Does anyone know how historically accurate the film "the madness of king George is"?

[Illuminatiprimus]

I’ve not got that far in my reading of English history - I really enjoyed the film and wondered how accurate it was in its portrayal of the actual situation of George’s madness and to the legal/court wranglings that went with it.

Grateful for dopers’ contributions

[Bytegeist]

This isn’t exactly what you’re asking for, but I found the anachronisms on this page amusing:

The left side of the door has 1862 carved in it, even though the film is set in the 1780s.

The modern royal coat of arms (adopted during the reign of Queen Victoria) is visible.

A globe shows post-1846 United States boundaries, including the Louisiana Purchase and Oregon Territory.

Early in the film, King George rides his horse across a lawn which has clearly been mowed by a modern lawnmower, as tire tracks are visible.

So basically, the movie is complete hogwash.

[Cunctator]

George III certainly suffered from porphyria, as depicted in the film. Most of the histories I’ve read say that he suffered increasingly from blindness and bouts of “insanity” from about 1801 onwards. I don’t know how “mad” he actually was and whether or not the episodes shown in the film actually happened. His behaviour was bad enough to require the establishment of a formal regency, with his son the Prince of Wales (later George IV) being appointed as Prince Regent in 1811.

[dolphinboy]

@Cunctator

George III certainly suffered from porphyria, as depicted in the film. His behaviour was bad enough to require the establishment of a formal regency, with his son the Prince of Wales (later George IV) being appointed as Prince Regent in 1811.

So what is the wife of the Prince Regent called?

[Cunctator]

@dolphinboy

So what is the wife of the Prince Regent called?

Princess Regent perhaps? I don’t know. The question didn’t arise with George IV. He and his wife had separated long before he became Regent and he refused to acknowledge her.

[WotNot]

@dolphinboy

So what is the wife of the Prince Regent called?

“the vilest wretch this world was ever cursed with.”

If you ask the Prince, that is.

[saoirse]

@WotNot

“the vilest wretch this world was ever cursed with.”

If you ask the Prince, that is.

But I don’t think she’d answer to that.

[BrainGlutton]

George III did suffer a temporary fit of insanity in 1788, and it was proposed to appoint the Prince of Wales as regent. This raised a constitutional problem the film glosses over: Only Parliament could appoint a regent; but Parliament could not lawfully meet until the king formally opened the session with a Speech from the Throne, which George III was in no condition to do. They solved the problem, more or less, with some legalistic hand-waving. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_iii#William_Pitt:

George III’s personal health, however, was in a poor condition. He suffered from a mental illness, now strongly believed to be a symptom of porphyria. (A 2004 study of the King’s hair samples revealed extremely high levels of arsenic, a possible trigger of the disease [1] and 2005 publication). The King had previously suffered a brief episode of the disease in 1765, but a longer episode began in 1788. Though ill during the summer of 1788, George was sufficiently sane to prorogue Parliament from 25 September to 20 November. During the intervening time, however, George became seriously deranged and posed a threat to his own life. When Parliament reconvened in November, the King could not, as was customary, communicate to them the agenda for the upcoming legislative session. According to long-established practice, Parliament could not begin the transaction of business until the King had made the Speech from the Throne. Parliament, however, ignored the custom and began to debate provisions for a regency.

Charles James Fox and William Pitt wrangled over which individual was entitled to take over government during the illness of the Sovereign. Although both parties agreed that it would be most reasonable for George III’s eldest son and heir-apparent, the Prince of Wales, to act as Regent, they disagreed over the basis of a regency. Fox suggested that it was the Prince of Wales’s absolute right to act on his ill father’s behalf; Pitt argued that it was for Parliament to nominate a Regent.

Proceedings were further delayed as the authority for Parliament to merely meet was questioned, as the session had not been formally opened by the Sovereign. Pitt proposed a remedy based on an obscure legal fiction. As was well-established at the time, the Sovereign could delegate many of his functions to Lords Commissioners by letters patent, which were validated by the attachment of the Great Seal. It was proposed that the custodian of the Great Seal, the Lord Chancellor, affix the Seal without the consent of the Sovereign. Although such an action would be unlawful, it would not be possible to question the validity of the letters patent, as the presence of the Great Seal would be deemed conclusive in court.

George III’s second son, the Prince Frederick, Duke of York, denounced Pitt’s proposal as “unconstitutional and illegal.” Nonetheless, the Lords Commissioners were appointed and then opened Parliament. In February 1789, a Regency Bill, authorising the Prince of Wales to act as Prince Regent, was introduced and passed in the House of Commons. But before the House of Lords could pass the bill, George III recovered from his illness under the care of Dr. Francis Willis. He confirmed the actions of the Lords Commissioners as valid, but resumed full control of government.

At least this precedent came in handy in 1811, when it became clear the king had gone permanently mad and there was no option but a regency. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_iii#Later_years:

In 1810, George III became dangerously ill, the malady possibly having been triggered by the death of his youngest and favourite daughter, the Princess Amelia, from erysipelas or porphyria. Arsenic poisoning is also a possible cause. By 1811, George III had become permanently insane and locked away at Windsor Castle until his death. Sometimes speaking many hours without pause, he claimed to talk to angels and once greeted an oak tree as King Frederick William III of Prussia. His doctors gave him James’s Powder (calomel and tartar emetic) and bled him regularly. They also advised him to bathe in the sea (thus encouraging public seaside vacations).

Parliament then passed the Regency Act 1811, to which the Royal Assent was granted by the Lords Commissioners (who were appointed under the same irregular procedure as was adopted in 1788). The Prince of Wales acted as Regent for the remainder of George III’s life.

BTW, I’ve read the play on which the film is based, and it completely omits any mention of Mrs. Fitzherbert, the Prince of Wales’ Catholic mistress whom he secretly and illegally married. They added that for the movie – which gives the prince some extra motivation for taking advantage of his father’s illness to secure the regency and place his marriage beyond his father’s veto. In the play, Prince George is merely an indolent esthete who wants to rule so he can redecorate Windsor Castle.

[BrainGlutton]

@Bytegeist

The modern royal coat of arms (adopted during the reign of Queen Victoria) is visible.

Here, BTW, is the royal arms George III used: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:G3_Arms.png It includes the arms of the Electorate (later Kingdom) of Hanover in the escutcheon (I think that’s the heraldic term for the part in the middle of the shield).