King Edward VII (1841-1910) and Queen Alexandra (1844-1925)

[CyrilVladisla]

Edward VII and Alexandra were even on a postcard!
http://www.pinterest.com/pin/394346511101870657

 

[Curryong]

They were probably on lots of postcards. Queen Alexandra in particular was much-loved by the British public from the start. I knew someone years ago who collected Royal memorabilia and she had a transfer print dish commemorating Edward and Alexandra's wedding in 1863.

 

[eya]

What a naughty girl! Former maid reveals how Camilla's great-granny Alice Keppel who famously seduced Edward VII also bedded men for money | Daily Mail Online

 

[Denville]

What a naughty girl! Former maid reveals how Camilla's great-granny Alice Keppel who famously seduced Edward VII also bedded men for money | Daily Mail Online

what baloney

 

[Iluvbertie]

What in the story is baloney?

Edward may have been Sonia's father. We don't know. He may not even have ever known.

Most of that story is well-known factual stuff although there are some exaggerations.

 

[Denville]

I think it is very unlikely that Alice's children were conceived by other lovers. She only had 2 as far a I know, and generally a woman waited till she had had a few children, and sons, before having affairs that might result in more children.

 

[Curryong]

I don't think it's all baloney. It was known that the Keppels were hard up, and when the King died Alice cried out "Oh, whatever shall I do!" I don't think that was entirely because she was going to miss Bertie, though she undoubtedly did. She probably received discreet little 'gifts' from kind friends for years, though exactly how this maid knew all about it is problematical. Gossip among the servants perhaps.

It was said that Jack, Winston Churchill's younger brother, was fathered by another man, though it's true that Lord Randolph had a nasty bout of syphilis that ultimately killed him, so maybe Lord R. looked the other way where Jenny was concerned. As Alice's husband George, may have done, though I do think he was probably Sonia's father. (It became known that Alice was mistress to the POW in 1898. Sonia was born in 1900.)

 

[Denville]

I don't think it's all baloney. It was known that the Keppels were hard up, and when the King died Alice cried out "Oh, whatever shall I do!" I don't think that was entirely because she was going to miss Bertie, though she undoubtedly did. She probably received discreet little 'gifts' from kind friends for years, though exactly how this maid knew all about it is problematical. Gossip among the servants perhaps.

It was said that Jack, Winston Churchill's younger brother, was fathered by another man, though it's true that Lord Randolph had a nasty bout of syphilis that ultimately killed him, so maybe Lord R. looked the other way where Jenny was concerned. As Alice's husband may have done, though I do think he was probably Sonia's father.

It was not uncommon for upper class ladies to use their sexual and social charms to help either themselves or their husbands. Yes I am sure Alice did receive gifts from male admirers and from the King and as she was his recognised mistress he problaby helped her out financially if needed. But she wasn't "having sex with other men for money". She might have gone to bed with some of them, or might not, just flirted or amused them with her company.
And servants' gossip?? I mean, how accurate is that likley to be?

Clemmie Churchil's friends told her she was very selfish in refusing to take a lover when she was a young woman, because if she took up with an influential man, it could help Winston in his political career..
As for Jenny Churchill, she had lovers certainly but IMO one can't say with any certainty who fathered her sons. Winston was certainly a Chrurchill and was born only 7 months after the wedding so he was either premature or was perhaps conceived before marriage (it did happen occasionally with upper class brides). There were rumours about her second son, and I suppose they might be true, but its far from certain.
She certainly would not produce a cuckoo in the nest with her first child, a second son maybe, esp as Randolph was only a second son and not likely to become Duke..

 

[Dee Anna]

what baloney

Why so?

There is no disagreement that they were lovers, so quite possible, if not actual.

So, logistics wise could it be possible? When did the affair start and when was Sonia born?

 

[Queen Claude]

I think it is very unlikely that Alice's children were conceived by other lovers. She only had 2 as far a I know, and generally a woman waited till she had had a few children, and sons, before having affairs that might result in more children.

As you stated "generally" a woman waited until she had children by her husband to have affairs, that does not mean that all women did. There was another incident involving Edward VII having an affair with a married woman and when she had a child who was ill, she admitted to having affairs with numerous other men including the then Prince of Wales.

 

[Denville]

As you stated "generally" a woman waited until she had children by her husband to have affairs, that does not mean that all women did.

Yes Harreit Mordaunt...she seems to have been a bit unstable. And Edward Denied having an affair with her..He had been indiscreet, and had flirted but problaby had not actually had an affair. She may have had other lovers, or she may have been just talking wildly. Alice Keppel seems to have been a sensible woman, and conventional, and I doubt if she would break the unwritten rules...

 

[Curryong]

You said though, Denville, that in general, women waited until a couple or more sons were born before they had affairs. Winston was the older of two sons; there were no other siblings before Jack. I'm not saying that another man fathered Winston, just his brother Jack.

Also Alice became the POW's acknowledged mistress in 1898. Sonia Keppel (Alice's second child) was born in 1900. I don't think Bertie was the father, but it's within the bounds of possibility.

And if Alice's male confidants/lovers were writing her discreet little cheques because George Keppel couldn't keep up the family's standard of living, then that is 'taking money from other men', however you slice it, IMO.

 

[Iluvbertie]

I think it is very unlikely that Alice's children were conceived by other lovers. She only had 2 as far a I know, and generally a woman waited till she had had a few children, and sons, before having affairs that might result in more children.

Lily Langtry didn't have her child with her husband. She too was a lover of Edward's but the child was possible Prince Louis of Battenburg's making her the half-aunt of Philip's. Lord Louis certainly believed she was his half-sister.

It isn't beyond the realms of possibility that Alice also didn't have her husband's child/ren.

The 'rules' were 'an heir and a spare'. Alice, like Lily before her, was having affairs before passing that rule. If the woman wasn't going to stick to the idea of producing the two sons before cheating then there is no reason to argue that her husband was the father of either of the children.

Why so?

There is no disagreement that they were lovers, so quite possible, if not actual.

So, logistics wise could it be possible? When did the affair start and when was Sonia born?

The affair started in 1898 or 1899 and Sonia was born in 1900 so definitely possible.

 

[Queen Claude]

Yes Harreit Mordaunt...she seems to have been a bit unstable. And Edward Denied having an affair with her..He had been indiscreet, and had flirted but problaby had not actually had an affair. She may have had other lovers, or she may have been just talking wildly. Alice Keppel seems to have been a sensible woman, and conventional, and I doubt if she would break the unwritten rules...

I have questions about the story, namely I want to know more about how and when the writer got the information since these events took place over 100 years ago. I don't automatically believe these stories but I am not going to stridently dismiss them based on generalizations either. Maybe Alice was a sensible woman because she needed money and knew that she had to be discreet in order to keep in good standing with the men she wanted to support her. Conventional? I think that is debatable. I don't think that all royal and aristocratic Edwardians were engaged in relationships outside their marriage as a matter of course, so I don't know if I would call her conventional.

P.S.
Perhaps this is apocryphal, but Alice supposedly said something along the lines of, her job as royal mistress was to curtsey first and then jump in bed.

 

[Iluvbertie]

From my reading of the story one of the Alice's staff gave some interviews in the early 80s which are the basis of this writer's story.

Of course the staffer was talking 70 years at least after the events and she was presumably a junior housemaid aged in her mid-late teens to early 20s when these events were allegedly happening and then recalling them 70+ years later. How reliable said maids stories are we don't know as we don't know whether she had anything other than memory on which to base her stories - e.g. did she have a diary or letters to her parents etc??

 

[Queen Camilla]

Alice Keppel was one of the nicest people. She was kind hearted and sweet.

Alice Keppel was not Edward's mistress. She was not the mistress of any man.

Alice Keppel would never have been allowed to step foot into Sandringham if she had been Edward's mistress or anyone's mistress.

It was Alexandra who invited Alice to Sandringham to celebrate Alexandra's birthday and everyone who is not out to trash Alice agrees that Alice Keppel would never been allow into Sandringham had she been Edward's mistress.
Edward would not have introduced his mistress to his family, much less invited her to the family home.
There are photographs of Alice at Sandringham with the BRF including Alexandra. One is from 1899, when Alice was pregnant with Sonia.

 

[Queen Camilla]

Someone hawking a book filled with lies. Maybe he should have done a bit of research to make his lies believable.

But some of the most revealing new evidence has come from interviews I conducted in the early Eighties, and am publishing for the first time, with a former housemaid, Agnes Cook.

She and her mother were servants at Mrs Keppel’s London house in Portman Square from the 1890s to the 1920s, and the detailed memories of this remarkable woman — who was in her late 80s when I interviewed her.

The Keppels did not live in Portman Square from 1890s to 1920.
Their first home is listed as 7 Haikin Street West. This was the home of Alice's mother.
In 1893 Alice's mother moved to 2 Wilton Terrace.
From 1890s to 1900 they lived at 2 Wilton Crescent.
From 1900 to 1910 they lives at Portman Square.
From 1910 to 1924 they lives at 16 Grosvenor Street.

The Keppels were not hard up.

Alice came from a wealthy family and yearly received money from a trust fund. They may not have been rich but that is reflected in their housing.
Her yearly income from the trust fund would have more than covered the lease on the house and the staff.

During their first year as a newly married coupled they live with Alice's mother or took over her residence.

When Violet was born in 1894 the Keppels were living in 2 Wilton Crescent. (Just yards from Alice's mother at 2 Wilton Terrace.)

In 1899, Alice became pregnant with Sonia and they leased 30 Portman Square.
2 Wilton Crescent was a much nicer house and in a better neighborhood than Portman Square.
Clearly a case of tightening the belt. 2 Wilton Crescent is still standing, 30 Portman Square was torn down.

In 1910 they moved to the less fashionable area of Grosvenor street. The house was larger to accommodate the dancing and dining for Violet's debut. The house was a commercial property that was on a main street without a garden or green space.

The 1901 census does not list an Agnes Cook, nor an Agnes nor a Cook as one the Keppel servants.

Sonia lists the maids at Portman Square during her childhood as Kate & Peggy. Bessie and Janet as the maids at Grosvenor in 1920. No Agnes.

Agnes Cook would have been born around 1895. The youngest woman employed in 1901 was 20 not 6.

The entire Keppel family was trusted by the BRF. Henry, Colin, Marie, Maria, Meita, Arnold, Gertrude, Elizabeth, Walter, Derek, Bridget, George and Alice etc.

Alexandra preferred her family and stayed abroad for extended periods. Alexandra had Victoria as her trusted companion and Edward had Alice as his trusted companion (not his mistress.). Approved and sanctioned by Alexandra and probably chosen by Alexandra.

FYI, Edward had been impotent since 1895. (Regardless he would never have chosen Alice as a mistress due to her Keppel connection.) A simple comparison between Alice and Edward's known mistresses would show the clear difference.

The picture of the woman lounging is not Alice, I believe it is Lily Langtry.
Note the date.

The picture of the couple walking is not Alice & George Keppel but George's brother Arnold & his wife Gertrude.

 

[Curryong]

I know nothing about this book, which is probably extremely unreliable.

However, George Duke of York and his wife Princess May don't seem to have felt the warm glow of Mrs Keppel and Queen Alexandra's friendship and mutual admiration as described in above posts.

George was with his parents King Edward and Queen Alexandra at Cowes Week in 1902. Queen Mary, who was a bad sailor, was not present, but wrote to her husband enquiring about the atmosphere on board the royal yacht.

George replied that peace reigned but "Alas Mrs K arrives tomorrow and stops here in a yacht. I am afraid that peace and quiet will not remain.'
May, his wife, sympathised and wrote back 'What a pity Mrs G K is again to the fore! How annoyed Mama (Queen Alexandra) will be!'

On the other hand Princess Alice, Countess of Athlone, wrote in memoirs in her old age about Mrs Keppel being an entertaining confidante and companion to King Edward and remarked '...Of course there was a lot of gossip and public disapproval of their relationship, and unnecessary sympathy for Aunt Alix who did not need it as she welcomed the arrangement.'

 

[Denville]

You said though, Denville, that in general, women waited until a couple or more sons were born before they had affairs. Winston was the older of two sons; there were no other siblings before Jack. I'm not saying that another man fathered Winston, just his brother Jack.

Also Alice became the POW's acknowledged mistress in 1898. Sonia Keppel (Alice's second child) was born in 1900. I don't think Bertie was the father, but it's within the bounds of possibility.

And if Alice's male confidants/lovers were writing her discreet little cheques because George Keppel couldn't keep up the family's standard of living, then that is 'taking money from other men', however you slice it, IMO.

As I understand it the servant making all this claim said that Alice was "Having sex with other men for money"... which IMO is not proven.
And again we dont know about Winston's brother., more gossip I suspect. Jenny Churchill was the wife of a younger son, so her boys weren't that likely to inherit the family title.. and Randolph was a pretty dreadful husband.. Enough to drive any woman to wild behaviour.
Even so, in the absence of any strong evidence.. ie Jack being born when Randolph had been away at sea for a year, i'd assume that he was Rand's son.
It is possible that Bertie was Sona's father, but it is just as possible -probalby more so -that she was her legal father's child.. I think that since teh days of Royal princes cheerfully acknowledging their bastard children was now over, Bertie problaby expected his mistresses to take precautions, because he didn't want children whose existence might cause trouble for him...

 

[Denville]

I . Maybe Alice was a sensible woman because she needed money and knew that she had to be discreet in order to keep in good standing with the men she wanted to support her. Conventional? I think that is debatable. I don't think that all royal and aristocratic Edwardians were engaged in relationships outside their marriage as a matter of course, so I don't know if I would call her conventional.

Im sure the story of "Curstsy and jump into bed" is about as likely as Camillas allegedly saying to Charles," My grandma and your great grandpa were lovers, how about it."
Yes Alice was conventional by and large. Not all upper class women had affairs, but many did, and there were conventions for doing it and Alice stuck to them for the most part. One thing was being very discreet.. and apart from a bit of hysteria when Bertie was dying, she seems to have been pretty discreet and various people used her as a conduit to gain access to Bertie.. and she was accepted as his dinner partner, in society because she kept him amused,..
If she had been a wild or foolish or unconventional woman, she would nto have amused him and she might have had an affair iwth him, but it woudl not have lasted so long. If she'd been someone who outraged the various conventions, like Daisy Warwick turning socialist, She would not have been popular in society as she was.. Immorality was meant to be discreet and well bred in how it was done.
There is a story that the Duke of Devonshire (known as Harty Tarty) was addressed as Harty Tarty by his mistress in public one day, she wasn't tinking..and called him something like Harty Tarty Darling..
and that was breaking one of the rules, which was that everyone knew of the affair, including the servants, but in public the couple were formal with each other.

Another rule was that you didn't land your husband with someone else's child, at least for the first pregnancy and preferably you produced a few children before allowing for the possiblity of a cuckoo in the nest. But Alice like Jenny Churchill was married to a younger son...so her children were not really in line for a title.

 

[Queen Camilla]

George was with his parents King Edward and Queen Alexandra at Cowes Week in 1902. Queen Mary, who was a bad sailor, was not present, but wrote to her husband enquiring about the atmosphere on board the royal yacht.

George replied that peace reigned but "Alas Mrs K arrives tomorrow and stops here in a yacht. I am afraid that peace and quiet will not remain.'
May, his wife, sympathised and wrote back 'What a pity Mrs G K is again to the fore! How annoyed Mama (Queen Alexandra) will be!'
'

Is this source reliable? Are they adding to it to sell a story?

I have read multiple versions of this quote.

Some state the letter only states "K". Others have placed the date of the letter as 1895.

Alice Keppel was not at Cowes in 1902.

Could the "K' refer to Kaiser Wilhelm who regularly went to Cowes and was disliked by both Edward & Alexandra?

Cowes is where people in yachts watched other yachts race.

Kaiser would compete against Edward with Edward always coming out on the losing end.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Alice Keppel was one of the nicest people. She was kind hearted and sweet.

Alice Keppel was not Edward's mistress. She was not the mistress of any man.

She most certainly was Edward's mistress. His last mistress and along with Lily Langtry the best known.

Alice Keppel would never have been allowed to step foot into Sandringham if she had been Edward's mistress or anyone's mistress.

Not true.

The mistresses were as likely to be invited as were the wives - who were often the mistresses of other men within the set.

My great-great-grandfather visited Sandringham a number of times with his different mistresses. He wasn't a lover of Alice's as he had different married women as his mistresses at the time (note 'mistresses' at the time).

It was Alexandra who invited Alice to Sandringham to celebrate Alexandra's birthday and everyone who is not out to trash Alice agrees that Alice Keppel would never been allow into Sandringham had she been Edward's mistress.

Alexandra befriended a number of Edward's mistresses.

She even did charity work with Lily Langtry whose company Alexandra enjoyed.

When it came to who to invite to Sandringham she always invited Edward's current mistress as otherwise there was a good chance that Edward himself wouldn't have been there.

Edward would not have introduced his mistress to his family, much less invited her to the family home.

Rubbish. He often had the mistress and her husband at the family home, for dinner and to stay.

It was one of the ways that people actually spent time with their mistresses - was being invited to each others' homes and having the rooming even arranged so that the mistress was roomed near the lover's while his wife's room was near her lovers.

Of course Alexandra never took a lover as she understood the treason laws but with the exception of Daisy Warwick she was friendly with most of them. She never liked Daisy but still hosted her in her home at times.

There are photographs of Alice at Sandringham with the BRF including Alexandra. One is from 1899, when Alice was pregnant with Sonia.

This is one of the reasons why there are questions about Sonia's paternity - that she was at Sandringham while pregnant with her daughter.

There is a lot of documentation from a range of other families who note the rooming that was needed to host Edward with Alice nearby because they were lovers.

I know when Edward and Alexandra went to by great-grandfather's wedding (along with George and May) one of the questions that was asked was what excuse there was to invite the Keppel's who didn't know either my great-grandmother or great-grandfather. They couldn't come up with one and Edward left the day after the wedding while Alexandra stayed for the next three days until after the couple left on their wedding tour. They married in 1899.

Saying that Alice was no one's mistress is simply refusing the overwhelming evidence - including her own words and her own family's history of that time in her life.

 

[Denville]

Oh heavens of course she was his mistress. so was Lillie Langtry and Lady Warwick..and a number of other society women. Alexandra didn't like her much, she liked Lillie L, didn't like Daisy Warwick, in short, she tolerated the mistresses, and liked some better than others. But she would not make public scenes about it..
And yes that was a large part of house parties, the arrangement of bedrooms so that the various lovers in the group could meet up...
Same with the ritual of afternoon tea and the tea gown....

 

[Queen Camilla]

We are going to disagree.

She most certainly was Edward's mistress. His last mistress and along with Lily Langtry the best known.

His last mistress was Daisy who he was still with until 1901 or 1902.

Alexandra befriended a number of Edward's mistresses.

Edward did not have as many as people claim. This is just lies and gossip.

When it came to who to invite to Sandringham she always invited Edward's current mistress as otherwise there was a good chance that Edward himself wouldn't have been there.

There is no evidence that Alexandra invited any of Edward's mistresses to Sandringham.
None were invited to celebrate Alexandra's birthday.

Of course Alexandra never took a lover as she understood the treason laws but with the exception of Daisy Warwick she was friendly with most of them. She never liked Daisy but still hosted her in her home at times.

That is not what Edward believed. He accused her of infidelity

This is one of the reasons why there are questions about Sonia's paternity - that she was at Sandringham while pregnant with her daughter.

She was invited by the Queen Alexandra to celebrate Alexandra's birthday.
Sonia is pure Keppel. She resembles her Keppel side. She looks like her Keppel cousins and aunts.
(Unless Edward VII was a Keppel. Queen Victoria and Queen Alexandra did adore Henry Keppel.)
And there is a picture of Queen Alexandra with Henry Keppel arm & arm while holding hands.

There is a lot of documentation from a range of other families who note the rooming that was needed to host Edward with Alice nearby because they were lovers.

All gossip.

I know when Edward and Alexandra went to by great-grandfather's wedding (along with George and May) one of the questions that was asked was what excuse there was to invite the Keppel's who didn't know either my great-grandmother or great-grandfather. They couldn't come up with one and Edward left the day after the wedding while Alexandra stayed for the next three days until after the couple left on their wedding tour. They married in 1899.

Edward was easily bored and Alice was known for her quick wit.

Which Keppels? Henry, Colin and Mary, Derek and Bridget, Arnold and Gertrude, George and Alice.
Did Edward and George want the entire Keppel clan at your family wedding?
Derek Keppel was the best friend of George V and Bridget was Queen Mary's friend.

Saying that Alice was no one's mistress is simply refusing the overwhelming evidence - including her own words and her own family's history of that time in her life.

What evidence?
What words?
What family's history?

I did extensive research for years before coming to this conclusion.

 

[Curryong]

Is this source reliable? Are they adding to it to sell a story?

I have read multiple versions of this quote.

Some state the letter only states "K". Others have placed the date of the letter as 1895.

Alice Keppel was not at Cowes in 1902.

Could the "K' refer to Kaiser Wilhelm who regularly went to Cowes and was disliked by both Edward & Alexandra?

Cowes is where people in yachts watched other yachts race.

Kaiser would compete against Edward with Edward always coming out on the losing end.

I know what Cowes Week is, and Queen Mary would scarcely refer to the Kaiser as 'Mrs G K'.

That particular exchange of correspondence between the Yorks I have read many times. However, last night I took it from Raymond Lamont Brown's 'Alice Keppel and Agnes Keyser: Edward VII's Last Loves.' It is packed with detail about Alice's life and fully footnoted.

The letters from which I quoted are in the Royal Archives CC/7/32; CC/3/29; CC/7/68.

Are we to take your assertion that 'Alice wasn't at Cowes in 1902' at face value without any back-up, correspondence etc?

My other quote was from Alice of Athlone's autobiography, 'For my Grandchildren' Evans 1966.

Alice was known as La Favorita throughout Society, and Count Mensdorff the Austro-Hungarian diplomat called her that, as did countless others. He is quoted in Lamont Brown's book, which goes into great detail (footnoted) with regard to Alice's relationship with King Edward, Alice's social life, and her finances.

Alice may have come from a wealthy family but not, relatively speaking, her particular branch, and she became wealthy through the advice of the King's great friend Sir Ernest Cassel and the generosity of the King and others. The Keppels had a very restricted income at the beginning of their married life. Alice was given as a dowry of £15,000 in shares and George Keppel (who never had any money all his life) had £5,000, and that was it.

 

[Queen Camilla]

I know what Cowes Week is, and Queen Mary would scarcely refer to the Kaiser as 'Mrs G K'.

That particular exchange of correspondence between the Yorks I have read many times. However, last night I took it from Raymond Lamont Brown's 'Alice Keppel and Agnes Keyser: Edward VII's Last Loves.' It is packed with detail about Alice's life and fully footnoted.

The letters from which I quoted are in the Royal Archives CC/7/32; CC/3/29; CC/7/68.

Are we to take your assertion that 'Alice wasn't at Cowes in 1902' at face value without any back-up, correspondence etc?

No you do not need to take my word.

1902 was the Coronation and Edward was still recuperating when he and Alexandra went to Cowes.

There are descriptions of who Edward met at Cowes in the newspapers and magazines of the day.. I could not remember the publication to link to my post. There are several but the one I referring to describes Edward being seen on the yacht exercising and it lists who visited the yacht.

The reason I do not believe this is about Alice (beside her not being at Cowes) is that others have quoted the Royal Archives and have stated the letter only states "K".

I read Brown's book years ago and found several errors about Alice.

Alice may have come from a wealthy family but not, relatively speaking, her particular branch, and she became wealthy through the advice of the King's great friend Sir Ernest Cassel and the generosity of the King and others. The Keppels had a very restricted income at the beginning of their married life. Alice was given as a dowry of £15,000 in shares and George Keppel (who never had any money all his life) had £5,000, and that was it.

In 1891, this is a considerable sum. This does not include Alice's yearly trust fund nor George's income from his investments and various jobs. When Alice needed money she went to her brother. Alice's mother was also rich. I sure Alice could have walked the few yards to her mother's house.

The lease on 30 Portman's Square was £160 a year.

 

[BeatrixFan]

Does any of it really matter? It's all so long ago! Bertie and Alix clearly understood each other and to hand out morality well over 100 years later to the players involved seems a bit ridiculous. If Alice brought him comfort, whenever, wherever, whatever - good for her. I can't see that it makes any difference when she met him. Or when their relationship started. Surely we are advanced enough nowadays to accept that Alice was good for him? A calming influence? Someone he clearly loved and who loved him?

 

[Curryong]

With regard to the Royal correspondence from Cowes, surely it's cherry picking to state what you obviously believe, Queen Camilla, that the Princess of Wales refers to 'K' not 'Mrs GK'. I've read many books and never heard that Mary wrote 'K'. It always refers to Mrs Keppel whenever I've read it in various biographies, memoirs etc. Can you point me to any biographies etc where it is 'K' only?

The lists of those who visited the King on his yacht would be provided to the social pages of magazines like the 'Illustrated London News' by the visitors themselves, added to by contacts at Court. Edward might not necessarily have wanted Alice to visit him on the yacht if Alexandra was irritated by her.

The Princess of Wales's reference is clearly aimed at the Queen finding out that Alice was nearby, as Alice so very often was throughout the year as Edward moved around, and there being a row between the royal couple as a consequence of it.

And, if it was the Kaiser being referred to, why would Mary have to be discreet in a letter to her husband? Why would she refer to the Kaiser only by the initial K? He was a relative. The obvious way to refer to him in family letters would surely be 'Willie' or 'William' or 'Wilhelm', or even 'W', not by the initial of his title as German monarch.

I was referring to the rather straitened financial circumstances of the beginning of the Keppel marriage in the above post. I know that Alice became wealthier later through the generosity of others, and advice from Cassel etc. Yes, £15,000 was a large sum of money in the 1890s but not when it is a dowry, has to last for years and you wish to take part in London Society, the Season, etc, as both the Keppels obviously did. And Alice was the youngest of a very large family.

Queen Alexandra being friendly to various Keppels is neither here nor there. They were inlaws of Alice's and don't point in any way to Alexandra's relationship with Mrs Alice Keppel.

Alice was regarded by everyone in Society, including courtiers, as being King Edward's mistress/confidante, she was referred to as La Favorita by dozens of people and all books on Edward VII in which she appears refer to her as being so.

Courtiers including Lord Esher, Edward's great friend, knew this woman, took her to be King Edward's lover, and surely their opinion and knowledge is worth more than what people, including us, think in the 21st century, more than a hundred years later.

 

[Queen Camilla]

With regard to the Royal correspondence from Cowes, surely it's cherry picking to state what you obviously believe, Queen Camilla, that the Duchess of York refers to 'K' not 'Mrs GK'. I've read many books and never heard that Mary wrote 'K'. It always refers to Mrs Keppel whenever I've read it in various biographies, memoirs etc. Can you point me to any biographies etc where it is 'K' only?

And, if it was the Kaiser being referred to, why would Mary have to be discreet in a letter to her husband? Why would she refer to the Kaiser only by the initial K? He was a relative. The obvious way to refer to him in family letters would surely be 'Willie' or 'William' or 'Wilhelm', or even 'W', not by the initial of his title as German monarch.

A photograph or a facsimile of the letter will help clear things so there is no disagreement.

The 1902 date just does not add up when trying to connect it to Alice.

If Alice arrived by yacht at Cowes, it would have been listed in the papers and the names of her host or hostess.

The Kaiser was there. He competed and he visited Edward on yacht. This was reported in the newspapers.on July 22 and July 23 that the Kaiser will make a brief private visit to Edward

KAISER TO VISIT KING EDWARD. KAISER TO VISIT KING EDWARD. LONDON, July 22.-A dispatch received hare from Cowes says it has been arranged that Emperor William shall visit King Edward before the latter returns to London.

In 1902, George & Mary were the Prince and Princess of Wales.

Alice was regarded by everyone in Society, including courtiers, as being King Edward's mistress/confidante, she was referred to as La Favorita by dozens of people and all books on Edward VII in which she appears refer to her as being so.

She was his confidante but not his mistress.

No not everyone in society thought she was Edward's mistress only those that were ignorant of the facts and did not know Alice or Edward personally.

Courtiers including Lord Esher, Edward's great friend, knew this woman, took her to be King Edward's lover, and surely their opinion and knowledge is worth more than what people, including us, think in the 21st century, more than a hundred years later.

The opinion of the people who knew Alice and Edward should also count.

Randall Davidson the Archbishop of Canterbury told the Earl of Crawford and Balcarres

The King's affair with Alice Keppel had been platonic. His Majesty indicated this by "always placing her beside the Archbishop at table; something he would never have done if she had, as generally supposed been his mistress. It would have been an insult to the Church and utterly unlike him.' This subtlety of approach, said the Archbishop, 'was very characteristic of the King.'

 

[Denville]

Does any of it really matter? It's all so long ago! Bertie and Alix clearly understood each other and to hand out morality well over 100 years later to the players involved seems a bit ridiculous. If Alice brought him comfort, whenever, wherever, whatever - good for her. I can't see that it makes any difference when she met him. Or when their relationship started. Surely we are advanced enough nowadays to accept that Alice was good for him? A calming influence? Someone he clearly loved and who loved him?

well it does not matter in that it happened. It happened, Edward had many mistresses (and less respectable liaisions with to put it bluntly tarts) thruoghtout his married life. Alexandra had to put up with it, because that's what royal wives had to do. Unlike upper class wives they could not take a lover in retailiation. She tolerated the women, and some of them she did like and was friendly with. Others she just tolerated for her husbands sake and because she had to, and at times when she was fed up with his having a particular affair, or flings, she would go off to Denmark and stay for months.
I don't know why anyone would try to say that Ed DIDNT have numerous liaisons because quite simply he did.
Just like Louis XV would simply take any woman he fancied more or less and had a mini bordello where his girls were procured for him...
Edward wasn't on that scale but he had plenty of flings and more serious affairs.
What is the point of trying to whitewash this?
It's well known that ALix was not able to keep up with her husband, because of her deafness and she preferred to stay home..and Ed was easily bored and wanted constant amusement and chat from his ladyfriends.
So he sought sexual and non sexual fun and amusement form a lot of other women.
Lots of upper class men did this...(nad women). Couples weren't expected to spend their time together, they were expected to be loyal and as discreet as possible if they sought amusement elsewhere.. and to appear together occasionally.
Its like various people I have seen on other forums who insist that Diana didn't have any affairs iwht married men, because the poster clearly thinks that this is a bad thing, and liking Diana a lot wants to clear her of this charge.