Killing Kings

Jan 28, 2011
Killing Kings
Enrique of Transtamare kills his half-brother Pedro I, King of Leon and Castile Jean Froissart, Chroniques (Vol 1), Virgil Master (Illuminator) c.1410

(PhysOrg.com) -- A new study by a Cambridge University criminologist reveals just how dangerous it was to be a monarch in Europe before the modern era.

On 30 January 1649 Charles I was executed on a balcony overlooking Whitehall in central London. A huge crowd, restrained by ranks of militia, gathered to witness his beheading. An eye witness reported that his severed head was thrown down and his hair cut off while soldiers dipped their swords in his blood.

As a royal meeting a ghastly fate, Charles I was far from alone. The astonishing number of European kings who met a violent end has been documented for the first time by a Cambridge University criminologist. Professor Manuel Eisner's study reveals just how risky it was to be a monarch in an era when murdering those who stood in your way was a fast lane to power.

Killing Kings, a paper that will appear on the website of the British Journal of Criminology on Monday 31 January, is a statistical study of the demise of 1,513 monarchs in 45 European monarchies over the period 600 to 1800. It reveals that almost a quarter (22 per cent) of all royal deaths were bloody - accidents, battle deaths and killings - and that 15 per cent of all deaths were outright murder.

"The toll of 15 per cent corresponds to an average rate of 10 murders for every 1000 years of life as a monarch - far higher than the for even the most troubled areas of the world today. This rate is higher than the threshold for 'major combat' among soldiers engaged in a contemporary war. It demonstrates the intense violent rivalry for domination among historical European political elites," said Eisner.

As a criminologist, Eisner divides his gruesome statistics for kingly killings into four broad scenarios. Top of the list is murder as a means of succession: at a stroke the reigning monarch is removed from power and a rival enthroned. In 969, for example, the Byzantine Emperor Nikephoros II was slain in his bedroom by his wife Theophano and his chief general, John Tzimiskes. John was crowned as emperor after agreeing to do penance for murder and to separate from his lover.

Next up is murder by a neighbouring ruler and competitor, attempting to gain territory or seal a military victory. In 1362, the Sultan of Granada, Muhammed VI, was invited to attend peace talks with the of Castile and murdered treacherously near Seville on the orders of Peter I of Castile.

Personal grievance and revenge, fuelled by rape, murder or insult committed by the ruler, rank third as scenarios. Albert I of Germany was assassinated in 1308 by his nephew Johann of Swabia and others while riding home from a banquet at which he had publicly insulted Johann.

Bringing up the rear is the outsider killing. In 1172 the Venetian Doge Vitale Michel II was stabbed to death by a member of a member of an angry mob. In 1354 Yusuf I of Granada was killed by a maniac while praying in the mosque.

Young monarchs - whose grip on the reins of power was tenuous - were especially liable to having their lives cut brutally short. Most poignant are the presumed murders of young Prince Edward V and his younger brother Richard in the Tower of London. In some cases, murder begat murder in relentless waves of killings. Murder hot spots cropped up in some unlikely cold climates - among them Norway and Northumbria.

Eisner suggests that the murder of monarchs provides a window into the dynamics of elite violence across more than a thousand years of European history. If removing a monarch promised important benefits, and opportunities arose, assassination was seen by political elites as a swift route to regime change.

European regicides were most frequent in the Early Middle Ages and became gradually less common over the centuries. Eisner suggests that, as legislative systems strengthened their hold on the division and transfer of power, murder lost its appeal as a strategic tool. On top of this, the doctrine of the divine right of kings, which gathered credence from James I onwards, meant that kings enjoyed almost godly status and an act of deposition was sacrilegious.

"After the 16th century it became very uncommon to organise power transfer through the of a monarch. If it did occur, it required extensive legal justification such as in the criminal trial of Charles I in 1649 which eventually led to his execution," says Eisner. "As for regicides motivated by ideology and radicalism, they have continued right into the early 20th century."

Explore further: Best of Last Week – Evidence of quark-gluon interactions, new portable device hack and why we may never live forever

More information: The full paper of Killing Kings will appear online on Monday 31 January at bjc.oxfordjournals.org/content… 1/28/bjc.azr004.full

Related Stories

Murders, Traffic Deaths Connected

Dec 03, 2009

If you want to know how many people are killed in car accidents in a particular U.S. state, look to its prisons. Regions with higher murder rates also tend to have a greater number of traffic fatalities, according to a new ...

London murders: Stats theory shows numbers are predictable

Mar 17, 2009

Leading statistician Professor David Spiegelhalter claims today that the number of murders in London last year was not out of the ordinary and followed a predictable pattern. Spiegelhalter's report, published today in Significance, the ma ...

Serial killers may kill more victims than we think

Dec 03, 2007

Serial killers might be responsible for up to 10 times as many U.S. deaths as previously estimated, according to an analysis by a criminologist at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis.

Mass murder mystery of Maya kingdom

Nov 17, 2005

Forensic scientists with mass burial expertise have been called into an ancient Maya city in Guatemala to help unravel a 1,300-year-old mass murder mystery.

Parts of kings' table found at Westminster

Jun 10, 2006

Sections of a medieval kings' table that was smashed by Oliver Cromwell to celebrate the end of the monarchy, have been found at the Palace of Westminster.

Recommended for you

Precarious work schedules common among younger workers

2 hours ago

One wish many workers may have this Labor Day is for more control and predictability of their work schedules. A new report finds that unpredictability is widespread in many workers' schedules—one reason ...

How does your wine make you feel?

3 hours ago

University of Adelaide researchers are investigating the links between wine, where it's consumed and emotion to help the Australian wine industry gain deeper consumer insights into their products.

User comments : 10

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

JRDarby
5 / 5 (4) Jan 28, 2011
And as evidenced by JFK not much has changed.
ryggesogn2
1 / 5 (4) Jan 28, 2011
That's what you get when you seek power, you may get burned.
scidog
5 / 5 (1) Jan 28, 2011
any idea of many of those young modern royals we see on TV these days own their social position to a stab in the dark 600 years ago?
barakn
5 / 5 (1) Jan 29, 2011
stabbed to death by a member of a member of an angry mob

Death by penis?
ekim
not rated yet Jan 29, 2011
It is NOT good to be King!
antialias_physorg
5 / 5 (1) Jan 29, 2011
Basically this study says: Those in power are dar more likely to be murderous bastard than thos living under intense economilcal and social pressure in the poorest parts of the world.

Just goes to show that 'our betters' are far from better.
ennui27
5 / 5 (1) Jan 29, 2011
I wonder if there is a corelation between the benefits the King/ruler allowed his subjects and his death.

Are despots more likely to be done in than beneviolent rulers?
Au-Pu
3 / 5 (2) Jan 29, 2011
What our researcher needs to look at is how royal families were established.
Those who eventually established themselves as Kings/Emperors were simply ruthless thugs (in todays society they would be criminals and end in prison) but there was nothing to stop them and by force and intimidation they extended their control until they could appoint themselves as a monarch.
All the worlds royal families are descendants of murderous, raping, pillaging thugs, with the sole exception of one European country where the people wanted a royal family and chose one of their citizens as their king, sorry I am unable remember which it was but I think it might have been Denmark.
frajo
5 / 5 (1) Jan 30, 2011
All the worlds royal families are descendants of murderous, raping, pillaging thugs
That's why the Greek invented tyrannicide and democracy.
antialias_physorg
not rated yet Jan 30, 2011
Are despots more likely to be done in than beneviolent rulers?

Probaly the reverse since the good rulers are more likely to be done in by despots (who then are aware of the risk and are more cautious/paranoid)

Note that 'the people' are not the leading cause of kings' deaths but other wanna-be kings.