Thursday, 10 August 2017

Ovid (ESE): Personality Type Analysis

Publius Ovidius Naso, known in the English-speaking world as Ovid, was a Roman poet known for his legacy of bringing a diverse array Latin poems into that of Western canon. He lived during the reign of Augustus (LIE), as a contemporaries of the legendary Virgil (ILI) and lofty Horace (ESI). At an early age, Ovid was tutored under Arellius Fuscus and Marcus Porcius Latro in Rome to study rhetoric and law along with his older brother. However, when his brother died at the age of 20, Ovid abandoned his studies altogether and devoted the rest of his life to poetry. His first success was penned around 16 BCE, known as Amores, a collection of erotic poems that were praised for their descriptiveness and consistently light-hearted themes. Ovid followed this work with more romantic poetry, eventually producing Metamorphoses, - 12,000 lines written in dactylic hexameter chronicling all of human history up until the death of Julius Caesar (SEE).

The majority of what is known of Ovid comes from his own writings. He was an ardent, passionate lover of women, he married thrice and divorced twice before turning 30. As a young adult, he travelled about the Empire to Athens and Asia Minor, squandering his family fortune on his relationships with women until returning home. He loved the popularity he got from writing poetry and understood that his poetry began to reach out to a certain group of people who not only had an appreciation for romance, but knew that romance certainly wasn't the only manifestation of human affection that could be shared between others. Ovid didn't want to be perceived as an expert on these topics, his motivation was out of pure fascination and interest with love's role in facilitating the quality of life's pleasures. It is clear that Ovid's great enthusiasm and engagement in the arts for the emotional experience of it, is first and foremost an indication of E1.

His most ambitious work, Metamorphoses, was organized by Ovid through the large amount of material covered in it and its engaging way of connecting topics discussed in the story to a different theme or by relating to the real world in some way. Ovid works his way through this subject matter, often in an apparently arbitrary fashion, by jumping from one transformation tale to another, sometimes retelling what had come to be seen as central events in the world of Greek mythology and sometimes straying in odd directions. It begins with the ritual 'invocation of the muse', and makes use of traditional epithets and circumlocutions. But instead of following and extolling the deeds of a human hero, it leaps from story to story with no dynamic connections, almost as if the author didn't acknowledge the importance of the progression of time. Ovid attempts to use I, out of pure interest to start a new trend of story-telling, with no sign of T in comparison to Virgil's literary prose. He is a man who was comfortable with exploring and improving upon I, even in the cases where he would get it wrong (I6) and almost a confusing disdain for using T when there was no valid reason to (T4).

The one person who definitely seemed to hate Ovid was Emperor Augustus, he didn't really care for Ovid's charisma and was annoyed with his lack of personal integrity. Augustus observed that Ovid's humanizing perspective of the gods was concerning and he believed Ovid's lifestyle to be in direct opposition to his efforts for incorporating Roman standards of morality. His own hatred towards Ovid was made clear when he eventually banished him from Rome to the live on the coast of the Black Sea. The details as to why he was banished is still a historical mystery. Historians tend to think that it had to do with a political or sexual scandal involving Augustus's granddaughter Julia, though there is a very thin basis for this assessment, and so it is thought that Augustus valued his standards of morality to such a degree that he banished his own granddaughter Julia for adultery. Ovid was in Julia's circle of friends, and Augustus perhaps blamed Ovid for venting the flame that led to her banishment. However, the only potential evidence that would allude to such an event occurring was in a poem that he had written on the topic of his recent mistakes that briefly mentioned, "something that I saw but shouldn't have seen". Ovid in this situation, failed to understand why Augustus was so concerned about the importance of R, the matter with Julia only being one example of many. Ovid's R7, or simply the greater emphasis on E > R, is evident based on what information is available in Ovid's relationships, not devoting himself singularly with one person and instead wanting to please anyone (or even everyone) he loved.

During his forced exile to the Romanian coast, the topics of his poems became excessively melodramatic as a result with his dissatisfaction of how horrid the scenery and weather was there, hoping for the chance that he could return to Rome one day. However, his attitude towards his banishment could be seen as an overreaction, since Ovid still retained his property rights and Roman citizenship. This, along with his appreciation of the passionate expression of love is intertwined with material pleasures works with a combination of E+S, more specifically S2.

Ovid worked tirelessly to produce these poems. A great amount of personal energy was directed to produce these works, with little or no intention of 'taking a break' - as was a common occurrence with Roman poets who were busy with a second job to earn more money. While never an underlying theme in his poetry, his use of F was only for the purposes of 'toughing it out' when tying up loose ends, and not giving up or considering switching professions during the period of time when his poems weren't doing as well as his earlier works. This shows that he had strong enough F, but unvalued for the most part, thus making F8 the best possibility.

In conclusion, Alpha values with no interest in T whatsoever, valued I though obviously not strong, devalued R to the point of getting him in trouble, a high focus on E and S, using F for personal ambitions only and conveying the impression of a friendly, joyful and even carefree man. Thus far, what has been mentioned about Ovid clearly points towards E1, S2, T4, I6, R7 and F8, suggesting consistently that he was the ESE type of information metabolism.

To learn more about ESE, click here.

If you are confused by our use of Socionics shorthand, click here.

Wednesday, 2 August 2017

Louis XV of France (ILI): Personality Type Analysis

Louis XV was King of France and Navarre from 1715, when he was five years old, until his death in 1774 at the age of sixty-four. He was the fourth king of the House of Bourbon, ascending the throne on the death of his great-grandfather, King Louis XIV (LSI). It was during his reign that France consolidated its present European borders. Unlike his immediate predecessor and successor, Louis XV's reign and legacy are controversial and are often reevaluated. While Louis XIV is easily defined as the king who relentlessly pushed for increasing the power of the monarchy and for wars aiming at expanding French territory and power, and Louis XVI (LII) is the king who ineptly drifted into revolution and lost his head, Louis XV is far more difficult to assess. He has been considered the king chiefly responsible for the collapse of the prestige of the French monarchy - thus passing on to his successor an impossible legacy - due to the scandal of his private life and the perceived failures of his foreign policy. On the other hand, it has been noted that in his reign no foreign army ever crossed into French territory; that he was far less inclined than his predecessor to engage in aggressive wars; that Louis XV was aware of the need for peaceful years of recovery and for balancing the budget; that his reign was the peak of the Enlightenment period; and that in his reign, France built the world's most extensive and modern road network. It may be fair to say that the general population was safer and more prosperous in his reign than in Louis XIV's; yet Louis XIV's reign was widely perceived as increasing France's power, greatness and glory, and Louis XV's as diminishing them. That was probably his biggest 'failing'.

Louis XV succeeded his great-grandfather as king due to the dynastic catastrophe after 1711, when Louis XIV's son, grandson and even elder great-grandson all died in quick succession of natural causes, leaving the five-year old orphan Louis XV as the next in line. During his minority, Louis XIV's nephew, the Duke d'Orleans (ILE), acted as regent. Louis XV was considered of age at 13 in 1723, but he continued to govern with prime ministers, most notably Cardinal Fleury, his former tutor as a child. After the latter's death, when the king was 33, he announced that he would follow Louis XIV's example and run the government himself, without a prime minister.

At this point, it is convenient to drop the chronological narrative and focus on Louis XV's reported and obvious traits, also in comparison to Louis XIV, whom he 'officially' was emulating. Louis XV's personality has been usually described as something like, "gloomy, shy, reluctant to form attachments", a man who obviously found it more difficult to irradiate personal authority and self-confidence than Louis XIV, despite his position as absolute monarch and being generally regarded as one of the best-looking men in France, as well as fit and athletic. Colin Jones summed up Louis's personality in his massive The Great Nation. The king had,
-- a taste for a kind of morose hedonism. Awkward and uncomfortable in formal company, the king only felt truly at home among small groups of intimates with whom he could engage in gloomy gallows humour.
Louis XV was also described as disliking formal public occasions and he actually fled from even friendly crowds. He also found it difficult to give speeches, preferring to hand a written speech to a courtier who would deliver it on his behalf. Yet, he was not exactly a timid man, formally taking command of the French army during the War of the Austrian Succession, and by all accounts, exposing himself to some danger by getting close to the field of battle. Despite his recorded dislike for interacting with crowds, in his function as commander-in-chief he was assiduous in visiting and trying to console individual wounded soldiers.  He was also an enthusiastic hunter (hunting in the sense of pursuing deer at fast speed on horseback and with hounds, not the leisurely hunting of the aristocracy in the later 19th and earlier 20th century), far more so than his predecessor Louis XIV: Louis XIV included hunting among the activities that a king was supposed to pursue, while Louis XV was a genuine enthusiast.

As far as closer, personal relationships are concerned, Louis XV showed a consistent tendency of trusting unreservedly very few people whom he knew very well (like Cardinal Fleury) and, later, Madame de Pompadour (SEE). The king seemed to alternate, throughout his life, between years of more or less consistent monogamy (first with his queen Marie Leszczyńska for a few years, then with Madame de Pompadour, finally with Madame du Barry), and periods in between where he devoted himself to casual sexual debauchery, sometimes with teenagers with whom he had no actual acquaintance. Exaggerated rumours about his depravity during those periods, even to the effect that he drank the blood of those girls, contributed to the decline in the king's personal popularity during his reign. Notably, his personal friendship with Madame de Pompadour continued for some 14 years after their physical relationship had cooled, with her exercising considerable influence and power of patronage due to the unreserved trust of the king (which also undermined his popularity).

What the above descriptions of his personality point to is a man with difficulties in both E and R, but seemingly greater familiarity with R and longing for it. That already suggests a Logical type, and also points to the Gamma or Delta quadras.

Louis's period of personal government has been described as being a bit like 'anarchy' in the sense that despite his proclaimed intentions, he never imposed his personal authority and control on his cabinet in the way that Louis XIV or even Fleury had. Louis XIV had revamped the monarchy and the court at Versailles to make it work like some sort of clock, with all the members of the court, including the king himself, as sort of puppets in a rigid daily routine around etiquette, work, mass, meals, and 'private' time, all aiming at emphasising the king's authority and higher status, with his personal comfort and convenience receiving less priority. By contrast, Louis XV clearly hated that rigid system: early in his reign, feeling obliged to emulate his great predecessor, he dutifully adopted that same system. But he gradually began to 'escape' from it with increasing frequency, following it perhaps just once a week in his later reign. Louis XV preferred to withdraw into his private apartments in the main Versailles palace (which he expanded, at the cost of public areas), or to the smaller Trianon complex in the Versailles garden. In those private areas, he mostly dropped formality and spent time with his immediate family and some intimates - even to the point of being the one to pour the tea. Yet, he never stopped the formal etiquette and routine from operating in the main palace.

What is most revealing about the above is that Louis XV preferred to gradually 'bypass' the system inherited from Louis XIV rather than merely abolishing or drastically revamping it. Just as Louis XIV had used his power as king to invent and impose that ultra-formal system, it fully lay in Louis XV's power to relax it, to abolish it, even to move the court back to Paris (as the Regent, the Duke d'Orleans, had done), that is, to re-shape the monarchy in a way in tune with his personal inclinations, just as Louis XIV had done.

That Louis XV followed the 'path of least resistance' of bypassing routines and systems he disliked, rather than facing it head-on and reshaping it, already points to weaker F than F1 or F2. Also, Louis XIV was inflexible in maintaining that system because any concessions would start to diminish the aura of authority of the king (awareness of F with E). And as he would have predicted, Louis XV's increasing neglect of that system was one of the factors leading to the decline in his personal prestige and that of the monarchy. Yet, Louis XV did care very much about maintaining the power of the monarchy and acted resolutely when he thought it was threatened in more concrete ways, as in his 1771 abolition of the political powers of the law courts (confusingly called "parlements"). This points to a man who does care about his power and authority but finds it difficult to be personally forceful about it, and who seems to overlook the E aspects of power. A low focus on E is already visible in what was reported about his personality in his entire life, as a reserved, even shy man, who preferred the company of small circles of intimates rather than grandiose events and public appearances. This again points to someone of the Gamma or Delta quadras, with R more valued than E, which was also apparently very subdued, pointing to E4 or E7, which narrows down Louis XV's likely types to ILI, SLI, ESI or EII. 

The trait mentioned above of mostly following the 'path of least resistance' rather than facing head-on the existing 'establishments' was observed in other areas. Louis XV famously preferred to bypass his own official foreign ministers by conducting what became known as the secret du Roi - the King's secret - a 'secret diplomacy' conducted by the king himself, personally, during twenty years, using direct secret correspondence with foreign powers and the use of a network of spies and secret agents. Another evidence of this trait is what happened in the aftermath of his assassination attempt, by a man named Damiens, who stabbed the king in Versailles, wounding him in a non-lethal way. The king's advisers as well as the high court - parlement - of Paris wanted  to sentence Damiens to the full punishment reserved for regicides (and applied previously to the murderer of Henry IV (ESE) in 1610), that is, death after hours of savage, agonising public torture. The king's first reaction, upon hearing the description, was of horror and inclination to pardon Damiens - yet faced with unanimous opposition, he relented and let events 'take their course'. Finally, later in his reign, he supported his finance minister in a tax reform that would reduce the tax rate, spread the tax base more evenly, and probably balance the budget - yet, faced with stiff opposition of the nobility and church, Louis sort of let it drop.

The overall picture is of man who, despite the immense authority and power inherent in his position, had extreme difficulty in actually using them when faced with direct opposition from those around him - even if he clearly thought he knew better what should be done. So his attitude was either to give up, in frustration, or to just give up the open confrontation and do it his own way - on his own. This points to a man with very weak F - especially since, it must be remembered, all he had to do was to stay firm in his decisions and wishes, and he would be obeyed. Of the above types, this makes ESI and even SLI very unlikely for Louis XV.

Unlike Louis XIV - a man more inclined to focus on details while missing the big picture, and not inclined to reading - Louis XV was, since childhood, a man of great interest in reading books about many varied subjects, and always impressing foreign ambassadors with his easy mastery of the subjects at hand. He was also deeply interested in natural sciences, asking for demonstrations of newly discovered phenomena such as electricity. His awareness of his own knowledge and ability to learn a varied number of subjects must have been one big factor in his preferring to conduct foreign policy by himself, from his desk, rather than having to rely on the established diplomatic service, and in his personal involvement in tax reform. That points to a man with considerable confidence and focus on P. That was also seen on his war policy: even after fairly victorious wars, Louis XV tended to prefer a peace that more or less restored the previous status, rather than an expansion that would be difficult to preserve; and during the Seven Years War, he quickly realised that France had no chance to defend foreign colonies in Canada and in India against the British navy, preferring to focus resources elsewhere. This realistic approach, showing a higher focus on P than on F or E, although successful, was yet another factor in the king's unpopularity: the perception that he either only lost wars, or that even when he won them, he did not gain anything for France in the end. Many people, perhaps most, missed the days of the destructive wars of Louis XIV, who at least seemed to win.

What we have is a man with almost no focus on E - either at personal or political level - with a clear need for R close relationships but also with difficulty in them; with focus and confidence in P, weakness in F but seemingly valuing it: this is shown not only by his attempts to exercise his will, but also in his preferring intense physical activity in hunting and obviously liking best strong-willed women, like the Madame de Pompadour. E4, R6, P2, F5 fit perfectly all that is known and consistent about Louis XV, pointing to ILI as his Socionics type.

To learn more about ILI, click here.

If you are confused by our use of Socionics shorthand, click here.

Sources: besides Wikipedia in French and English, The Great Nation by Colin Jones, episodes of the French documentary series Secrets d'Histoire and the excellent documentary Louis XV le Soleil Noir.

Sunday, 30 July 2017

Elizabeth II (SLI): Personality Type Analysis

Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II (born Elizabeth Alexandra Mary of the royal house of Windsor) is the reigning monarch of the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, and as Head of the Commonwealth, is Queen of a further 12 countries. At 91 years of age, she is currently the oldest monarch in the world and holds the record for Britain's oldest ever, as well as being the longest-reigning at over 65 years on the throne.

She was born in Mayfair, London in 1926, during the reign of her grandfather, King George V (SEI). As the eldest of two daughters to the second son of the King, it was never expected that she would one day be crowned Queen. Everything changed in 1936, due to the sudden and unprecedented abdication of her childless uncle, King Edward VIII (IEI) in order to marry his American divorcee lover, Wallis Simpson (EIE). Duty fell on her father, Prince Albert, Duke of York to sit the throne and he was crowned King George VI (EII), taking his father's regnal name. From then, the young Princess Elizabeth, fondly known as 'Lilibet' by those who knew her, was carefully prepared to rule as the heir presumptive, receiving private tuition in constitutional history and learning French.

As a child, Princess Elizabeth was educated largely at home by her governess Marion Crawford, who later published a biography on The Little Princesses in 1950. Here, her natural love of dogs and horses that would persist to this day, were first described, as well as her orderliness and responsibility, which stood in stark contrast to her more impulsive and exuberant younger sister, Princess Margaret (SEE), who would later become the Duchess of Cornwall.

"...when it was time to return to their home in London, Lilibet carefully put away all the blankets and linen, covered the miniature furniture in dust sheets and wrapped up the silver in newspaper — ‘to prevent it getting  tarnished’, she told me.

She wasn’t quite six, but clearly loved order. After dinner every night, both she and Margaret — then a little fat child — would hold out their hands and their father would give them each a spoonful of old-fashioned barley sugar.

Margaret pushed the whole lot into her mouth. Lilibet, however, carefully sorted hers out on the table, and then ate it very daintily. She also kept all her belongings immaculately tidy — but there’d come a time later when she became almost too methodical and neat. Indeed, I grew quite anxious about her.

During the course of each night, she’d hop out of bed several times just to make sure her shoes were quite straight on the floor and her clothes arranged just so.

It was only when Margaret did a hilarious imitation of her sister’s bedtime rituals that Lilibet finally stopped performing them."

From this early stage, we can see a particular fixation on the physical minutiae of her daily life, feeling the need to make sure that everything is 'just right', even to excess. This makes sense for a type with S in a very pronounced position, albeit in a very structured way that suggests a great deal of L too.

At the age of 18, during World War II, Princess Elizabeth was eager to help with the war effort and became the only female member of the royal family to ever serve in the armed forces. She volunteered to work with the Women's Auxiliary Territorial Service (WATS), training as a driver and mechanic. This unprecedented example of a British princess imploring the King that she be allowed to participate in practical work like anyone else is notable. Furthermore, the nature of the work was especially technical and required one to 'get one's hands dirty' with cars and other machinery. She did well enough to be promoted five months later to honorary junior commander. This suggests someone, first of all, willing to put aside the airs of hierarchy to work alongside regular people in a useful role. Second, it suggests that Elizabeth had a degree of confidence and competence with learning how to handle practical, mechanical tasks. Already, this mildly suggests strong, valued P, especially blocked with S.

At 21, Princess Elizabeth became engaged to her second cousin once removed, Prince Philip (ILI) of Greece and Denmark, an exile in the United Kingdom who would later renounce his foreign titles to become Philip, Duke of Edinburgh and Prince consort. They were married in 1947. It is notable that Elizabeth decided to marry Prince Philip purely out of personal love and affection, despite him being a poor match in terms of his family background. The Duke of Edinburgh was not merely foreign-born, but all his sisters had married noblemen with Nazi links. Furthermore, he had nothing in the way of financial standing. While the King's advisers and Princess Elizabeth's own mother, Queen Elizabeth (ESE) opposed the union, the otherwise sensible and well-behaved Princess Elizabeth insisted on proceeding with the marriage. This suggests that despite being highly dutiful, Elizabeth felt it most important to marry the individual person right for her, regardless of family or fortune. This suggests the valuing of R over more E and L-related matters, such as status and public approval, as well as a certain firmness in its use.

In the years immediately following her marriage to the Duke of Edinburgh, which included the birth of two children, Charles, Prince of Wales (LII) and Anne, Princess Royal (LIE), she had the opportunity to lead a mostly 'normal' married life, although with Prince Philip being given second-in-command of the Malta-based HMS Chequers in 1949, they had to live intermittently abroad, leaving the children at home. It is thought that this period was one of the happiest of her life. This points to someone attracted to normality, rather than the pressures of royal duty, and if given free reign, would have been happy as a commoner.

It was while on holiday in Kenya with her husband in February 1952 that Elizabeth was alerted to the death of the King from lung cancer. Princess Elizabeth was crowned 'Her Majesty, Queen Elizabeth II' in June 1953. Unlike her father, who was born Albert, it did not occur to her to choose a regnal name different to that of her birth. When asked if she wanted to stay 'Elizabeth', she responded "of course!". This suggests, not just a preference for continuing with her birth name, rather than inventing a new persona, but also the absence of thought to the idea of ever doing so. That could mean that matters of E are not usually considered.

The name of greater consequence was that of the royal house. As a woman, precedent was that Her Majesty's descendents would belong to the house of her husband, the Duke of Edinburgh, changing from Windsor to Mountbatten. Unprecedentedly, her grandmother, Queen Mary (LSI) and the Prime Minister at the time, Sir Winston Churchill (SLE), opposed this position, arguing that the royal house remain with Windsor. Both of these opponents possessed strong personalities, and there is no information on how much the new Queen Elizabeth II resisted their wills, whether she folded unwillingly or did not care enough to protest. Either way, Her Majesty accepted their demands and declared on the 9th April 1952 that Windsor would remain the name of the royal house. What is clear is that this greatly distressed her husband, who notably declared "I am nothing but a bloody amoeba. I am the only man in the country not allowed to give his name to his own children". The Queen's attempt to address her husband's disappointment was to grant him new duties and privileges, including full control over the household and more publicly, the position of organising her coronation. Eight years later, after the death of her grandmother and Churchill's retirement, the Queen would concede to Prince Philip, allowing all their male-line descendants without royal titles to take the name Mountbatten-Windsor.

During the year-long preparations for her coronation, and soon after the death of her grandmother, Queen Mary, the Queen was asked by her sister, Princess Margaret for permission to marry Peter Townsend, the Comptroller for her mother's household. He was a divorcé, over 16 years her senior, with two sons from a previous marriage. The Royal Marriages Act of 1772 required members of the royal family to seek permission of the monarch before marrying. Although the Queen was sympathetic towards her sister, senior politicians opposed the match, and it was known that the Church of England would not permit remarriage after divorce. Marrying outside the Church would have required Princess Margaret to renounce her right of succession to the throne. Her Majesty's approach to this solution was a delaying tactic, saying to her sister "Under the circumstances, it isn't unreasonable for me to ask you to wait a year." The Queen's intentions were thought to be to try and discourage her sister from pursuing the marriage, while trying to minimise any harshness or cruelty with her. She believed that, given time, her sister's affection would 'peter out'. However, the Government was more impatient, wanting to get rid of him. While the Queen rejected her private secretary's advice to send him away and opted to transfer him to her household instead, Churchill eventually arranged for him to be sent to Brussels on post. It would not be one, but three years before he could return.

Letters released in 2004 reveal that by 1955, with the replacement of Churchill with Anthony Eden (ESI) as Prime Minister, the Queen had been willing to draw up a plan to allow Princess Margaret to marry Townsend in exchange for giving up her right to succession, with Eden saying "Her Majesty would not wish to stand in the way of her sister's happiness." However, Margaret released a statement three days later, saying that she had decided not to proceed with the marriage.

What the incidents with her husband's name and her sister's marriage suggest about Her Majesty is someone who is cautious, sympathetic and averse to conflict, while also more open-minded to other people's points of view. Although not wanting to stand in the way of those close to her, the Queen prioritises not rocking the boat with her Government or other authority figures, while trying to harmonise her relationships in the wake of her decisions, appreciating their viewpoint and attempting to respect it in deed where able. It is worth noting that in both cases, Her Majesty was willing to make concessions to her husband and sister, but waited until after the strongest sources of opposition were gone before reaching a compromise. This points to valued instead of F and R instead of L, although with a sufficient degree of awareness in all four, understanding the balance of power but choosing to minimise disruption, and keenly understanding the importance of duties and traditions, while at the same time, trying to minimise the pain of individuals close to her where she can. It is also likely that the Queen did not fully consider how much her declaration in 1952 would hurt her husband, suggesting a certain oversight in her use of R.

Her coronation, over a year after her accession to the throne, was the first in British history to be televised, which met opposition from Churchill as well as the Elizabeth The Queen Mother and numerous royal courtiers, believing the ceremony to be a private, sacred matter. The Queen herself was uncomfortable about the idea, being notoriously camera shy. She had previously resisted having cameras film her wedding to the Duke of Edinburgh. Nevertheless, Prince Philip, whom she had given the position of arranging the coronation (possibly out of a desire to make amends for not allowing him to pass on his name), believed that the coronation should be televised as means of modernising the monarchy. The British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) also thought this would be a good idea, and made the issue a matter of public discourse in the newspapers. Having been informed that the public was strongly in favour of being able to see the coronation for the first time, the Queen changed her mind, saying that "all subjects should have the opportunity of seeing it". However, she only allowed it on the condition that the camera take no close shots. From this, we see the beginning of an ongoing struggle for Her Majesty, someone who had always been ill-suited to publicity and being in the view of a large audience, but who felt motivated by a duty to do the right thing for her subjects.

It is notable that Her Majesty always felt a strong desire to follow the dutiful example of her father, who had given up a relatively private life to fill in for his abdicated brother. While the vivacious Princess Margaret was known as her father's "joy", Princess Elizabeth strove to be her father's "pride". This preoccupation with duty as an extension of her paternal relationship has been a consistent motivator over 63 years and once again, suggests that R is in a pronounced position as a motivator. At the same time, it is clear that the Queen's motivations were not out of an E-focused desire to reach out to the public.

The information we have so far is enough to provide a good sense of the Queen's values; someone who pays much more attention to the individual merits of the people they interact with, rather than their position in a rigid social hierarchy or their public reputation, who is attracted to a 'normal', private life and thinks nothing of engaging in un-glamorous, practical tasks deemed 'beneath' her rank and station if it provides some assistance, and approaches her formal duties as a means of emulating and respecting a person of deep love and admiration to her. The Queen tends to side with tradition as part of her embrace of duty, but this does not stop her from making concessions for the happiness of people she is close to. In rare footage, where Her Majesty reflects on the many letters she receives from subjects seeking her help, this emphasis on the personal connection is very apparent:

"I've always had rather a sort of feeling that letters are rather personal to oneself, you know, because people write them thinking that I'm going to open them and read them. I don't open all of them obviously because I don't have time to do that. But it does certainly give me... an idea of what is worrying people and what actually they feel I could do to help, and there are occasions when I can help. I can pass things on to the right authorities or I can even in some cases write to various organisations who will look into it. But I've always had this feeling that letters are written to ME and I like to see what people want to write to me. I think in a way one feels that there is a sort of "the buck stops here", so to speak , that I'm the one. I had a letter this morning about something. He said 'I've been going round and round and round in circles, but you are the only person who can stop the circle and YOU would be able to fix it.' I thought that was rather nice."

This manner of emphasising the personal characteristics of interpersonal communication, e.g. the relationship and expectations between two people, and readily describing how one personally feels about it, is normal for a type with R in a pronounced, valued position. Overall, this and the way Her Majesty prioritises personal relationships in decision-making is very consistent with an Integrity-Seeking set of values.

We can also see, from the Queen's decisions in moments of family crisis, a desire to avoid conflict, even going so far as to side with the more demanding, authoritative party while they are alive or in power, but to soften her position on those suffering from the decision once the source of demands is out of the picture. This can be seen in her granting the right of male, non-royal descendants to use her husband's family name, as well as eventually saying she will not prevent her sister from marrying Townsend. In each case, despite being the head of state, Her Majesty found herself as the intermediary, trying to balance different points of view, rather than a wilful party imposing her own will. This largely shows a monarch with little interest in utilising F, whether through force of personality, or with her constitutional powers.

Similarly, the previous footage, shows how Her Majesty conceptualises and approaches her role as Queen of the United Kingdom and Commonwealth Realms:

"It was all a very sudden kind of taking on and making the best job you can. It's a question of maturing into something that one's got used to doing and accepting the fact that here you are and it's your fate, because I think continuity is very important. It is a job for life. 

Most people have a job and then they go home and in this existence, the job and the life go on together because you can't really divide it up. The boxes and the communications just keep on coming and of course the modern communications, they come even quicker. Luckily I'm a quick reader so, I get through a lot of reading in quite a short time, though I do rather begrudge some of the hours that I have to do this instead of being outdoors."

What this quote demonstrates is someone inclined to accept the Crown as something that happened to her, and to focus on adjusting and making the best out of the situation. At the same time, it is clear that, despite feeling a duty to do a good job as monarch, the Queen is much more satisfied "outdoors", engaging in pleasurable past times like looking after her horses, or else, being involved in charitable causes. Elizabeth gives no impression of someone who relishes in her considerable power as head of state. When taken alongside Her Majesty's approach to managing disputes, which show someone who clearly desires to smooth things over and make concessions, it becomes quite clear that S is much more valued than F, making it apparent that Her Majesty has World-Accepting values.

The combination of Integrity-Seeking and World-Accepting values means that Queen Elizabeth II is a likely Delta type. Furthermore, it is not hard to see that, with S and R being the most pronounced of the valued elements, Her Majesty must be a Delta Integrator, i.e. either EII or SLI. In a nutshell, Elizabeth II is primarily motivated by a sense of harmony and ease in her relationships with others.

The Queen's reign has seen the gradual transformation of the British Empire into a Commonwealth of Nations. Although she remains Head of State for most of these nations, the change in name to 'Commonwealth', a name used to describe England after the execution of King Charles I (LII) and the takeover by Lord Protector Oliver Cromwell (LSI), is telling in reflecting a further reduction of the British monarch's influence to that of an effective figurehead. The monarch used to wield considerable powers, with monarchs before the 17th Century being able to veto bills passing into law, enjoy diplomatic immunity around the world, commandeer any ship, declare war without consultation, control the entire British military, arrest people and seize their property. While these powers still exist in theory, no monarch in recent times has had the de facto power to attempt any of these without risking the United Kingdom becoming a republic. Despite this, up to 2011, the Queen still had the power to dissolve governments and call an election at will. While effective power has ebbed from the Crown since its peak in the 16th century, monarchs with a greater emphasis on F put up more of a resistance, e.g. James II (ESI) creating a standing army and reasserting power through the judiciary, or else, made greater use of the powers allowed to them, e.g. Charles II (EIE), George III (ESI) and William IV (ESE) dismissing governments, and Victoria (ESI) exercising a great deal of private influence over policy. The only known attempt by Her Majesty to exercise her power over Parliament was once where she prevented discussion of a bill to give Parliament the ability to conduct military action in Iraq, but only did so with the advice of her government. This largely follows the approach of her father, King George VI in keeping out of politics and government entirely, suggesting a F that is used as minimally as possible, that is either F4 or F7.

Despite this, video footage of the Queen shows someone rather more capable of being asserting herself on the one-to-one. As seen in one incident when the Her Majesty was supposed to wear the full regalia of the Order of the Garter, a highly flamboyant and impractical outfit, where she said "I'm not changing anything. I've done enough dressing like this, thankyou very much." and her own insistence that her grandson, Prince William, on his wedding day, wear the ceremonial tunic of an Irish guard's officer, rather than his preference for the Irish guard's frock coat. It became very clear to him that "you do not mess with your grandmother, and what she says goes".  What we see here is that although being one of the most laissez-faire monarchs in history, in regards to power and influence, the Queen is able to get highly assertive over particularly S-related matters, having to do more with aesthetic minutiae than anything else. This suggests F7 supporting S1, rather than F4 failing to support S6.

The main element of the Queen's activities as a figurehead is regularly meeting with people from a range of professions, including civil servants, volunteers, government officials, philanthropists, award-winners and celebrities. While the duties of administration in the palace, of appearing positively in front of the cameras and the general pomp and circumstance can be draining for her, Her Majesty seems to genuinely enjoy holding more private audiences with people in a variety of careers and getting to find out more of what they do. Although usually rather restrained and on her guard in public, she is often described as being rather more 'chatty' in these meetings, seeming to use them to satisfy a genuine curiosity about what people do. This is notable for someone whose personal passions can be counted as the breeding and care of her dogs and racing horses. It is perhaps a sign of someone who, despite the great regularity of her own life, is attracted to hearing the perspectives of other people, suggesting a weak, but valued I5.

The Queen's reign has not only been the longest in British history, but has perhaps also been very stable, with Her Majesty never having had to see off a conquering force or an attempt on her life. Nevertheless, she has faced challenges in regards to her popularity as a monarch, knowing that losing the approval of her people could one day mean the removal of the monarchy. The time her popularity reached its nadir soon after the death of her daughter-in-law, Diana, Princess of Wales (IEI), someone whose natural touch with the people regularly upstaged Her Majesty's more distant, less exciting figure. This highly popular person's death in a car crash, years after divorcing the Prince of Wales, brought collective expectation on the Queen to show emotion publicly for her loss. Her Majesty's approach was ill-suited to this requirement, deciding instead to withdraw from the public to the care of her bereaved grandchildren, holding a church service where no mention was made of the death. This caused public outrage, suggesting she had completely misread the nation's mood.

At the advice of her Government, the Queen resolved to speak directly to the people on national television, which although certainly helped to repair the damage, showed clearly how Her Majesty is not someone capable of publicly reaching out in an emotional display, and at her best, could only resort to sincere statements about the positive qualities of her late daughter-in-law's character. This shows, more than anything else, a complete blindness to the need for emotional affect, which best fits E4 with R6.

Although the Queen is not known for giving interviews where she gives her own opinions to the camera, the documentary of her being painted by Rolf Harris (it is an example of how rare it is to find video footage of a proper conversation between Her Majesty and someone else, that I am forced to use her discourse with a now convicted abuser of young women) provides a unique opportunity to see Her Majesty in conversation and the sorts of things she tends to focus on. It becomes clear rather early on that she is very inclined to 'small talk', discussing the bad weather and moving on to the biting habits of her dogs, of which she is very fond. While Rolf is a clear E-ego type, and naturally communicates emotively, the Queen is brief and matter-of-fact, both communicating factual information, rather than much of an emotional nature, while occasionally asking Rolf questions about how he does his work and inquiring into his stories. A good example can be seen with her response to this story he told:

Rolf Harris: "A couple of weeks ago I was down in Wales at a function and one of the people involved in organising it said "Did you know there's a painting by your grand-dad out in the main hall upstairs?" and I said "No". So he took me upstairs and there is a painting by my grandfather of your grandfather, George V reviewing the troops in the 14/18 war, in the trenches, and it sent off shivers down the back of my spine."

Her Majesty: "You didn't know it was there?"

The Queen in conversation demonstrates a precise and detailed knowledge of specific things, from the origins of her broach to the painting techniques of previous people to have painted her. She is also someone who incorporates an understated, dry humour in conversation. For instance:

Rolf Harris: "Are portraits a terrible chore?"

Her Majesty: "No, not really. It's quite nice. Usually one just sits and people can't get at you because they know you're busy doing nothing." 

These observations come together to suggest a person who is naturally proficient in matters of factual information and is more comfortable handling conversation of this kind, but at the same time, someone who is far more relatable in one-to-one conversation than in public. That suggests strong P for a Delta Integrator, i.e. P2.

To conclude, the Queen is someone who shows all the signs of Delta values, with particular emphasis on S and R, suggesting a Delta Integrator. Between the options of EII and SLI, it is apparent that the Queen is confident in matters of P, while being more reliant on the stories of other people for I, suggesting P2 and I5, with S1 and R6. At the same time, while she has limited, but successful use of F7, her greatest challenge as a monarch is obviously E4. The presence of L can also be seen as something unvalued when compared to R, but which is very much present in how she uses her S and how she defaults to conventional duty when her values are not conflict, suggesting the background effect of L8. This makes SLI by far the most likely typing for Her Majesty.

Sources: While I focused on real-life sources for analysing the Queen, including her Wikipedia page and the different links provided further up, I should add that the Netflix Series, The Crown is a remarkably insightful portrayal of the young Queen, Prince Philip and several others and would strongly recommend that people see its first season.

To learn more about SLI, click here.

If you are confused by our use of Socionics shorthand, click here.

Saturday, 8 July 2017

Louis XIV of France (LSI): Personality Type Analysis

Louis XIV, sometimes called "the Sun King" and "Louis the Great", reigned as King of France and Navarre from 1643 until his death in 1715 at the age of 76. He was the third French king of the House of Bourbon, ascending the throne when he was 4 upon the death of his father, King Louis XIII (IEI). His reign was the zenith of France as the leading European power politically, militarily and culturally. Louis XIV re-invented the French monarchy as a manifestation and celebration of the absolute power of the king; he was regarded by his contemporaries, as he is still today, as the archetype of the absolute monarch. His personal tastes in art, architecture, etiquette and even landscaping had a huge impact among his contemporaries which is felt still today.

Louis XIII, supported by his prime minister Cardinal Richelieu (LSI), had already greatly increased the authority of the monarchy; however, the death of both men in quick succession led to a weaker government, during Louis XIV's minority, under his mother Queen Anne and Richelieu's successor, Cardinal Mazarin. They broadly continued the previous reign's policies but their unpopularity, heavy-handedness and perceived lower legitimacy led to a series of revolts and civil wars collectively known as the Fronde; the most serious of them led by many nobles, including Louis XIII's brother, Gaston d'Orleans. The Fronde revolts were kept at bay by the Queen and Mazarin until Louis XIV's coronation at the age of 16, formally signalling the end of the Regency and essentially draining the will of the nobles towards revolt. Nevertheless Louis kept Cardinal Mazarin as chief minister until his death in 1660, when Louis was 22. The king immediately announced that from now on he would not have a prime minister - which had been the norm for four decades - and that he would govern himself: as he put it, "I request and order you to seal no orders except by my command . . . I order you not to sign anything, not even a passport . . . without my command". Even if later he allowed his minister a little more independence, it remains true that for the next five decades Louis made all major government decisions and nothing was decided against his will.

After this announcement, Louis still moved carefully to get rid of the most powerful left-over from Mazarin's cabinet, Nicolas Fouquet, the Superintendent of Finances (i.e. finance minister). Fouquet had managed to make himself almost independent of Mazarin's authority and his control over the state finances was total. He also built up a vast personal fortune and network of supporters, and he advertised his power and wealth by building the magnificent palace of Vaux-le-Vicomte. The king considered him too powerful and potentially too dangerous to be merely sacked; so he carefully first let Fouquet feel secure that he had the king's esteem, and then quickly had him arrested, when he least expected, by the chief musketeer, d'Artagnan. Fouquet was tried and found guilty of embezzlement, and sentenced to banishment. Louis 'commuted' the sentence to life imprisonment. Fouquet died in prison some 19 years after his arrest. To this day, his trial is the subject of French scholarly analysis as an example of an unfair, highly politicised trial for trumped-up charges.

The above already points to Louis XIV as an individual, not only with great focus on F, but also with a seemingly subtle, masterful approach to it. In isolation, Louis' merciless destruction of Nicolas Fouquet could be interpreted as either personal vindictiveness in destroying someone whom he considered irredeemable - pointing to R blocked with F, that is the Gamma quadra - or as the ruthless elimination of a powerful minister in a way as to signal to the whole nation that the king was all-powerful, establishing his authority, which would point to F blocked with L, that is the Beta quadra.

Having gotten rid of Fouquet, Louis appointed as ministers men whom he could trust and who owed their positions to him, such as Jean-Baptiste Colbert as finance minister. Colbert overhauled the taxation system, greatly increasing revenues and rescuing the state from near bankruptcy, and introduced measures to encourage manufacture and trade, greatly improving infrastructure, aiming at a positive trade balance. While Colbert had to have the king's support in all his actions, Louis XIV was not very concerned with economic policies as such, seeing the increased economic and financial strength as a means to enhance the power of the monarchy and of the French state. Accordingly, Louis soon started spending immense sums on building the huge palace complex at Versailles (at a cost of perhaps 10% of the annual budget, over many years), and on an aggressive foreign policy, with a succession of wars, all of which drained the state's finances, especially the last one, the War of the Spanish Succession (1701-1714). So the net result of Louis XIV's reign was that at his death he left a national debt five times higher than he had found it, and ten times higher than Colbert had left when he died three decades earlier.

Louis XIV spent over half of the period of his personal rule at war. All his five major wars had, generally speaking, the aims of expanding France's borders, or attacking external enemies (like the Dutch Republic), or installing on foreign thrones monarchs friendly to France. All his wars were aggressive ones started by him, even if arguably with some justification. They were broadly successful - one of Louis XIV's legacies was an enlarged French territory, with frontiers starting to resemble today's - but at huge cost to the population and economy of France, which was even more bankrupt when he died than when he took the reigns of government.

As for his palace at Versailles - which was built despite Colbert's exasperation with the cost - Louis' reasons for building it were manifold. First, he regarded the palace in Paris (the Louvre) as vulnerable to riots and revolts (as per his experience of the Fronde), and he seemed to have had an obvious dislike for the place. Second, he intended the palace to be a visible, giant advertisement of the power, wealth and glory of the monarchy (interestingly he was inspired by Fouquet's own Vaux-le-Vicomte palace). Third, and perhaps most importantly, he intended for the whole of the French nobility to make Versailles their main, if not only, residence. Louis XIV's power as king was still counterbalanced to some extent by the estates and regional legal powers of the nobility, which still made them possible sources of revolts. By keeping all the nobles either at Versailles, or on the battlefield in periods of war, the king kept them under his eye and under his control.

The above summarises (a bit simplistically) the main policies and priorities of Louis XIV as king: to increase the power and territorial extent of France, to increase the power and prestige of the monarchy, and to reduce the independence and power of the nobility in relation to the king. Although those could be seen as obvious aims for a king, that is not necessarily so and Louis was personally the author of all the specific policies. It can be argued therefore that more than just his position as king, they point to Louis's own personal psychology. confirming an intense focus on F. Louis' personal project of using a vast luxury palace as a visible advertisement of the power and prestige of the monarchy (which is F+E), and his dismissal of P concerns when pursuing F goals, point to E rather than P as a valued function, so Beta is his quadra.

In Versailles, Louis designed and implemented a rigid system of etiquette, which he followed daily and expected the courtiers to follow. It included a fixed routine for when he would get out of bed, go to mass, have his meals, see his ministers, have some brief private time with his family, then go to bed - the Duke of Saint-Simon, an eyewitness, said in his memoirs that it was possible to know exactly what the king was doing, no matter how far you were from Versailles, just by looking at a watch. It also included a rigid, perhaps petty, hierarchical order of etiquette in the sense of which ranks in the nobility were allowed to be present at the king's most intimate moments and on what kind of armchair they could sit while in the king's presence. It is revealing that Louis subjected not only others but himself to this regimented lifestyle (his two successors, Louis XV (ILI) and Louis XVI (LII) "escaped" from that routine often). This liking for a rigid structure for his daily routine, as well as for the social positions of those around him, point to L and F as valued and strong functions.

The Duke of Saint-Simon left some interesting observations:
His mind was occupied with small things rather than with great, and he delighted in all sorts of petty details, such as the dress and drill of his soldiers, and it was just the same with regard to his building operations, his household, and even his cookery. He always thought he could teach something of their own craft even to the most skilful professional men, and they, for their part, used to listen gratefully to lessons which they had long ago learnt by heart. He imagined that all this showed his indefatigable industry; in reality, it was a great waste of time, and his Ministers turned it to good account for their own purposes, as soon as they had learnt the art of managing him, they kept his attention engaged with a mass of details, while they contrived to get their own way in more important matters.
Although the Duke was not necessarily a neutral witness, if there is some truth to this portrait, it points to a person with an apparent focus on S, and even S+P, making the S4 of EIEs very unlikely and suggesting LSI or SLE among Beta types.

Louis expected the nobles to spend most of their time in Versailles; he did not mind so much if they also spent time in their own estates, but considered it an affront if they preferred to stay in Paris instead. The moment that the king decided a noble was guilty of that, he would regard him essentially as persona non grata and ignore the man's existence, saying "I do not know who he is" or "I never see him here". The moment that happened, the man was condemned to irreversible social oblivion. This ruthlessness in dealing with individuals who broke his rules - perhaps unwittingly in some cases - points again to R in a weaker and less valued function than L. Also, Louis officially allowed anyone to approach him with requests when he was walking in the garden, but his almost invariable answer was "I will think about it" - suggesting that being so accessible was again one of the rules he imposed on himself rather than deeply felt.  However, according to Saint-Simon, when someone managed to get a private audience with the king, regardless of rank, then Louis was inclined to be "kind-hearted and just", and it was permissible to contradict or even interrupt the king, as long as a posture of reverence was maintained, with Louis then even making exceptions to his rules. This willingness to make exceptions for individuals who did manage to speak to him on a more personal basis suggests some concern for R, and seems most like R3.

Finally, the Duke of Saint-Simon has this to say about Louis's greatest weakness:
His Ministers, generals, mistresses, and courtiers soon found out his weak point, namely, his love of hearing his own praises. There was nothing he liked so much as flattery, or, to put it more plainly, adulation; the coarser and clumsier it was, the more he relished it. That was the only way to approach him; if he ever took a liking to a man it was invariably due to some lucky stroke of flattery in the first instance, and to indefatigable perseverance in the same line afterwards. His Ministers owed much of their influence to their frequent opportunities for burning incense before him...

Not only does this confirm the E valuing of Louis XIV, but it also points most clearly to E5.

All the evidence points very clearly to Louis XIV as a Beta, with focus on F, L and a craving for E the most obvious and consistent traits, but also with some inclination to drift towards focusing on S. That would point to LSI or SLE as possible types, but it is difficult to imagine a SLE who would voluntarily submit himself, over decades, to Louis's repetitive around-the-clock regimented lifestyle, that pointing more to the energy levels of an Integrator type and to having L as more important than F. L1, F2, R3, E5 and S8 fit very well what is known of Louis XIV, making him a likely LSI.

To learn more about LSI, click here.

If you are confused by our use of Socionics shorthand, click here.

Sources: besides the French Wikipedia, my mental image of Louis XIV was first shaped by Will and Ariel Durant's The Age of Louis XIV. Excerpts of the memoirs of the Duke of Saint-Simon are available online, like here. A description of the king's boring routine is  here.  The excellent French television series Secrets d'histoire has several episodes on Louis XIV in YouTube.

Saturday, 1 July 2017

Hendrik Verwoerd (LSI): Personality Type Analysis

Hendrik Frensch Verwoerd was a South African psychologist, university professor, newspaper editor and politician who served as South Africa's 6th Prime Minister from 1958 until his murder in 1966. He is often called the "Architect of Apartheid" and was the politician chiefly responsible for the creation of the Republic of South Africa in 1961. It was during his government that Nelson Mandela (EIE), along with others, was sentenced to prison for sabotage until his release in 1990.

Verwoerd was born in the Netherlands in 1901; his parents emigrated to South Africa when he was about two years old. At first, he attended primary school in Cape Town, then in his teens accompanied his parents when they moved again, to Bulawayo (in what was then Rhodesia) and then back to South Africa, in the then province of the Orange Free State. He was an outstanding student and got the highest marks for English literature in the whole of Rhodesia, and the highest score in the Orange Free State in his exams for attending university. He went to the prestigious University of Stellenbosch near Cape Town where he graduated in psychology with a doctorate. Offered a scholarship for a post-doctorate in Oxford, and another for studies in several universities in Germany, he chose the latter. When he returned to South Africa, his academic record assured him a position in Stellenbosch where he became a tenured professor of sociology in 1934.

Those were the years of the Great Depression, and Verwoerd started getting involved academically, and then more actively, with the "poor-whites" social problem, that is, the massive unemployment and poverty among unskilled whites, which affected essentially Afrikaners (i.e. Afrikaans-speaking descendants of the original Dutch settlers of the 17th century) as they had been largely economically ruined by the Boer Wars one generation earlier. Then (if not much earlier) that Dutch-born, polyglot academic identified himself fully with the Afrikaner population, culturally and politically, and with the growing notion of Afrikaner nationalism. That essentially saw the Afrikaners as being caught between economic, political and cultural domination by the generally wealthier white population of British descent, and the competition for low-skilled jobs by the increasing migration of black natives (i.e. Xhosas, Zulus, etc.) from their rural areas into urban centres. Starting from his work as an academic, Verwoerd gradually shifted his focus to politics, until he was offered the position of editor-in-chief of a new Afrikaans newspaper based in Johannesburg, Die Transvaler, sponsored by the National Party (NP) as part of their efforts to increase their political presence in the Transvaal province against the ruling United Party of Prime Minister Barry Hertzog. With no previous experience in journalism, Verwoerd resigned his prestigious, tenured position as a Stellenbosch professor to move to Johannesburg and start a new career as newspaper editor in 1937. His editorial policy was to promote relentlessly the ideas, at that time, of Afrikaner nationalism: that South Africa had to cease being an independent British Dominion (like Canada, Australia, etc) and become a republic that would prioritise the interests of the Afrikaner population. His writings included frequent complaints against what he saw as the excessive domination of the South African economy, not only by English-speakers, but also by Jews, and he opposed the decision of then Prime Minister Jan Smuts to join the Allies in WWII. Nevertheless, Verwoerd always said that he was more anti-British Empire than pro-Nazi Germany. During that time, he was also relatively unconcerned with issues relating to native black South Africans.

The above already makes a few things clear about Verwoerd. First, his background, as a highly-educated, foreign-born, urbane academic who spoke several languages and had studied abroad and achieved an enviable position at Stellenbosch, was not one to obviously make him a fierce Afrikaner nationalist. That his beliefs were deep and sincere is obvious, I suggest, by the fact that he resigned his tenured professorship to become the editor of a new newspaper that might well fail (his father told him he was nuts in doing that). That points to a man not only with a need for some sense of mission that overrules personal comfort and career security, but even more so to a man with a deep need for, and identification with, a sense of collective identity. That already points to Beta as Verwoerd's likely quadra.

Under Verwoerd, Die Transvaler was successful, and the period of WWII and its immediate aftermath saw a rapidly increasing migration, due to economic factors, of the native black population from their original rural areas into the larger urban centres, such as Johannesburg, and the mining areas. That migration quickly changed the previously mostly white cities, with most of the new inhabitants living in informal housing. As in colonial Africa generally, that kind of uncontrolled migration of the local native black population into cities was not really allowed under the segregationist laws, but the Smuts government lacked the will, or the inclination, to do much about it, considering that migration inevitable. The NP used that issue to mobilise their campaign and so in the (mostly whites-only) elections of 1948 it narrowly defeated Smuts' United Party, forming the new government. The NP would remain in power uninterrupted until 1994. The new prime minister, D.F. Malan, Verwoerd's political patron who had brought him to Die Transvaler, now brought Verwoerd into his cabinet, having him appointed as a Senator and as Minister of Native Affairs.

The Malan government introduced its policy of apartheid, an Afrikaans word meaning "separateness". Until then, South Africa had more or less typical colonial segregationist laws (not unlike the "Jim Crow" laws in the US), but those were sort of ad hoc and as mentioned, were starting to crumble in the Smuts government. Malan's government ruthlessly reinforced the existing segregationist laws and introduced new ones, but again sort of ad hoc, without much of a consistent ideology or system except that of promoting the basskap (supremacy) over the black natives, and of the Afrikaners over English-speakers. Malan was also less concerned than Verwoerd about the issue of making South Africa a republic, which he feared would unnecessarily alienate part of his electorate.

As Minister of Native Affairs, Verwoerd remained as determined a republican as before, but that was not his immediate concern in his new position. He devoted his energies to arriving at what he saw as a consistent system and ideology of apartheid, starting from what was to remain his basic premise: the interests of the Afrikaner nation came before anything else. His conclusion went as follows: the only logical way to forever prevent native black South Africans from eventually overwhelming the white, and specifically the Afrikaner, population politically was to forever deny them any possibility for a legal basis for political rights (which a small minority of them did possess, in the Cape Province) and of legal residence in the "white" regions. That necessarily meant denying them any legal claim for citizenship in South Africa, and the most consistent way of arguing that was to state that they were actually citizens of other countries. That led Verwoerd to devise a policy of converting the historical areas inhabited by the different native nations - Xhosas, Zulus, Sothos, etc. - first into "autonomous", "self-governing" "homelands" that would eventually become independent states (not unlike Lesotho and Swaziland are today). When that happened - so went his argument - white South Africans would likewise be foreigners in those new states and full political, economic and physical separation would follow. Any integration of the black population outside those "states" was to be stopped and reversed.

Verwoerd spent his ten years as Minister of Native Affairs developing, promoting and getting political support for his scheme, which is often described as "grand apartheid" to differentiate it from "petty apartheid", that is, the daily "Jim Crow" kind of segregation and discrimination. Verwoerd's ultimate goal was total racial separation, that is, eventually all of the black population would reside in those future homelands or states. As however by this time only some ~40% lived in those areas, and economic factors, such as the increasing industrialisation of the country, were rapidly decreasing that percentage, Verwoerd devised incentives to encourage, or force if necessary, industries to move to areas bordering those "homelands", so that the migration would be diminished and eventually reversed. He predicted confidently - on which basis is not known - that the migration would revert, from the cities to the homelands, in 1978. That kind of confident vision of the future, of a political goal, within the context of what he saw as a consistent set of policies, confirms the Beta values of T and L.

Verwoerd's development of this, what he saw as an internally consistent system, allowed him to defend it tirelessly in lengthy, repetitive speeches where he always came back to the basic argument that that was the only way to go and that there was no alternative if the Afrikaner nation was to survive. The two prime ministers he worked for - Malan and later Hans Strijdom - were not so concerned with internally consistent policies, Strijdom saying bluntly that he was only interested in basskap and not in economic development of homelands. But after Strijdom's death from cancer in 1958, Hendrik Verwoerd was elected the new leader of the NP and therefore the new Prime Minister of South Africa.

As prime minister, Verwoerd could now devote his energies to his decades-long goal: he held a referendum on the status of South Africa, with a small majority of the (white) electorate choosing the option of South Africa ceasing to be a Dominion, with the Queen as nominal head of state, and becoming the Republic of South Africa. Having achieved this, Verwoerd made conciliatory gestures towards the not-so-happy English-speaking population: they had ceased to be his main "adversary", he was now much more concerned with the political issue of the black population and the development of his grand apartheid homelands scheme. His concept of the black population as being theoretically "foreign guest workers" led to the introduction of personal passes that had to be carried by them at all times. This led to political protests, including the Sharpeville Massacre of 1960, where 69 people were shot by the police. Some black political activists like Nelson Mandela - who in the Smuts years had sensed that things would gradually get better - lost all hope and went underground, eventually being arrested or fleeing into exile. South Africa's economy boomed during the Verwoerd years, making him politically supreme and neutralising all opposition, until he was stabbed to death by a deranged messenger during a session in Parliament in 1966 (even though the obvious assumption would be that his murder was political, no one has ever questioned that the man was insane; he died in prison in 1999 when Thabo Mbeki was president).

Looking closely at Verwoerd as a person: by all accounts, he was an autocratic boss who took all major decisions himself, whether as newspaper editor, minister, or prime minister - members of his staff at Die Transvaler said that he ran the paper as a "benevolent despotism". That was made more palatable by him working very long hours himself. As was already made clear, he felt the need to be completely consistent in his arguments and policies so that he could tirelessly defend them. That need for complete consistency made him sometimes look absurd: as a republican, he decided in 1947 that his newspaper would give no coverage at all to King George VI's (EII) visit. That led to the ridiculous situation where the paper would report traffic jams caused by the royal visit but not their cause. This points to a huge focus on L as well as F, and weak E (as he did not realise this would make him look silly even among his own staff). Generally, Verwoerd's approach of having a very basic set of political beliefs and then ruthlessly using force to defend them to what he saw as their logical conclusion already points to a Beta with L and F as ego functions, that is LSI or SLE.

As a politician, Verwoerd could never really display a common touch when talking to individuals (unlike his predecessors Malan and Strijdom, who were more conventional politicians), always seeming like an aloof, intellectually arrogant university professor who gave long speeches based on the assumption that he was right and everyone else was wrong. At best, he could make a somewhat benign "grandfatherly" impression as in this video and show patient politeness when listening to complaints - except when the person was an open political adversary, such as Helen Suzman, the only MP fully opposed to apartheid, whom he would treat with contempt. This points again to weak E.

Verwoerd understood that the implementation of his grand apartheid policies implied the economic development of the homelands, even if by force. He was however not that concerned with, or was even dismissive of, the overall costs and effects on the economy of South Africa as a whole, remarking that even if that made the country poorer, that was a price they had to pay. The mining magnate Harry Oppenheimer observed, "when you have a man prepared to slow down his nation's welfare on account of political theories, then you are dealing with an impractical fanatic". Verwoerd's response would be that his way was the only way. This points to awareness of P but one that is overruled by L.

Finally, as a minor personal detail: although not obviously fitting the overall picture of Verwoerd as a ruthlessly ideological politician and former tenured professor of sociology, his favourite hobbies were carpentry and similar manual work, having designed and partly built himself his holiday home, which shows that S was what he liked to focus on when relaxing.

A Beta whose main focus is L with an obviously strong focus on F, who intentionally ignores P and who has low focus on E (especially for a politician); also a man with a very rigid, yet certain, one-track vision of the future of his country and of his personal mission, pointing to valued but not very strong T.  L1, F2, P7, T6 , E5 and S8 all fit Hendrik Verwoerd perfectly, pointing to LSI as his Socionics type.

To learn more about LSI, click here.

If you are confused by our use of Socionics shorthand, click here.

Sources:  Besides a general knowledge of South African history, the source was Henry Kenney's biography, Verwoerd: Architect of Apartheid 

Monday, 19 June 2017

Alfred the Great (LII): Personality Type Analysis

Alfred the Great was the 27th King of Wessex from 871 to 899, the very first English monarch to have ever been given the epithet "the Great" and most well-known for commanding the successful defense of Wessex during Viking conquest, which eventually lead him to become the dominant monarch of England towards the end of his life. The history of his life and reign as monarch of Wessex is explained in detail through the written accounts of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, historical documentation of what his reign was like, those who personally knew him and the biography The Life of King Alfred, written by the Welsh monk Asser.

The details of his early childhood are elaborated on in Anglo-Saxon Chronicle, in which young Alfred (suspected to be around age four) travelled with his family to Rome in 853, to be made "consul" by Pope Leo IV. This was early preparation for his eventual succession as King of Wessex, though the possibility of Alfred becoming the next in line was slim. This was because he had three elder brothers (from eldest to youngest); Æthelbald, Æthelberht and Æthelred, who had greater chances of future coronation as monarch of Wessex. (The first brother, Æthelstan died in 852, shortly after fending off a Viking fleet in Kent and had very little impact on the life of Alfred as a child.) After spending time in Rome for a few years, Alfred's father Æthelwulf visited Carolingian King Charles the Bald in 856 and married his fourteen year-old daughter Judith to signify the diplomatic alliance between the two kingdoms. Æthelbald heard of this news, enraged at now having an underage stepmother and casting aside his own mother, a kindhearted, devoutly religious woman who cared about the education of her children. In reaction to this, Æthelbald led a revolt in an attempt to depose his father of the throne on his return to Wessex. In the instance of civil war breaking out, Æthelwulf negotiated with Æthelbald to let him rule western province of his kingdom and for himself to rule over the eastern province.

After Æthelwulf's death in 858, Æthelbald's reign from 858 to 860 was relatively short and seen by Asser as unstable and lawless (Though further details of his reign is limited). Next in line was Æthelberht, his reign from 860 to 865 was internally peaceful and harmonious, though he died shortly before the invasion of the Great Heathen Army in 865. The reign of Æthelred was the most war intensive out of the three elder brothers, with some successful military victories early on. However, after the Saxon defeat of the Battle of Merton, Æthelred died a month after and left Alfred to deal with a kingdom on the verge of collapse, all on his own. 

During all of this political unrest, Alfred was known by his mother Osburh, to be fascinated with reading, poetry and education at a very young age. To encourage her son's interest in education, she offered a challenge to her four children that the first person to memorize a book of Saxon poems would be the new owner of that book. Even just recently learning how to read at age twelve (which was the result of the lack of tutors and scholars in the West Saxon Kingdom), Alfred had surpassed his brothers in intellectual strength by memorizing the entire book, thus winning the book of Saxon poems. Since then, Alfred was known to carry around books with him wherever he went and frequently sought quiet refuge to read alone. This specifically is from Asser's account, "[...] he collected in a single book, as I have seen for myself; amid all the affairs of the present life he took it around with him everywhere for the sake of prayer, and was inseparable from it".

Notably, in contrast to his brother Æthelred who based his military organization purely off of tactics and strong defense, Alfred naively came to the conclusion that peace could be negotiated between the new leader of the Danes, Guthrum. After exchanging oaths and swearing loyalty to a "holy" ring (thought to be associated with Thor), the Danes immediately broke their promise and decided to kill the hostages they captured anyway. By taking advantage of his weakness in F, the Danes thought that they had gotten a step ahead of the Saxons, though unknowingly to the Danes, Alfred had already blockaded their ships in Devon ahead of time in the case if they didn't keep their word. His preference of long-term military strategy over tactics served him well in the Battle of Edington and in his plan to storm the Dane's stronghold in Chippenham by cutting off their food supply and starving them until surrender. Guthrum and his men had no other choice but to come to a complete surrender, and instead of killing the men or arresting them for their actions, Alfred came to the conclusion that they should be converted to Christianity through baptism at his court (even accepting Guthrum as his adoptive son). With what has been written above, provides the most evidence for a type with F4 and strong T.

After the war, Alfred became a respected military strategist, though his innate talents were in law-making and governance. He was a wise administrator who proceeded carefully in diplomatic matters, reorganizing his finances and politely distanced himself from his thanes (nobles). Once he realized the current state of corruption in the state's legal system, he scrutinized the administration of justice and ensured to protect of the weak from oppression by ignorant or corrupt judges. In this way, Alfred decided it would be best to administer an important code of laws, after studying the principles of law-giving in the Book of Exodus, again with special attention to the protection of the poor. While avoiding unnecessary changes in custom, he limited the practice of the blood feud and imposed heavy penalties for the breach of an oath or pledge. His own attitudes are reflective of weak R3, his own efforts to distance himself from the members of his court could have been seen as impersonal and standoffish by some (though he did send frequent embassies to Rome conveying the translated alms to the Pope). He would much rather see them more as "co-workers" since he believed that unnecessarily making friends and enemies would make more unjust activities like bribes to be more accepted.

Alfred attitude toward learning is quite evident, due to his belief that the Viking raids were a divine punishment for the people's sins and he attributed these to a lack of education in general. He argued that through learning, men could acquire wisdom and live in accordance with God's will. In 878 CE, he invited scholars from across the European continent to his court, taught himself Latin and began to translate Latin books into English in 887. Baffled by how indolent and ignorant the common man was in comparison to these scholars, he directed that all young men must learn to read English. By his own translations, he released to the public English versions of books that were necessary people to know; The Ecclesiastical History of the English People and the Seven Books of Histories Against the Pagans. Alfred's translation of the Pastoral Care of St. Gregory I, the great 6th-century pope, provided a manual for priests in the instruction of their flocks, and a translation by Bishop Werferth of Gregory's Dialogues supplied edifying reading on holy men. To summarize, Asser's notes on Alfred characterize him as a scholarly man who had an unwavering interest in L pursuits, his own confidence and talents in these subjects indicating strong and valued L1.

Alfred's religious beliefs were inspired by the philosopher St. Augustine of Hippo, to which he credited him by adding very broad material that addressed problems concerning faith, reason and the nature of eternal life. His translations were from a wide variety of sources, one of which was Boethius' Consolation of Philosophy. Some of these psalms may have their origins in the intellectual interests awakened by the revival of learning under him. His reign also saw activity in reconstructed temples as centers of education, art, and foreign craftsmen were attracted to his court. The eclectic amount of interests and search for new ideas to accommodate both his religious and philosophical beliefs suggest Alfred had I2, or at the very least, a type with strong I.

More to the point, Alfred is a scholar by inclination, who became a war leader not because of glory, wealth or fame, it merely was because he had to. Though it is interesting that with such a beloved king, E is almost non-existent with Alfred. As stated before, he was a man who was beloved by his family and locals in Wessex, Alfred himself did not turn a blind eye to this popularity, though he felt this was only because the Anglo-Saxons only recognized him as king and not as a person. What's even more revealing is Alfred's emotional attitudes written in one of Alfred's last works, "Blooms" or Anthology. The first half is based mainly on the Soliloquies of St Augustine of Hippo, the remainder is drawn from various sources, and contains much of what is Alfred's passions are. The last words are quoted, "Therefore he seems to me a very foolish man, and truly wretched, who will not increase his understanding while he is in the world, and ever wish and long to reach that endless life where all shall be made clear."  In general, a solitary and solemn man who avoided E matters, preferring to address the matters through writing because dealing with these problems socially brought him great discomfort, still fitting E5 nonetheless.

Concluding this analysis, there is a small anecdote that would be essential in putting together a clearer image of what Alfred type is. It's interesting that a scholarly man like Alfred, whose natural inclination to studying might've suggested that he had a sedentary lifestyle, but this was quite the opposite. Alfred was an avid huntsman who was often quite physically active, yet he saw his ability in hunting as more of a hobby than a more competitive activity. With this interest in a sport only for being physically active and healthy, would make S6 more likely for Alfred.

I would say that all of the evidence all points to LII Alpha values with visible L1, I2, R3, F4, E5, S6 and T8.

To learn more about LII click here

If you are confused by our use of Socionics shorthand, click here

Saturday, 17 June 2017

Pedro II (EII): Personality Type Analysis

Emperor Pedro II of Brazil, also called Dom Pedro II the "Magnanimous", was the second and last monarch of the Empire of Brazil, from his father’s abdication in 1831 to his deposition in a military coup in 1889.

He was born in Rio in 1825, the son of Emperor Pedro I (SEE) and Leopoldina of Austria. He was five years old when his father abdicated the Brazilian throne and returned to Portugal. Raised by tutors, he was a serious, studious and shy boy, very different from his impulsive, physically hyperactive father. As per the constitution, regents were elected by Parliament to rule while Pedro was a minor. However, it soon became clear that without the personal authority that Pedro I had wielded, Brazil’s internal tensions and rivalries re-emerged in the form of a series of regional rebellions, some with secessionist goals. So after 9 years of near-anarchy under the Regency, the consensus in Parliament was that their best chance of avoiding further chaos was to end the Regency and enhance the central government’s authority with a ruling emperor. Therefore he was declared of age by Parliament in 1840 (not fully legally) at 14, and political stability did start to increase.

The constitution, reflecting Pedro I’s personality, assumed that the monarch would act as chief executive himself, as also the regents had done. That was initially the case with the young Pedro II, with him relying politically and emotionally upon an often self-serving inner circle of palace hangers-on and select politicians, the so-called “Courtier Faction”. Gradually, as he reached his 20s and gained more self-confidence, he dismissed or reduced the influence of that inner circle, by 'kicking them upstairs' or simply by ceasing to listen to their political advice while maintaining friendly personal relations. In 1847, with his agreement, the government’s structure was changed in a way suited to the times and to Pedro II’s personal inclinations, with the creation of the office of prime minister. Pedro II retained the considerable powers of calling new parliamentary elections and appointing the prime minister. At this time, the young monarch was described as someone who “was never rude and never lost his temper. He was exceptionally discreet in words and cautious in action”; “the shy and suspicious youth became a man who could be sophisticated and charming in social situations”. Those traits would generally remain constant throughout his life. Even taking into account his political and constitutional position, the above already points to someone not obviously focused on F, who prefers to tone down confrontations for the sake of smooth interactions.

In the exercise of his role as monarch, Pedro mostly focused on keeping the system working smoothly. As in similar parliamentary systems, he appointed as prime ministers leading politicians of the majority party in Parliament and then let the cabinets get on with governing. However, unlike more established parliamentary monarchies, he had more of a personal choice as to who exactly would be appointed. Also, since it was widely acknowledged that the party in power would cheat in elections to some extent (by ballot-stuffing etc.), sometimes Pedro used his personal influence to encourage the rotation in government of the two main parties (Conservative and Liberal, as in Britain), so preventing either one from becoming too powerful. Still, the policies during his reign were mostly those of the prime minister and the cabinet rather than Pedro’s own. This is illustrated precisely by two occasions when he clashed with his cabinet and had to threaten to abdicate to get his way: in 1850, in order to force the government to support a law that would finally enforce the ban on slave trade (in theory already banned in 1831); and in 1865, in the context of the Paraguayan War, when the government and Parliament would not grant him permission to travel to the front himself, as the nominal commander-in-chief. Those episodes are useful because they illustrate not only the limitations of Pedro II's political role in government, but also his unwillingness to clash with the political establishment except in matters about which he felt particularly strongly. Apart from such episodes, his other visible influence in government was that of essentially vetoing the appointment as minister of men whose personal integrity was in any way questionable, a matter in which the party politicians got used to and did not try to overrule. Overall Pedro's approach to his duties seemed to be keeping things running smoothly, guaranteeing the rotation of power between the two main parties, keeping an eye on the personal character of ministers, and mostly not interfering in the policies themselves. This points to R and P rather than L and E as quadra values.

Besides fulfilling his duties as monarch, Pedro spent his time essentially in intellectual pursuits. Those included a general interest in all sciences - he was an amateur astronomer, for instance - and in languages in particular, having become fluent (or at least functional) in the main international languages of the time: French, English, German, Spanish, and Italian, as well as in Guarany (spoken in Paraguay), classical Latin and Greek, and studied even Hebrew and Sanskrit. During his reign he refused to accept increases in the allowance allocated him, and he spent large sums granting student scholarships. That meant he lived in a (relatively) modest style, and he only adopted the 'pomp and circumstance' of his role when formally opening Parliament. In his private letters he even said that he disliked that part of his job, and that in his opinion the noblest profession was that of teacher, since they developed young minds. Again this shows a total disregard for the elements of power and status projection, i.e. E and F, and his interest in a variety of subjects and in developing minds suggest I as a valued function. All of the above already points to Delta as Pedro's quadra.

As soon as his eldest daughter Isabel was of age and could legally act as regent in Pedro's absence, he started a series of travels abroad, in the 1870s and 1880s, mostly through Europe but also to the Middle East and the US. In such trips he did not quite travel in cognito but on a modest budget, with a minimal retinue, and staying in small hotels. In one revealing episode, during his first visit to Paris, he wrote to Victor Hugo asking him to come see him in his hotel. Hugo, annoyed at being often seen as a 'tourist attraction' by important foreigners, curtly wrote back to say that he never left home to visit anyone. To Hugo's surprise, a few days later Pedro II knocked on his door, on his own, asking to see him. As per Hugo's own account, the Emperor was a polite, even shy man.

In 1876 he became the first foreign head of state to visit the United States, and together with President Ulysses S. Grant (SLI) he opened the Centennial Exposition in Philadelphia. There, he played a significant role by being fascinated by, and calling attention to, Alexander Graham Bell's invention - the telephone - which had already been overlooked by the exposition's judges. In 1930, AT&T recreated the event in a short film. It is significant that this is pretty much the only event of historical relevance in Pedro's foreign trips, and that it was a P and I event. Otherwise, Pedro's trips consisted of him visiting places, and meeting people, that he found interesting, and although not hiding, he certainly downplayed his role as a monarch and sitting head of state, preferring to spend time at the many literary and scientific associations he became a member of, particularly in France. Again, that points to I.

The prestige and power of the monarchy in Brazil was in obvious decline in the 1880s, for several reasons. The new generation of politicians and military officers had no personal recollection of the near-anarchy of the 1830s; the Paraguayan War of 1865-70 had vastly increased the army's sense of self-importance and corporate identity and grievance; the Princess Imperial, Isabel, and her French husband, the Comte d'Eu, were personally unpopular and few believed that she would succeed her father upon his death. An European-style monarchy in the Americas was starting to look increasingly anachronistic. Finally, the agrarian oligarchy ceased to support the monarchy due to its decades-long support for the gradual abolition of slavery, which was completed in 1888. By then Pedro II himself was a prematurely aged 63-year old, suffering from diabetes and mercilessly mocked in newspaper cartoons as falling asleep in official events. From his writings, the Emperor seemed aware that the monarchy would not survive him but he lacked the will, or the inclination, to do something about it (or even the knowledge of what he could do). So in November 1889, a minor military revolt in Rio which at first only intended to demand the replacement of the prime minister quickly escalated into a movement aiming at abolishing the monarchy itself. Rather than attempt any kind of resistance, Pedro II returned by train to Rio from his mountain summer residence, and was ordered by the new military provisional government to leave the country with his family by ship the next night. Too proud to accept the provisional government's offer of a large sum of money, Pedro spent the next two years in Paris, doing pretty much the same he did during his previous visits there, that is, at scientific and academic events, financially supported by wealthy friends and European relatives, until his death from pneumonia in 1891.

The overall picture we have of Pedro II is of a man who, despite his hereditary position, was seen by all who met him as modest and even shy; who obviously disliked the trappings of power and status of his position and who was apparently completely oblivious to, or uninterested in, threats to his personal political position, pointing to such weak and devalued F as to point to F4. Also a man obviously able to project personal charm in close encounters and to defuse conflicts (his only active role at the front of the Paraguayan War was precisely to calmly mediate a conflict of egos among the leaders of the three allied nations) and to manage personal relationships with politicians without seemingly any personally disliking him, which points to strong R as well as some awareness of E at personal level. His interest in a wide variety of subjects and languages, as well as his fascination with science and technology, suggest strong I and valued P but with I stronger - his P seemed more manifest in his attraction to knowledgeable people, pointing to P5.  R1, I2, F4, P5 and E7 all fit well what is known of Pedro II, making EII his likely type.

To learn more about EII, click here.

If you are confused by our use of Socionics shorthand, click here.

Sources: besides the video linked above, the Wikipedia entries on Pedro II are long and high-quality, sufficing for a good idea of his type.