More Madness, George III style!

elverno

The first serious bout of madness for George III took place in 1788-89. Of course there had been minor bouts of odd behavior but nothing anyone took that much notice of, he was considered somewhat eccentric in any case so the events weren't that noteworthy. In 1788 however the King's behavior got seriously worse and he was eventually turned over to the medical profession which probably made him even more mad.

This medal was the first struck to commemorate his return to lucidity:

30mm, White metal. BHM 294, BHM says rare.

BHM also commented in part:


<< <i>The King's health began to improve from the middle of January 1789 and on the 27th February the London Gazette announced that no further bulletins on the King's health would be issued. On the 10th March Parliament presented congratulatory addresses to the King on his recovery and the nation celebrated his return to health with enthusiasm. The 14th March saw the King's return to Windsor and large cheering crowds turned out to witness his progress. Thursday, 23rd April was appointed by royal proclamation to be observed as a day of general thanksgiving. The King, the Queen and the Royal family, both Houses of Parliament and the corporation of London attended a service in St Paul's Cathedral. A complete description of the church service and processions is in the Gentleman's Magazine for 1789 pp. 366-70 and 459. >>

Cladiator

That is a pretty nice medal ya got there! Do you know what the "white metal" is or most likely is?

cosmicdebris

Isn't this issue in the D&H too?

spoon

Interesting!

So, this isn't something I've studied much.. how did his condition impact on the public? To what extent did they know he was nuts and when?

elverno

Yeah, this is D&H Middlesex 176 but its relative rarity isn't mentioned there. It's almost certainly pewter but as usual with the generic term "white metal" it could be any mixture with a high proportion of tin. British white metal medals of this period are almost always pewter.

The politicians of the period were in a quandary over George's health. He couldn't be trusted to speak lucidly in public and it was fairly common knowledge that he was a bit "potty". He also was a supporter of Pitt and opposed to Fox; in part because of their positions on Catholic emancipation. George IV (Prince Regent at the time) was in favor of emancipation, he was secretly married (at least by this time I think he was) to a Catholic and his father felt that the issue was non-negotiable; he had sworn an oath opposing such reform at the time of his coronation. The movie about the madness is pretty accurate though they don't explain some of the back story. Religion and politics, prejudice and family feuds all went into the mix. Pitt and Fox really didn't like each other at all and people lined up on both sides of the debate with a rancour that reminds me of the political climate here in the States. In addition George III was relatively popular while his son was reviled for his lifestyle and that put people with opposite political views into another quandary (George III fans who supported Pitt for instance... ). In all a fascinating time.

Stork

Interesting about his madness, and the now presumed underlying cause. Ignore the fact it's labelled 'George II' in the title:
Porphyria. from the link:

Some historians blame the American Revolution on a blood disease--an abnormality of hemoglobin that afflicted King George III, who ruled England at the time. So puzzling were his symptoms that not until this century did medical researchers discover the underlying disorder, called porphyria.

At age 50, the king first experienced abdominal pain and constipation, followed by weak limbs, fever, a fast pulse, hoarseness, and dark red urine. Next nervous system symptoms began, including insomnia, headaches, visual problems, restlessness, delirium, convulsions, and stupor. His confused and racing thoughts, combined with his ripping off his wig and running about naked while at the peak of a fever, convinced court observers that the king was mad. Just as Parliament was debating his ability to rule, he mysteriously recovered.

But George's plight was far from over. He suffered a relapse 13 years later, then again 3 years after that. Always the symptoms appeared in the same order, beginning with abdominal pain, fever, and weakness and progressing to the nervous system symptoms. Finally, an attack in 1811 placed him in an apparently permanent stupor, and he was dethroned by the Prince of Wales. He lived for several more years, experiencing further episodes of his odd affliction.

In George III's time, doctors were permitted to do very little to the royal body and based their diagnoses on what the king told them. Twentieth-century researchers found that George's red urine was caused by an inborn error of metabolism. In porphyria, because of the absence of an enzyme, part of the blood pigment hemoglobin, called a porphyrin ring, is routed into the urine instead of being broken down and metabolized by cells. Porphyrin builds up and attacks the nervous system, causing many of the other symptoms. Examination of physicians' reports on George's relatives--easy to obtain for a royal family--showed that several of them had symptoms of porphyria as well. The underlying defect in red blood cell recycling had appeared in its various guises as different problems.

Kind of interesting. The abdominal pain can be quite agonizing I've heard (it's a little outside my field).

wybrit

Interesting thread. Thanks!

lordmarcovan

Neato.

I'll bet our own Olde Dead King would love that.

Steve27

Interesting story and nice medal!

Conder101

Nice pictures (looks to be about the same condition as mine) and interesting information.

The problem with calling it pewter is that like "white metal" pewter can mean just about anything. Many pewters are lead based alloys but this medal/token is not lead based but is most likely tin based since it is very light in weight, about 150 -200% what an aluminum piece the same size would be.

Sylvestius

<< <i>In George III's time, doctors were permitted to do very little to the royal body and based their diagnoses on what the king told them. Twentieth-century researchers found that George's red urine was caused by an inborn error of metabolism. In porphyria, because of the absence of an enzyme, part of the blood pigment hemoglobin, called a porphyrin ring, is routed into the urine instead of being broken down and metabolized by cells. Porphyrin builds up and attacks the nervous system, causing many of the other symptoms. Examination of physicians' reports on George's relatives--easy to obtain for a royal family--showed that several of them had symptoms of porphyria as well. The underlying defect in red blood cell recycling had appeared in its various guises as different problems.

Kind of interesting. The abdominal pain can be quite agonizing I've heard (it's a little outside my field). >>




There are several different types of Porphyria i believe, based on gradual differences in how extreme they are, and George had the worst one going.

I believe Queen Victoria had something similar but more mild (this is when she wasn't gulping down her cough medicine which contained opium). George IV also had it and he was addicted to laundanum, which taken into account with his extreme obesity, over indulgence and probably a good blood letting session from a doctor probably saw him off.

As for Doctors, they were best avoided, the old story comes round and round again with these pre-Victorian doctors, if in doubt bleed the patient. The four humour theory, fundamentally complete twaddle but it was persistent. Several English monarchs were probably killed by their doctors.

Charles II is the notable example. Cause of death uncertain, presumably a stroke initially and then the doctors bled him. Well that helped...

Sylvestius

<< <i>Nice pictures (looks to be about the same condition as mine) and interesting information.

The problem with calling it pewter is that like "white metal" pewter can mean just about anything. Many pewters are lead based alloys but this medal/token is not lead based but is most likely tin based since it is very light in weight, about 150 -200% what an aluminum piece the same size would be. >>




Definately not aluminium, no way could it be aluminium.


I'd pluck for tin as well, most likely from Cornwall.

Having had a tin farthing of Charles II for several months i must admit that coin pictured has a look of tin about it, not pure tin because it wouldn't have survived half as well has it has if it was. Probably a Sn/Pb based alloy of which Sn is the bigger part.

Just my two groats.

Conder101

I wasn't implying that it was aluminum, just using that as a comparison.

(Although it COULD have been made from aluminum. I'm fairly sure aluminum had been isolated by that time, but it was done chemically and was a very expensive process. Aluminum production did not beome practical until after the electrical reduction process was developed and electricity production on a large scale was practical and cheap.)

Aethelred

Great medal!

Sylvestius

<< <i>(Although it COULD have been made from aluminum. I'm fairly sure aluminum had been isolated by that time, but it was done chemically and was a very expensive process. Aluminum production did not beome practical until after the electrical reduction process was developed and electricity production on a large scale was practical and cheap.) >>




Aluminium was not discovered until 1825.

Conder101

I stand corrected. I thought it had been isolated earlier.

Aethelred

<< <i>Aluminium was not discovered until 1825. >>



I also believe it was highly prized and quite costly until near the end of the 19th Century.

Sylvestius

<< <i>

<< <i>Aluminium was not discovered until 1825. >>



I also believe it was highly prized and quite costly until near the end of the 19th Century. >>




Electricity is the answer to why it became cheaper by the end of the 1800s. Electrolysis.

Although aluminium gets bad press from coin collectors generally, it is actually one of the most useful metals out there. Aluminium has many endearing qualities but to me the one that really gives it the edge is that although it is a rather reactive metal, far more reactive than say silver, hence why it quickly turns into Al Oxide. But the Oxide is a protective oxide that is only a little duller than the metal itself. Which means the metal soon gets the oxide coating but once the oxide has formed it prevents any further reactions occuring, which makes it pretty inert compared to say iron. Iron is a rather embarrasing case... of all the metals that you could have picked you had to pick the one that upon oxidisation turns to the most useless material going. This is why Al for coins is good and Fe is bad!

But i digress, so lets get back on topic. Tin... hu where to start on that one