Most inbred royalty?

Feb 2019
617
Serbia
#41
That's a very good question... his mother was Queen Regent - from what I gather, up to her death, when Charles was 35. Perhaps they held out hope that his developmental delays would resolve as he aged?

You raise a good point - perhaps the medicine of the day was partially to blame for some of these fertility issues / infant mortalities.
I think not. His condition was more than ''developmental delays'', he had a terrible set of disabilities, both physical and mental. It was apparent that it would stick with him until the end. His weak state and the fact that he was pretty much a figure head was good for the nobility. In 1677 his mother was deposed by his brother John of Austria the Younger, who ruled until his death in 1679. After John's death Charles' mother returned to the regency. Officially, her regency ended in 1675 but she continued to exercise influence along with other nobles. John arranged a marriage for Charles in hopes of him actually getting an heir, but it was discovered he was infertile. He was king because he inherited the throne, simple as that. He was around as a figurehead while the nobles tried to get real power. Lack of advanced medicine did have an impact on infant mortality at the time but Charles' disabilities were a result of genetics and inbreeding.
 
Likes: Futurist
Feb 2019
598
Pennsylvania, US
#43
I think not. His condition was more than ''developmental delays'', he had a terrible set of disabilities, both physical and mental. It was apparent that it would stick with him until the end. His weak state and the fact that he was pretty much a figure head was good for the nobility. In 1677 his mother was deposed by his brother John of Austria the Younger, who ruled until his death in 1679. After John's death Charles' mother returned to the regency. Officially, her regency ended in 1675 but she continued to exercise influence along with other nobles. John arranged a marriage for Charles in hopes of him actually getting an heir, but it was discovered he was infertile. He was king because he inherited the throne, simple as that. He was around as a figurehead while the nobles tried to get real power. Lack of advanced medicine did have an impact on infant mortality at the time but Charles' disabilities were a result of genetics and inbreeding.
I was mainly just trying to keep the conversation going... :) If you aren't as knowledgeable about the topic as you are, it's a fair question to ask... why put him on the throne in the first place? Perhaps they had hopes that he would outgrow some of the issues he presented as a baby - it would take a few years before anyone would know about his infertility. I agree with you, though, that he merely was a figure head.
 
Likes: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
18,745
SoCal
#44
I was mainly just trying to keep the conversation going... :) If you aren't as knowledgeable about the topic as you are, it's a fair question to ask... why put him on the throne in the first place? Perhaps they had hopes that he would outgrow some of the issues he presented as a baby - it would take a few years before anyone would know about his infertility. I agree with you, though, that he merely was a figure head.
AFAIK, European monarchies back then generally had the attitude that people who acquired the throne by birthright must reign regardless of anything.
 
Likes: Niobe

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
18,745
SoCal
#45
In fact, this is why there was such controversy when Philip V of Spain renounced his and his male-line descendants' right to the French throne. Some people believed that princes cannot simply renounce something that might eventually become their birthright--especially in advance.
 
Likes: Niobe

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
18,745
SoCal
#46
Tsar Alexander III of Russia is another example of this. In the 1860s, he fell madly in love with his mother's lady-in-waiting, Princess Maria Elimovna Meshcherskaya. He was willing to renounce his rights of succession to the Russian throne in exchange for being allowed to do this, but his father Tsar Alexander II of Russia gave him a big fat "No!" and told him that it was his destiny to become Russia's Tsar. Thus the future Alexander III reluctantly ended his relationship with this woman and instead married the widow of his dead elder brother Nicholas.
 
Likes: Niobe

MAGolding

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
2,808
Chalfont, Pennsylvania
#48
Why was he placed on the throne in the first place?
From what I read on Wikipedia, another son of Philip IV might also suffer from the consequences of inbreeding.
Philip Prospero, Prince of Asturias - Wikipedia
Of all the children of Philip IV, only this is a "normal" boy:
Balthasar Charles, Prince of Asturias - Wikipedia
I prefer going scientific here: the high child mortality rate in the Spanish family was partially inbreeding and partially poor medical
science of the day.
That's a very good question... his mother was Queen Regent - from what I gather, up to her death, when Charles was 35. Perhaps they held out hope that his developmental delays would resolve as he aged?

You raise a good point - perhaps the medicine of the day was partially to blame for some of these fertility issues / infant mortalities.
Why was Charles II placed on the throne in the first place?

Because he was alive, a son of the previous king, and the only surviving legitimate son of the previous king, and thus was the legal heir to the Spanish throne. Furthermore, he was a minor who required a regency for years anyway so his mental deficiencies would not be important for years anyway. They could always hope that a miracle could turn Louis XIV into a good man who would no longer try to steal Spanish territories, or that an epidemic would wipe out the French royal family and start a war for the succession in France, or something would happen to make things turn out well.
 

MAGolding

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
2,808
Chalfont, Pennsylvania
#49
It was mentioned that Joseph Ferdinand of Bavaria (1692-1699) was chosen as a compromise candidate to the Spanish throne. As a close relative of the King of Spain he was quite inbred himself. Joseph Ferdinand of Bavaria - Wikipedia

I once traced Joseph Ferdinand's ancestry back to Grand Duke Gediminas of Lithuania (c. 1275-1341). Because of several uncle-niece marriages in his ancestry, Joseph Ferdinand was descended from Gedimnas in different numbers of generations in different lines, between a minimum of 10 generations and a maximum of 15 generations. Which goes to prove that assuming an average generation length can be misleading.

I think that the Inca imperial dynasty may have had a very high degree of inbreeding. As I remember, several generations of emperors in a row married their full sisters.

I believe there was also inbreeding in the Japanese Imperial dynasty for several generations of emperors marrying their half sisters, before it became the custom to only marry women of the Fujiwara family.
 
Likes: Futurist

Futurist

Ad Honoris
May 2014
18,745
SoCal
#50
It was mentioned that Joseph Ferdinand of Bavaria (1692-1699) was chosen as a compromise candidate to the Spanish throne. As a close relative of the King of Spain he was quite inbred himself. Joseph Ferdinand of Bavaria - Wikipedia

I once traced Joseph Ferdinand's ancestry back to Grand Duke Gediminas of Lithuania (c. 1275-1341). Because of several uncle-niece marriages in his ancestry, Joseph Ferdinand was descended from Gedimnas in different numbers of generations in different lines, between a minimum of 10 generations and a maximum of 15 generations. Which goes to prove that assuming an average generation length can be misleading.
Philip V of Spain was also relatively inbred due to his father Louis le Grand Dauphin having four great-grandparents instead of the usual eight due to his parents being double first-cousins.
 

Similar History Discussions