Henry VI and the Valois Madness?

Many sources claim that Henry VI of England came down with the same mental illness that his grandfather Charles V of France suffered from. This means that technically Charles VI of France and Henry VII of England could also have inherited it, since they were of Valois descent.
 
Many sources claim that Henry VI of England came down with the same mental illness that his grandfather Charles V of France suffered from. This means that technically Charles VI of France and Henry VII of England could also have inherited it, since they were of Valois descent.

Henry VI was fantastically unlucky. He was the only one his Catherine of Valois' children to be afflicted by the madness as far as we know. Catherine's Tudors boys were likely fine and Jasper Tudor lived a long enough life for such an ailment to become apparent. There's no definitive proof that any of Charles V's children had the illness and I don't know of any other grandchildren having it either.
 
These mental issues aren't genetically transmittable. Psychologic troubles could be, by exemple a great sensibility to stress, for various reason.

For obvious historical reasons, Charles VI and Henri VI were subject to these. Did one transmitted his troubles to another? That's debatable : contemporaries argued that easily, as it not only served as historical moral consequence (You tried to take over a kingdom by using the insanity of its king, feel the taste of karma in your face!) but also a tentative of explanation before a situation they couldn't really grasp : Henri wasn't guilty of something important enough to be punished like that, so who "give it" to him?

They searched for ancestors, and if they wouldn't have found so, it would have been a curse or something else.

Personally, I would say the psychological troubles were transmitted this way to both Henri VI and Charles VII alike (the Valois king may have been subject to maniaco-depression) IOTL, but that the different context and most probably other factors played fully.
 
I'm not going to get into the heritabilty of other mental illness but it's particular high for Schizoprenia (which Henry VI and his french grandfather are commonly thought to have had). Schizoprenia has a heritability of 0.8 which means that around 80% of whether you get it or not comes down to the genetics.

There's reasonable evidence that different degrees of mental instability was found in Henry VI's ancestors over a number of generations and did in fact run in the family (although not all members were afflicted).

Louis I of Bourbon --> Peter I, Duke of Bourbon --> Joanna of Bourbon (married to Charles V of France) --> Charles Vi of France (grandfather of Henry VI)
 
I'm not going to get into the heritabilty of other mental illness but it's particular high for Schizoprenia (which Henry VI and his french grandfather are commonly thought to have had)

While it's hard to make a diagnosis from only chronicles (critically regarding the "glass desillusion" that while relativly present at this point, isn't nowadays): it's certain that he suffered from a form of psychosis, without certainty about schizophrenia (this retro-diagnosis being not commonly accepted, many preferring to argue in favour of a more broad bipolar disorder, less by schizophrenia being disproven than not really proven)

Again, i'll argue in favour of some troubles being inherited by Charles VII IOTL, and was probably one of the reason of his periods of depression. I don't know the possible relations between bipolar disorders and schizophrenia, that said : could the appearance of the first be related to being the son of one suffering from the second?

If it's, I'll hold with my first post : Henri VI and Charles VII suffering both from this inheritance, but Henri VI being put in a more disfavourable position and under more stress (as Charles VI was) eventually making these troubles deepening.
 
While it's hard to make a diagnosis from only chronicles (critically regarding the "glass desillusion" that while relativly present at this point, isn't nowadays): it's certain that he suffered from a form of psychosis, without certainty about schizophrenia (this retro-diagnosis being not commonly accepted, many preferring to argue in favour of a more broad bipolar disorder, less by schizophrenia being disproven than not really proven)

Yes, the glass thing is something I'd never heard of until I read about him. I wonder if it could have been some sort of extreme germophobia being part of his diagnosis - would that be in the same broad area? (And is germophobia transferrable?)

My reasoning (and I'm not a doctor - but I do a decent Dr. McCoy impression:)) is that it disappeared becasue of our learning about germs. In the past, people not knowing what caused disease, they would avoid any contact with anything for fear of being damaged. That was interpreted as thinking the person thought he was made of glass when it wasn't that so much as the person didn't know what would hurt them. Now, however, since we know about germs, it's at least evident to such people that germs are what cause disease and illness, so now they have something to "blame" and thus shy away from. Except they do it to the same extreme extent someone did with that "glass syndrome" in bygone days.
 
I think it's a bit of rationalisation there : it seems that he really tought his body was made of glass, at the point of "reinforcing" it by bands of iron (up to hurting himself with trying to put iron within his arm)
Furthermore, the whole "gemophobia" is contradicting with the documents : the king is described as living in a total lack of hygiena, litteraly covered by fleas, if nobody managed (or wanted) to take care of him (and even that asked for treasures of diplomacy and cunning).
 
If I remember the history a-right, didn't Charles the VI grow up in the period of the Hundo that was relatively good for France? Charles the Wise had retaken a fair amount of territory, had some good minister running the finance and some scary hatchetmen keeping the rest of the nobility in line, and there was the joys of growing up rich at the top of the French noble pyramid. Phillip of Burgundy might be unpleasant, but is he enough to drive somebody mad without some genetic mine lurking beneath the surface? There are periods of the Hundred Years where being King of France is quite unpleasant enough to drive somebody off the rails, but did Charles the VI grow up in one of them?
 
I think it's a bit of rationalisation there : it seems that he really tought his body was made of glass, at the point of "reinforcing" it by bands of iron (up to hurting himself with trying to put iron within his arm)
Furthermore, the whole "gemophobia" is contradicting with the documents : the king is described as living in a total lack of hygiena, litteraly covered by fleas, if nobody managed (or wanted) to take care of him (and even that asked for treasures of diplomacy and cunning).

Okay, thanks. I guess even when one doesn't understand germ theory, that is a bit much.:) And, yes, reinforcing his body does tend to make it like he really did think it made of glss. I wonder why that doesn't show itself today - - or maybe it does and it just isn't as well known.
 
If I remember the history a-right, didn't Charles the VI grow up in the period of the Hundo that was relatively good for France?
But things going well for France isn't the same thing than going well for one person.

Remember that he became king quite young, and a good part of his early reign troubled by the premices of the Civil War. Without talking of fiscal revolts (at this point, it was quite clear that French edge on the conflict, even if appeasing, depended on the fiscal capacity, critically when Charles V's ressources were dried out) and of course the general mental climate of the late MA.

He eventually had really few time to take care of that, being under quite a stress : from having quite a careless life up to 20 years old, his advisors being under pressure of nobility and one even barely avoiding to be murdered.

While you probably had a genetic background, you had as well a contextual ground for its devellopement on something huge.
 
But things going well for France isn't the same thing than going well for one person.

Remember that he became king quite young, and a good part of his early reign troubled by the premices of the Civil War. Without talking of fiscal revolts (at this point, it was quite clear that French edge on the conflict, even if appeasing, depended on the fiscal capacity, critically when Charles V's ressources were dried out) and of course the general mental climate of the late MA.

He eventually had really few time to take care of that, being under quite a stress : from having quite a careless life up to 20 years old, his advisors being under pressure of nobility and one even barely avoiding to be murdered.

While you probably had a genetic background, you had as well a contextual ground for its devellopement on something huge.

Don't forget being set on fire. That is never good for a person's mental wellbeing. (Admittedly, he'd had his first breakdown previously, but the Bal des Ardents probably scotched his recovery.)
 
Top