Queen Ranavalona I: the ‘Mad Queen’ History Got Wrong

This article contains affiliate links. We may earn a small commission at no extra cost to you if you book through them.

By Jordan Lamont · Last updated 7 October 2026

For a century, European writers gave Madagascar’s longest-reigning queen a single, lurid label: the “Mad Monarch,” a bloodthirsty tyrant who terrorised her people and hated foreigners. It made a great villain. It was also, modern historians argue, largely wrong — or at least only half the story. Ranavalona I is one of history’s most misjudged rulers, and the truth is more uncomfortable, and more interesting, than the caricature.

The queen who wasn’t supposed to rule

Ranavalona came to power in 1828 against the odds. When her husband, King Radama I, died without a direct heir, custom favoured his nephew — but army officers backed her claim, and she took the throne, reigning until her death in 1861. From the start she governed as a ruler determined to hold the line against a world that wanted to swallow her kingdom.

The case against her is real

It would be dishonest to soften the record. Ranavalona’s reign was genuinely harsh. She made the practice of Christianity by her subjects a capital offence in 1835 and persecuted converts; she relied on the dreaded tangena — a poison ordeal that killed a horrifying number of people, by some estimates thousands every year; and she extracted brutal forced labour (fanompoana) and waged costly wars. By several estimates the population of the kingdom fell sharply during her long reign. The suffering was real, and no reappraisal erases it.

Why historians now defend part of her story

And yet. Look at what she was doing, and when. Across the 19th century, Britain and France were carving up island after island, nation after nation. Ranavalona annulled a British treaty, expelled foreign influence, pursued self-reliance, and kept Madagascar independent for decades while her neighbours fell to empire. Since the 1970s, historians have recast her not as a madwoman but as an early nationalist — a ruler making calculated, if ruthless, choices to protect her country’s sovereignty from colonisation. The “madness” was, in part, a colonial story told about a leader who refused to submit.

A divided memory

Malagasy views of her remain complicated. Many, shaped by the Christian persecutions and the tangena, condemn her; others honour her as the queen who kept the island free. Most regard her as a genuinely formidable figure — strong, uncompromising, and impossible to reduce to a cartoon. She ruled from, and expanded, the great palace of Manjakamiadana, and was buried with 12,000 zebu sacrificed in her honour.

Why it matters today

Ranavalona I is a lesson in who gets to write history. The traveller who understands her sees the Rova, and Madagascar’s whole 19th century, with clearer eyes. Read the fuller account in our guide to Queen Ranavalona I, and set it in context with our Madagascar travel guide.

FAQ

Was Ranavalona I really “mad”?

Modern historians say no. The “Mad Monarch” label was a European caricature; she is now read as a shrewd nationalist defending Malagasy sovereignty — though her reign was genuinely brutal.

When did she reign?

From 1828 to 1861, after seizing power on the death of her husband Radama I with the army’s backing.

What was the tangena?

A trial by ordeal using poison from the tangena shrub; it killed a devastating number of people during her reign — a central charge against her.

Why is she controversial?

She expelled foreign influence and persecuted Christians harshly, and the population fell sharply under her — yet she kept Madagascar independent while Africa was being colonised.