I could have done worse, I suppose...

[fajrdrako]

At least it's a pretty picture.


Which Historical Lunatic Are You?
From the fecund loins of Rum and Monkey.

I don't see a way on the site to see what the other possible answers are. I would suspect a slew of Roman emperors, perhaps?

Comments

[teenygozer.livejournal.com]

I got the same as you, so I changed a few things and got this guy. Gotta love that inbreeding and STDs!

You are Ludwig II, the Swan King of Bavaria!

Born with the name of Otto, you became Ludwig at the request of your grandfather, King Ludwig I, because you were born on his birthday. You became Crown Prince at the tender age of 3, and soon after stole a purse from a shop on the basis that everything in Bavaria belonged to you. Tragedy struck when your pet tortoise was taken away; relatives thought the six-year-old prince was too attached to it. Your childhood was lonely and formal. Once, you were prevented from beheading your younger brother by the timeous arrival of a court official. From the age of 14 you suffered from hallucinations.

Despite striking an imposing figure with your great height and good looks, your speeches were pompous to the point of incomprehensibility. You became even more of a recluse, often spending hours reading poetry in a seashell-shaped boat in your electrically-illuminated underground grotto.

You are most famous for building three fairytale castles - Linderhof, Neuschwanstein and Herrenchiemsee - at tremendous public expense. Declared insane and confined to your bedroom by concerned (and embarrassed) subjects, you escaped on 13 June 1886, but were later found drowned with your physician in Lake Stamberg in mysterious circumstances.

[teenygozer.livejournal.com]

It looks like they're sticking to the 1800s and being a king isn't necessary to be a historical loon, as I also got Nicola Tesla, who was quite a mighty loonie!

[monsieureden.livejournal.com]

I got him too.

[angevin2.livejournal.com]

Heh, it also means you get to be a character in Henry V and make extremely inappropriate remarks about your daughter's impending marriage ("Yes, my lord, you see them perspectively, the cities turned into a maid; for they are all girdled with maiden walls that war hath never entered"). Come to think of it you also get to say "Go down upon him; you have power enough" about your future son-in-law. Man, Charles has some issues, there. ;)

This quiz comes up every so often (I always get Charles VI, too) and I recall Caligula and Emperor Norton I being among the possible answers, too...

[medelle.livejournal.com]

I got Caligua! GO ME! :D

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Tesla's not a bad choice. I guess I'm glad I got a medieval nutcase, and better Charles VI than Gilles de Rais.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I suppose Caligula is a shoe-in, given his infamy. Emperor Norton I seems comparatively begign.

Yes, being in Henry V is a wonderful thing, I think I've lucked into a good thing here! And having an interesting sexual fixation with Henry V doesn't sound so crazy to me. I can quite understand that.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Do you have a horse?

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I approve of the castle-building. Go for it! Why live in an ordinary apartment when you can have a turrets and buttresses? And a portcullis to lower when people you don't like come to visit!

[wijsgeer.livejournal.com]

I got Charles as well. I would have liked a Dutch loony but I can't seem to think of one. Can the historically more educated help me?

[angevin2.livejournal.com]

Mmmm, this is true. Especially when he's Kenneth Branagh. Or Sam West. Or Olivier. ;)

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Long Live the Swan King!

Ought to be a ballet.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I haven't seen Sam West as Henry V, alas. Or Olivier, by choice. Branagh? He was fine indeed. I think I've only seen Henry V on stage once; I don't remember who played the king. I have seen many good Prince Hals in the Henry IVs. Gives me a fondness for the man quite independent of his history.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Good question - ! I can't think of a Dutch loony offhand but there must be one somewhere. I will continue to ponder and search my (admitttedly poor) memory.

[silverwhistle.livejournal.com]

I did this one ages ago and got Emperor Norton.

[silverwhistle.livejournal.com]

And the peacock flying-machines!
I can't wait for models to be built of those!

[silverwhistle.livejournal.com]

Van Gogh.

[amberite.livejournal.com]

(http://rumandmonkey.com/widgets/tests/lunatics/)
Which Historical Lunatic Are You? (http://rumandmonkey.com/widgets/tests/lunatics/)
From the fecund loins of Rum and Monkey. (http://rumandmonkey.com/)

Why am I not surprised? =)

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

You got one that's just plain fun!

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Hmm, yes, good call.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Always entertaining, Norton.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Peacock flying machines are the high end of chic when it comes to craziness.

[wijsgeer.livejournal.com]

2 more: Jan Matthys and Jan Bockelson, 2 of the leaders of the Münster Rebellion (a taking over of the city of Münster by the Anabaptist movement in the 16th century)
see wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C3%BCnster_Rebellion)

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Okay, we've increased the count by 300% so far!

[wijsgeer.livejournal.com]

I am sure there are loads more.

it does also of cours depend on your definition. If you go on modern definition of mental illness AND you approve of diagnosis by hindsight Abraham Kuyper (the Christian Deomcrat who had such a strong influence on Dutch political system (he was the founder of the first (Christian Democratic) political party, was very influentual, founded a university, wrote books) According to a recent biography Kuyper suffered from manic depression and he felt compelled to use all his manic energy for the cause, being depressed in between and able to work, hence more guilt (wich goes nicely with the grim version of Protestanism he believed in).
Neurotic, hypochodric, easily angered, but no chopping heads of or declaring himself Gideon and proclaiming polygamy in preperation for the apocalypse.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

So much depends on your definition of insanity - I wouldn't count mood disorders like manic depression, myself, but I can see an argument for doing so. (It would expand the field, if that's what you want to do!)

[wijsgeer.livejournal.com]

I'd say that a (severe) mood disorder may well be the soil for insanity, part of the definition of mania is delusional and illusions of grandeur. 2 possibillities for rather mad behavior I would say.
The thing is that people can sublimate these in different ways, if it is with Kuyper (and with Churchill) in great political actions (for want of a better description) we don't call them mad. But I think it is part of social situation, how much room does someone get. If you suffer from illusions of grandeur and you get locked in before you can done something dangerous, or if you happen to be born a king, a situation that puts fire under your illusions, so to speak.
(Of course, there are people who are not a king and who manage to find followers and wreak havoc like the Münster example, but I would not be surprised if with current day eyes the leaders involved suffered from some sort of personality or mood disorder.)

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Yes, a severe mood disorder can well be delusional - perhaps I am thinking that to be a bona fide historical loony, one's actions must make an impact on those around them? It's a rather complex continuum - some people get away with more than others. I'm thinking of Lord Byron, for instance; those close to him no doubt called him crazy, but his genius was unaffected - or enhanced - by his bipolar tendencies, and though he was hell to live with, he saw the world very clearly and cleverly.

As for kings: we all know that power corrupts. Even the sanest people can do bizarre things when they're on a power trip. (So then are they sane? I am posing myself a paradox.)

[wijsgeer.livejournal.com]

maybe we can use the term insane not only for people but also for societies (lets put aside that in doing so we reason from a euro-modern-dentric perspective). I would tend to call societies that give an inordinate of power to 1 (or a few) persons, without builinding room for movement of power (rigid structures.) I would say that in such a society the person who finds himself in the position of power will be outside the boundries of sanity, because he is in an insane position. The words sane and insane loose their meaning (to a certain extent?) Even so, there will be still differences in how different people express this.

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

Yes, and every situation is unique. But I don't think anyone could argue that there was plenty of room in the situation of a Roman Emperor (for example) for expressions of insanity that impacted on his society - as they proved on numerous occasions.

[wijsgeer.livejournal.com]

well, their powerbase was not that rigid.

But if we compare them to a modern day politician, a minister president or even an individual with a (clearly, I think) inordinate of power, the President of the United States. If Bush would want to ad a 2 hour prayer for him and his family for every school child and if he demanded people addresed him as Son of God or otherwise the deathpenalty loomed, he would be removed from power someway or the other. (I mean, there must be boundries he can't cross).
As comparison, the leader of Turkmenistan did such things, wrote his own holy book and demands it obligatory study for every schoolchild, student and civil servant. He is ruthless against everyone who doubts his holliness.

Eh, I am loosing my thread for I am hesitant to write that it is the US long standing democratic tradition that would prevent Bush (or any other president of any other party political background) go to such extremes without being opposed by the people. I don't know what gives dictators the power. Fear I guess. And I actually do think we are all (i.e. all our countries) are vulnerable to falling into the trap.

(lost the topic of mad kings a bit - sorry)

(will go and study)

[fajrdrako.livejournal.com]

I mean, there must be boundries he can't cross

I hope so! Sometimes I look at what he's done, and wonder.

As comparison, the leader of Turkmenistan did such things, wrote his own holy book and demands it obligatory study for every schoolchild, student and civil servant. He is ruthless against everyone who doubts his holliness.

Yup. People with god-complexes tend to be ruthless. It does with the territory.

We've seen cases where democracy disappeared without a trace. Dictators have their ways.

Yes, go and study! I have to go to work. Er, class. (For a change.)