Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > European History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

European History European History Forum - Western and Eastern Europe including the British Isles, Scandinavia, Russia


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old November 13th, 2012, 10:13 AM   #11

History Chick's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jun 2010
From: Colorado Springs (PA at heart)
Posts: 2,426

Quote:
Originally Posted by Louise C View Post
And he couldn't help becoming insane.
Indeed, I've always felt a bit sorry for him. My understanding is that his insanity was not violent so it's easy to feel bad for him - and he had periods of sanity and clarity, during which he understood his deteriorating mental health. That must have been tough to deal with.
History Chick is offline  
Remove Ads
Old November 13th, 2012, 10:23 AM   #12

Mangekyou's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Jan 2010
From: UK
Posts: 6,061
Blog Entries: 5

I think he is very unfairly treated. He was a very intelligent man, a patron of the arts, who was charismatic and showed a lot of interest in his subjects in the early years of his reign. He was very unfortunate to inherit the hereditary disease, Porphyria, which was not diagnosed correctly until the 20th century.
Mangekyou is offline  
Old November 13th, 2012, 11:08 AM   #13

Nemowork's Avatar
Teflon Soul
 
Joined: Jan 2011
From: South of the barcodes
Posts: 5,229

Quote:
Originally Posted by Locke View Post
A selfish, ignorant, snobby, and insane brat who became a disgrace to the British Crown.
You might be thinking of the next one
George_IV_of_the_United_Kingdom George_IV_of_the_United_Kingdom
theres no way you can call G3 selfish or ignorant.
Nemowork is online now  
Old November 13th, 2012, 11:35 AM   #14

redcoat's Avatar
Hiding behind the sofa
 
Joined: Nov 2010
From: Stockport Cheshire UK
Posts: 4,515

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jake10 View Post
. Has his reputation changed over the years?
Not really, in the UK he has always been considered one of the better kings.
redcoat is offline  
Old November 13th, 2012, 11:40 AM   #15

redcoat's Avatar
Hiding behind the sofa
 
Joined: Nov 2010
From: Stockport Cheshire UK
Posts: 4,515

Quote:
Originally Posted by kbear View Post
with 15 kids, we know what he liked to do in his spare time i feel sorry for the mrs. tho..
That one of the odd things about George III, he actually loved his wife and was faithful to her
redcoat is offline  
Old November 13th, 2012, 12:42 PM   #16

Major Wilson's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Norway
Posts: 514

Quote:
Originally Posted by redcoat View Post
That one of the odd things about George III, he actually loved his wife and was faithful to her
Actually, most British monarchs since George III have been faithful to their spouces. The exceptions being George IV and Edward VI. Apart from them, Britain has had a surprisingly long period of faithful monarchs. Even William IV was most likely faithful. George II also seems to have been in a happy marriage.

So in the 285 years since 1727, there has probably been only 20 years where the Monarch kept mistresses.
Major Wilson is offline  
Old November 13th, 2012, 02:48 PM   #17

Ancientgeezer's Avatar
Revisionist
 
Joined: Nov 2011
From: The Dustbin, formerly, Garden of England
Posts: 5,010

Quote:
Originally Posted by Major Wilson View Post
Actually, most British monarchs since George III have been faithful to their spouces. The exceptions being George IV and Edward VI. Apart from them, Britain has had a surprisingly long period of faithful monarchs. Even William IV was most likely faithful. George II also seems to have been in a happy marriage.

So in the 285 years since 1727, there has probably been only 20 years where the Monarch kept mistresses.
As far as we know.

However , you missed a few--- Geo. I had the Duchess of Kendal (full time),
Geo II had Henrietta Howard and Amalie von Wallmoden, Frederick Prince of Wales had too many mistresses to count as was famous for patronizing every knocking-shop in London after being turned down by Lady Diana Spencer! George IV had Mrs Fitzherbert, Lady Conyngham, Anna Marie Crouch, Lady Hertford, Grace Elliot and Frances Villiers. William IV had Mrs Jordan full time for 20 years. Geo III may have had Hanna Lightfoot, but thereby lies a mystery.
Victoria and John Brown is a bit of mystery too.
Edward VII-- how can we keep up? How could he?
George V seems to have been a good boy, but his elder brother was as queer as a coot, distaining women and preferring boys.
Edward VIII had everyone he could get his royal hands on, mainly the wives of court hangers-on before he met Mrs Simpson.
George VII-- it's too soon, the papers may become public in 2052.
The adventures of Phil the Greek, Princess Margaret, Charles and his lads don't really count do they?


Lady Diana Spencer v. 1.0
Click the image to open in full size.
Ancientgeezer is offline  
Old November 13th, 2012, 03:14 PM   #18

Major Wilson's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Norway
Posts: 514

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ancientgeezer View Post
As far as we know.

However , you missed a few--- Geo. I had the Duchess of Kendal (full time),
Geo II had Henrietta Howard and Amalie von Wallmoden, Frederick Prince of Wales had too many mistresses to count as was famous for patronizing every knocking-shop in London after being turned down by Lady Diana Spencer! George IV had Mrs Fitzherbert, Lady Conyngham, Anna Marie Crouch, Lady Hertford, Grace Elliot and Frances Villiers. William IV had Mrs Jordan full time for 20 years. Geo III may have had Hanna Lightfoot, but thereby lies a mystery.
Victoria and John Brown is a bit of mystery too.
Edward VII-- how can we keep up? How could he?
George V seems to have been a good boy, but his elder brother was as queer as a coot, distaining women and preferring boys.
Edward VIII had everyone he could get his royal hands on, mainly the wives of court hangers-on before he met Mrs Simpson.
George VII-- it's too soon, the papers may become public in 2052.
The adventures of Phil the Greek, Princess Margaret, Charles and his lads don't really count do they?


Lady Diana Spencer v. 1.0
Click the image to open in full size.
No, I think I got them all.

George I is pre-1727.

George II I'm not sure of. It seems he was in a happy marriage.

Princes of Wales are not monarchs.

William IV had Mrs Jordan before he got married. So he was not unfaithful.

Mr. Brown appeared on the stage after Prince Albert's death. So whatever happened, Victoria was not unfaithful.

George V elder brother was never a monarch - nor married. Although he could have been an interesting monarch.

Edward VIII was not married whilst being a monarch. Besides, he probably had his hands full dealing with his future wife to even have the time to play around with others during his 45 minute reign. So he was not unfaithful.

Philip, Margaret, Charles and the boys are not/have not been monarchs yet.

So I still claim that in the 285 years since 1727, there has probably been only 20 years where the Monarch was unfaithful.
Major Wilson is offline  
Old November 27th, 2012, 04:27 AM   #19

shivfan's Avatar
Scholar
 
Joined: Dec 2011
From: Hertfordshire
Posts: 852

Quote:
Originally Posted by tjadams View Post
I see him as no better or worse than any other monarchy.
Ditto....

A conservative king, with limited power, who opposed the anti-slavery movement, and with his sons, strong supporters of the pro-slavery lobby.

I wonder if he was gnashing his teeth when he was obliged to sign into law the Act which abolished the slave trade....

The real power seems to have been in the hands of the prime ministers, which was probably just as well....
shivfan is offline  
Old November 27th, 2012, 10:39 AM   #20

Ancientgeezer's Avatar
Revisionist
 
Joined: Nov 2011
From: The Dustbin, formerly, Garden of England
Posts: 5,010

Quote:
Originally Posted by shivfan View Post
Ditto....

A conservative king, with limited power, who opposed the anti-slavery movement, and with his sons, strong supporters of the pro-slavery lobby.

I wonder if he was gnashing his teeth when he was obliged to sign into law the Act which abolished the slave trade....

The real power seems to have been in the hands of the prime ministers, which was probably just as well....
What is your evidence that Geo.III or Geo. IV supported the pro-slavry lobby?
Geo.III, like all sovereigns had personal opinions and public opinions that were the opinions of his ministers. Geo III showed personal distaste for the slave trade in general as shown by his banning of sugar in the royal household as a silent protest against the trade. When the debate on slavery in the colonies reached its height with the first introduction of the anti-slave trade bill by Pitt in 1778, the King was going through his first bout of insanity and was not in a position to support or oppose the bill. It was during a narrow window of sanity that Geo III DID sign the antislave trade bill.
George III's sons always took a contrary view to anything that their father stood for, yet Geo.IV, the Prince Regent, the Duke of Kent (Victoria's father) and the Duke of Sussex supported Wilberforce, even though in the case of Prinny, Wilberforce was in the wrong party. This is evidenced by Wilberforce's dedication to these illuminaries in his published works.
The Duke of Kent, who had spent time in America and the West Indies, also provided finacial support to evangelical societies that agitated against slavery.
William IV on the other hand believed that manumission would do the slave in the West Indies no good and he had sound reasons. As he stated in the House of Lords before becoming King, he had travelled the world widely as a sea captain and had seen how Scottish crofters had fallen into total destitution when released from servitude, while the Scots could be shipped to the colonies, where, he asked, could unwanted negroes go? He also professed deep concern for the fate of the black poor in London. As a bon-vivant in his younger days, he also despised Wilberforce as a preachy, nosy do-gooder.
Quote:
"the proponents of the abolition are either fanatics or hypocrites, and in one of those classes I rank Mr. Wilberforce"
It was, however, in his reign that slavery was abolished in the Empire, the Reform Bill and the first factory and safety acts passed.
Ancientgeezer is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > European History

Tags
george, iii, king, view


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Your view on King Billy... jeroenrottgering European History 65 August 15th, 2012 10:08 AM
How do you know King George III? Pancho35 European History 37 October 4th, 2011 12:51 PM
Was King George VI malnourished? CIowa European History 4 May 28th, 2011 01:52 AM
King George III and Propaganda babikeri History Help 11 October 31st, 2010 10:46 AM
Napoleon-King George III Monsieur Stark European History 1 December 9th, 2006 09:38 AM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.