us, as well. What the Americans are allowed to think is extremely controlled.
 

Ludlow

Hall of Fame Member
Jun 7, 2014
13,588
0
36
wherever i sit down my ars
yes the social engineering we are conditioned to has turned all of us into mindless robots incapable of thinking for ourselves. Soon we'll all be wearing cod pieces electronically geared to regulate our sexual schedules which will determine population growth,

Quoting a lady who I admired many years ago, "the only difference between socialism and democracy,, is that the socialists know they are not free. Stop deluding yourself and pay your dues and like it.
 

Curious Cdn

Hall of Fame Member
Feb 22, 2015
37,070
6
36
yes the social engineering we are conditioned to has turned all of us into mindless robots incapable of thinking for ourselves. Soon we'll all be wearing cod pieces electronically geared to regulate our sexual schedules which will determine population growth,

Quoting a lady who I admired many years ago, "the only difference between socialism and democracy,, is that the socialists know they are not free. Stop deluding yourself and pay your dues and like it.

Yes, yes. I can see you going in that direction. Your educational system already limits what you learn to "official histories".