Real-Life Weirdness

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by Anders

During the peace negotiations between Sweden and Denmark 1613, both kings were banned from attending. They had sabotaged previous peace negotiations. However, they both attended anyway - in disguise.

I mean this with all the kindness imaginable, but your countries up there have some of the funniest odd instances of history.

[Anders]

Originally Posted by ericthered

nice ... can I get a link?

I don't think I have a link in English. It was in 1611, during the so-called Kalmar War. Swedish historians don't want to talk about it because we clearly lost.

The previous "peace negotiations" had been handled by the kings. King Charles IX of Sweden had opened them by challenging the Danish king to a duel "in the old Geatish way", with only a helmet for protection.

Christian IV answered by saying that the Swedish king was better suited for pity than for a fight, that a warm fire would be better for the old king, and that he needed a doctor to "make [his] head right again". He finished his note by saying that the Charles had apparently learned his manners from a whore who "wards herself by barking".

There was no peace.

Edit: Note that this wasn't even the lowest point of Swedish diplomacy. That took place in an infamous exchange of letters between John III and Ivan IV in 1572-1573, where the czar claimed that John was the son of a lowly peasant and that the czar was as the Heavens to John's lowly Earth. Upon reading this, John III completely lost it and sent a letter in which he said a) that the czar must have been raised by a peasant or a monk since he does not know how to write to a king; b) that John's father was a powerful noble and gave a very extensive account for his noble heritage; and c) that the czar had so poisoned his mouth with lies that it could never be clean again. He then wishes that the czar be reduced to a thrall, says that all Russians are ignoble thralls as well, and says that if the czar trembles over his letter and wishes to make peace, John will magnamoniously grant it, if the czar send his highest nobles to treat with the Swedish king.

[Johnny1A.2]

Originally Posted by Anders

During the peace negotiations between Sweden and Denmark 1613, both kings were banned from attending. They had sabotaged previous peace negotiations. However, they both attended anyway - in disguise.

Who did the banning? Who did the monarchs have to answer in those days?

[Nereidalbel]

Originally Posted by Johnny1A.2

Who did the banning? Who did the monarchs have to answer in those days?

Either religious authority, or generals promising a coup if they interfered.

[Anders]

Originally Posted by Johnny1A.2

Who did the banning? Who did the monarchs have to answer in those days?

The Swedish Privy Council (Marshal, Admiral, Treasurer, Chancellor and Chief Justice). This was before the advent of absolute monarchy. Charles IX had died from a stroke soon after the exchange of notes, so the Swedish throne was occupied by Gustav II Adolf (age 19; and there hadn't been a formal coronation ceremony yet; that had to wait until 1617). The Swedish king was fairly powerful - Charles IX had beheaded most of the top nobles in order to take control of the country - but Christian IV's ability to do what he wanted was sharply restricted by constitutional means. IIRC, the war wasn't officially between the King of Denmark and Sweden, but actually between the Count of Holstein-Gottorp and Sweden, and Christian IV had to pay for everything himself. Peter or Hans may know more. Absolute monarchs didn't become a thing until the second half of the 17th century.

The Swedish king was dependent on the Riksdag of the Estates for foreign policy, be able to conscript soldiers and take out extra taxes for wars.

Edit edit: Having consulted with the history professor who gave the lesson I heard on this, he says that while the Privy Council couldn't absolutely ban the kings from attending, they could tell them in very strong terms that it would be unwise and beneath the kings to attend. And you can probably find stories like these about most 15th-16th-17th century monarchies - it's just that I happen to love history and read voraciously. And Sweden is relatively unaffected by patriotism, so we don't hide embarassing events like these. For instance, did you know that England had a king who believed he was made of glass?

[Daigoro]

Originally Posted by Daigoro

If you can't see adventure possibilities in an underground stolen self-mummified monk smuggling ring, perhaps you've taken up the wrong hobby...
Mummified monk is ‘not dead’ and in rare meditative state, says expert

And something about the Mummies of Yamagata
The Gruesome and Excruciating Practice of Mummifying Your Own Body

And the Chinese-Arabian Honey Mummy
Mellified Man

More in the same vein:
CT Scan of 1,000-Year-Old Buddha Statue Reveals Mummified Monk Hidden Inside

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by Nereidalbel

For instance, did you know that England had a king who believed he was made of glass?

I'm pretty sure they didn't since I recall Charles VI of France having that exact delusion. I know of him because of Bal des Ardents, an object lesson in not playing with fire.

[Anders]

Right. Charles VI, sorry about that. I was thinking of Henry VI, who was also insane.

[RogerBW]

Originally Posted by Anders

Right. Charles VI, sorry about that. I was thinking of Henry VI, who was also insane.

The glass delusion (see Wikipedia) was quite a common form of madness in that period. It seems to have gone out of the zeitgeist now. As parodied by Bujold (Brothers in Arms):

"The fifth Countess Vorkosigan was said to suffer from the periodic delusion that she was made of glass."
"What finally happened to her?" asked Elli in a tone of fascination.
"One of her irritated relations eventually dropped and broke her."
"The delusion was that intense?"
"It was off a twenty-meter-tall turret."

[stefanj]

OMFG I love stuff like this:

"I assume the women were MTA employees, but definitely not track workers. Or at least, not dressed to do track work. They were both middle aged and looked like commuters. We were in the first car. They came through the car from behind and made their way to the front. We hardly noticed since so many people move to the front on the G.

A few minutes after, the train stopped. We realized that they were talking to the conductor, who had come out of his area. Everyone was pretty quiet. I think we all thought something bad was happening. It was so unusual for the train to stop and the conductor to be in the car.



So then, the conductor comes to one of the center doors, he unlocks one of the poster cases next to the doors of the train and reveals this mechanical area. At this point, everyone I was with was super tense. It seemed like there must be some sort of emergency, so it was super quiet on the train. Anyway, he just pulls the lever, opens the door and the women step out onto this concrete platform. I didn't see this, but my co-worker David Reilly says that there was some sort of room on the platform with frosted windows with bars on them ."

Full Story:

http://gothamist.com/2015/02/25/secr...ortal_whoa.php

Somewhere in a room full of robed figures a man carrying a white cat is cursing and shouting "We've been compromised. Evacuate this facility. And see that the mind-wipe team on duty that night never has a chance to fail us again."

(Growing up on LI, I heard stories about other Subway oddities, like a heavily guarded flatbed subway car that once made pick-ups of sacks of tokens from the stations at night.)