Nietzsche and Ayn Rand had difficult personal lives too, one notes.
Carlyle's philosophical/sociological commentary is on occasion cited by neo-reactionary types, but I'm not convinced he would have been terribly fond of them. Carlyle did have antidemocratic sentiments, but so do a lot of people nowadays - witness the criticism of the Brexit vote, or even the possibility of the election of Trump. But it's not that he thought aristocrats or kings were necessarily better. Carlyle was a critic of both sides, and never really formulated an idea of how-the-world-should be. You see some of this in Emerson's Carlyle essay:
If a Tory takes heart at his hatred of stump-oratory and model republics, he replies, "Yes, the idea of a pig-headed soldier who will obey orders, and fire on his own father at the command of his officer, is a great comfort to the aristocratic mind." It is not so much that Carlyle cares for this or that dogma, as that he likes genuineness (the source of all strength) in his companions.
Carlyle was a great critic, a tearer-down of systems, and he had a lot of insightful criticisms about his society and the direction it was heading. He isn't always sympathetic(for example, his views on slavery were repugnant then and even moreso now), but he's usually interesting. I think, to the extent he's a reactionary, it's mostly a case of "there are some good things about the old days, and we're throwing them away in the blind pursuit of the new"-type, rather than "older is always better".
My point is more like, the misanthropic aspects of a figure show through in both their philosophy and their personal life. There's definitely other examples- look at Lovecraft. I just think it's an interesting pattern.