Talk:Legitimacy of Queen Victoria

Problems

Just saw this page... I have a few concerns that I will take care of at some point but I thought I'd give a heads up first.

First one is it seems like the entire Jack the Ripper section is basically a fork file of the Jack the Ripper royal conspiracy theories article. I can't see duplicating discussion of the same information in such depth in two different places, especially as the information doesn't seem to match. It seems to me that the section here should be brought down to a summary and with a link to the appropriate section on the other article.

Also, as a general rule, "urban myths" is not an accurate term. They are urban legends. Myths, when used in a folkloric sense (as the term "urban legends" is intended to, means supernatural tales of gods and creation and so forth, which is lacking in this article. The name should be fixed to read legends, with all references in it being changed to either legend or a more accurate word (rumour, tale, whatever).

Also, Jack the Ripper should not be italicized, not sure where the idea to do otherwise came from. There are other words that also seem to be italicized for no apparent reason.

Also... there are a number of claims in the section that are not sourced and appear to be inaccurate:

• "elegantly attired gentleman, completely out of place in the East End of London, was seen chatting to a prostitute on the night of two of the most notorious murders, those of Elizabeth Stride and Catherine Eddowes,"

What elegantly attired gentleman? Are you thinking of George Hutnchinson's witness testimony? If so that was another night completely, more than a month later.

• "Nor did he have the medical skills evidenced in the work of Jack the Ripper."

Sorry, but whether medical skills were actually evidenced in the murders is a matter of much debate, with many sources, then and now, claiming exactly the opposite.

• "by the supposed royal psychopathic killer?"

Psychopathic has a precise meaning. We don't know that the killer was psychopathic. In fact, if the story about the Prince were true (as that's the context we are discussing it in), psychopath would be an inaccurate term.

• "Alice Margaret's father, who was not named on the birth certificate, was later revealed by her in adulthood to have been her own grandfather, so the silence on her parentage was due to a desire on behalf of her family to conceal incest rather than because the Duke of Clarence was her father. "

Uhhhh... no, the incest part was never proven. In fact, as far as I know, the only person who claimed this was a fiction author trying to tell a more interesting story (see From Hell). That's quite a claim. If you have a reputable non-fiction book that makes that claim we should source it, but I really think that's got to go.

• "Jullien did make clear that had been widespread during the lifetime of King Edward VII. "

"did make clear" presumes that it is true. This is currently a claim with no known supporting evidence.

• "The claims that Alice Margaret Crook was the daughter of the Duke of Clarence, and that her mother Anne Crook, was his secret wife, is sometimes thought to owe its origins to a rumour possibly put around by her family at the time that the father of her illegitimate child was a royal personage, so distracting local community attention from the more sordid truth; the existence of an incestuous relationship between Anne Crook and her father and the fact that it, and not some mysterious 'must be kept secret' marriage, led to the birth of Alice Margaret."

As above, who thought this? What? And, heck, as long as you are bringing up the story about Crook supposedly being Catholic and a threat to the throne, you ought to mention that records show she was actually Church of England and not Catholic at all.

Now, I can obviously go in and fix a lot of this myself, and some other things that I didn't mention, but considering the name of the article is wrong and there's a question about where all this Ripper info should be located, I thouht I'd post before jumping in to make changes. I also think that this whole article may be better split off into separate articles discussing each major legend/rumour (not myth) instead of trying to cram them all into one. DreamGuy 01:02, August 8, 2005 (UTC)

Since nobody has responded in a timely manner I have fixed the errors as best I could on a once through. DreamGuy 13:45, August 21, 2005 (UTC)

merge

Is there still a merge question here? It seems that the article are sufficiently different to removed the merge tag? Kerowyn 09:30, 30 January 2006 (UTC)

The merge tag is regularly removed for that reason. Unfortunately the merge tag is DreamGuy's "pet" and whenever it is removed he goes ballistic, accuses users of censorship, and reinserts it with a stream of abuse. If anyone else sees that damn tag in again, please remove it. DreamGuy has had his game-playing for long enough. FearÉIREANN\^{(caint) 18:19, 5 July 2006 (UTC)}

Albert, the Prince Consort, was illegitimate

According to this page his parents divorced because of his mother's adultery, but according to the articles on his mom and dad it was his father who was cheating. Does anyone know which is true? Tocharianne 03:26, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

The allegation that Albert was illegitimate, is by necessity based on an allegation that his mother was unfaithful. That however is urban legend, rumour, as indicated by the article. I have not seen any convincing citations that she actually had extramarital relations before her divorce. In most places, the reason of divorce is said to been Ernest's continuous cheatings and the consequent incompatibility (whatever were its symptoms). Maed 12:13, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I should have phrased that better. Regardless of any rumors about his mother, it is a fact that his parents were divorced. The article currently states as a fact that the divorce was because of his mother, but the rumor is that the man she was cheating with was a Jewish manservant. It currently isn't written to imply that part of the rumor was the claim that the divorce was because of his mother's adultery. (Confused yet?)

Ultimately I guess my question is "What exactly was the rumor?"

1. Was it: Albert's mother had an affair with a manservant at the time of Albert's conception.
2. Or was it: Albert's parents divorced because of his mother's infidelity.
3. Or was it both?

If only the 1st point is the rumor the section needs to be rewritten to make that clear. (Note also that the article on Albert himself also claims that divorce was because of his mother's adultery--I'm going to change that there.) Tocharianne 14:34, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Anti-Irish?

What evidence is there that anti-Irish sentiment existed amongst the European aristocracy? Amongst the British aristocracy, certainly yes but exiled Irish chiefs were well established in Catholic continental nations such as France, Spain, Italy, Austria and Portugal. Descendents of the Irish served as Prime Ministers of Spain and Austria and a President of France. They were well-established and respected in European armies.

More recent myths

How about we add the ridiculous legends of Prince Harry's supposed paternity and al Fayed's (and similar) conspiracy theories regarding the death of Diana? DBD 17:07, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

Death of Diana, Princess of Wales conspiracy theories has its own article, there's no need to repeat information here. However, a link would be appropriate. I've no opinion regarding Harry. DrKay (talk) 17:13, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

To say nothing of them all being part of The Lizard Conspiracy. David Icke says so, ergo it must be true... Mr Larrington (talk) 14:33, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Bias

So, seems to me this article is written in a way that somewhat suggests bias against the allegations. Now I do not have terribly strong feelings one way or the other on the subject, but it seems well within the realm of possibility, people do indeed have affairs, they do not admit them and they are not known of. Math is that that is more likely than a mutation that causes hemophilia to suddenly develop late in life, so presenting it as being less likely than the mutation is clear bias, more so when there had been accusations of infidelity. The chances of the mutation are pretty remote, and that is not really mentioned. The sources used to suggest that hemophiliacs had a low average life span are not terribly relevant on two grounds. One, they merely state that the average life span was 11 years of age before the 1960s, nothing at all to do with the Victorian age or with the aristocracy or Queen Victoria her self. Using that as a source to support this article borders on being original research itself as I cannot see a source making that argument on behalf of proving legitimacy, but rather some Wikipedian's use the source to make their own argument to prove legitimacy. The general average life span was only 35, and yet clearly a lot of people survived past 35, including most of the people in this article (Charlotte and some of William IV's children bring the average closer). Very clearly, hemophiliacs did in fact survive, most modern living hemophiliacs are the descendent of hemophiliacs from the Victorian age, that is how genetic diseases work. 216.154.62.174 (talk) 20:22, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

There are four sources in the article that link Victoria with low life expectancy for hemophiliacs and therefore low likelihood of her inheriting the disease from an affected father (Packard, McKusick, Jones and Ruston). DrKay (talk) 21:10, 15 March 2019 (UTC)

- - -

The agree with the concern on bias and believe the article presently fails to offer all pertinent facts in an objective manner. Consider how the article only references John Conroy as a potential illegitmate father. A genuine analysis would include consideration of alternative fathers. Additionally, the genetics discussion is far too limited given the additional research now available and there is no discussion of physical attributes. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.231.161.75 (talk) 14:26, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

What other candidates are there? What is the additional research? DrKay (talk) 16:38, 22 March 2019 (UTC)

Genetics section

This reads like a synthesis tending toward an original conclusion. The reference linked for the proposition that "life expectancy was 11 years or younger" is for severe hemophilia A; the disease in question is hemophilia B of any severity. (The reference from the same source referring to hemophilia B suggests—if I understand the factor IX statistics correctly—that 50% of hemophilia B is severe. Even if the 11 year figure is nevertheless accurate for all types of hemophilia, it does not exclude or significantly cast doubt upon the possibility that a sufferer of mild hemophilia B could live to reproductive age in the 1800s.) We seem to also need a citation for the proposition that Conroy "was healthy". What shall we do about this? TheFeds 18:31, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

The citation https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK1495/ says "Prior to the availability of such treatment, the median life expectancy for individuals with severe hemophilia B was 11 years (the current life expectancy for affected individuals in several developing countries)."

Te claim that Conroy was healthy is cited to Packard's Victoria's Daughters. What does Packard actually say? DrKay (talk) 19:33, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

First regarding Conroy and hemophilia, both are discussed by Packard (see Google Books). However, they are not discussed together (at pp. 43–44 as cited, or elsewhere). Conroy's health is not mentioned. (Incidentally, I don't think it should be assumed that the claim should even be attributed to Packard; it's in a preceding sentence about a different topic, and that makes it at least ambiguously cited.)

Packard seems open to the possibility of other parentage:

The likeliest source of Queen Victoria's hemophiliac gene would be her father. But not necessarily her legal and presumed father, the duke of Kent. The inference that can of course be drawn is that she is possibly not descended paternally from the royal family [...], but rather only maternally from that of the tiny and inconsequential duchy of Coburg. [...] [Leopold of Cobourg's] family's blood strain might, ironically, be the only royal blood strain from which Queen Victoria's children are descended.

— Victoria's Daughters pp. 43–44

Secondly regarding the NIH information, that is indeed a better source, and specific to hemophilia B. I believe the issue still remains that "Individuals with mild hemophilia B are often not diagnosed until later in life.", even though severe hemophilia B results in significantly shorter life expectancy. I don't believe we currently have sufficient evidence to deem Conroy not afflicted by mild hemophilia B (and thus reach the conclusion in the article text). It would be better if we had a source that analyzed the situation directly. TheFeds 21:32, 14 April 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps we should redirect this article to John Conroy#Rumour that Conroy was Queen Victoria's father. DrKay (talk) 05:49, 15 April 2022 (UTC)