Queen Victoria (1819-1901)


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
If anybody is interested in reading about Victoria as a personality I can highly recommend "Her Little Majesty"-sadly, the authors' name escapes me- it shows clearly how Victoria, the woman was quite other from Victoria, the Queen. Perhaps she demonstrates the duality of a true Gemini personality!!!
 
I totally love that movie
Has anyone noticed that princess Beatrice of York is actually in the movie,but would it be weird for her a descendent of queen Victoria to portray her.

Thanks also Liam. I would like to have seen Princess Beatrice have a larger role. She looks so much like QV when dressed in that period.
 
Victoria and Alberts love story is one of my favorites!You should see "Victoria and Albert".
 
I love Victoria's AMAZING strength. When she was crowned at 18, the Reform Bill of 1832 had been passed only five years before, both the last two Kings had unsuccessful reigns and the power of the Monarchy was now considerably less. They expected HRH Princess Victoria to be like a little and naive girl who the politicians could simply push around, but once she became Her Majesty The Queen Victoria she immediately showed she WOULD NOT be pushed around and not just be a figure head either -- she would LEAD her people (within the constitutional constraints obviously). When Prime Minister Lord Melbourne lost the vote in the commons and the Queen was obliged to summon Sir Robert Peel to form a government she was heartbroken. Peel thought he could tell her how it was going to be, but Her Majesty showed her colours and soon he was stepping down and Melbourne was back in. In a letter to Melbourne she expressed my favourite quote by her ever: 'The think they can treat me like a little girl, I will show them I am Queen of England.' WOW! How many 18 year olds do you know like that. Of course this all provoked a constitutional crisis, but it showed Parliament who was boss. The Prime Ministers of the United Kingdom on occasion forget they are Head of Her Majesty's Government NOT HEAD OF STATE. My allegiance is with Her Majesty not necessarily with her Ministers. Not that I don't have mad respect for some of our PM's of course, but it isn't The Rt. Hon. David Cameron's who's portrait is on my wall, if you know what I mean. *wink*
 
Does anyone know what her likes and dislikes are?
 
IloveCP said:
Does anyone know what her likes and dislikes are?

A book I read a while ago called "Farewell in Splendor" said that she did not like bishops, PM Gladstone, smoking and other specifics. She loved gold and ate off solid gold plates (I believe) and her most treasured piece of bric a brac was her golden egg cup. I also think she had a disliking for fires (in a fireplace) in her homes. This is what I remember from reading.
 
I found this text when I researched a different topic and found it interesting:

From: 'Kensington Palace', Old and New London: Volume 5 (1878), pp. 138-152. URL: Kensington Palace | British History Online Date accessed: 06 June 2011.

But that which invests Kensington Palace with the greatest interest is the fact that it was the residence of the late Duke and Duchess of Kent, in the year 1819, and consequently the birth-place of her present Majesty, who spent here nearly all her infancy, and the greater part of her youthful days. In the Gardens, as a child, the Princess Victoria used daily to take her walk, or ride in a goat or donkey carriage, attended by her nurses. Her most gracious Majesty was born at a quarter past four o'clock in the morning of the 24th of May, 1819, and on the 24th of the following month she was christened in the grand saloon of the palace by the name of Alexandrina Victoria. The reason of the choice of these two names is thus explained by the Hon. Amelia Murray, in her "Recollections:"—"It was believed that the Duke of Kent wished to name his child Elizabeth, that being a popular name with the English people. But the Prince Regent, who was not kind to his brothers, gave notice that he should stand in person as one godfather, and that the Emperor of Russia was to be another. At the baptism, when asked by the Archbishop of Canterbury to name the infant, the Prince Regent gave only the name of 'Alexandrina;' but the duke requested that one other name might be added: 'Give her her mother's also, then; but,' he added, 'it cannot precede that of the Emperor.' The Queen, on her accession, commanded that she should be proclaimed as 'Victoria' only."
 
I read in "Victoria's Daughters" that she believed that the royal family were "above British society".Im not sure of it but,do you think that sounds kinda agnorant that she think she and her family are above everyone else?
 
I read in "Victoria's Daughters" that she believed that the royal family were "above British society".Im not sure of it but,do you think that sounds kinda agnorant that she think she and her family are above everyone else?
She was the Queen, after all. But maybe she truly felt she was above the rest of society, which probably meant the nobility and upper classes. I don't think she was referring to the majority of her subjects. The nobles had plenty of moral failings and perhaps the Queen wanted her family to rise above that.
 
I know she was queen and the ruler of a country but,Kings and Queens should see themselves equally to everyone,including nobility and upper class.

But thanks for your insight.
 
The "above Britist society" thing was what she had been indoctrinated with since her extremely isolated childhood when she was deliberately kept apart from society so it is unsurprising that she always felt herself to be "apart", however, the Queen was "apart" from the woman, who seemed to be quite a simple soul who derived pleasure from her relationships with those much further down the social scale. Maybe it was from these that she experienced real warmth.
 
I read in "Victoria's Daughters" that she believed that the royal family were "above British society".Im not sure of it but,do you think that sounds kinda agnorant that she think she and her family are above everyone else?

Of course she is, I would be surprise if any heredity monarch didn't think himself as above his people.
 
Of course she is, I would be surprise if any heredity monarch didn't think himself as above his people.


Still,even if a monarch thinks like that,their lives are not perfect.
 
Each day, as you probably know, Wikipedia features a particularly well written encyclopedia article. Today it is about Prince Albert.

Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Remember, anyone can edit wikipedia (and should, if they know they can improve the article). I know some of you could probably improve this already well-received article (perhaps in the footnote or reference department, perhaps also in just providing a bit more detail).
 
I own both, The Young Victoria and Victoria and Albert. Obviously there are a few things that are different oweing to creative liscense... but they are both awsome lol. I get lost each time I watch them... like I'm there, you know?

I was wondering though, if anyone has seen the movie 'Her Majesty, Mrs. Brown'. If so, is it just a big piece of fiction or is there some truth to the main plot/idea of it?
 
There was some rumors that Victoria and Mr.Brown had a relationship.However it might not be true.I personally never seen the movie nor do I believe that they had a relationship.
 
I have seen the movie "Mrs. Brown" and I think there is probably some truth to what was portrayed. The movie did not show any affair between the two, and is actually not what the movie is about.

John Brown was a Scot in service at Balmoral Castle when the Queen and Prince Albert purchased it in 1853. He was highly regarded by the Queen, especially after Albert's death.

I believe he is the one who pulled her out of her depression over her husband's death, and by all accounts he was highly protective of her and was a very plain-spoken man, which almost all the court resented.. except of course, for the Queen.

I think what they shared was a deep and abiding platonic love and friendship.. one the Queen desperately needed in the years of her widowhood. She was certainly consumed with grief when he died in 1883, and in a letter to Viscount Cranbrook, she writes:

"Perhaps never in history was there so strong and true an attachment, so warm and loving a friendship between the sovereign and servant ... Strength of character as well as power of frame – the most fearless uprightness, kindness, sense of justice, honesty, independence and unselfishness combined with a tender, warm heart ... made him one of the most remarkable men. The Queen feels that life for the second time is become most trying and sad to bear deprived of all she so needs ... the blow has fallen too heavily not to be very heavily felt..."

That says it all.

But her attachment to Mr. Brown was such that when she died, Queen Victoria was buried with a lock of his hair, his photograph, several of his letters and a ring that had belonged to Brown's mother, which he had given to her. Given the facts, I would definitely say there was a relationship there.. I just don't think it was a romantic relationship - and even if one or both of them had some romantic feeling, I seriously doubt that the Queen had it in her to physically betray Albert's memory.

I highly recommend the movie, and I think it was well-thought-out and respectful to both Victoria and John Brown. It portrays the depth of their friendship and understanding.
 
Last edited:
I think Queen Victoria was a romantic and loved the company of handsome and virile men. I doubt very much she knew any man in the biblical sense after the death of Albert. But she did have friends and John Brown was one of them. She was devoted to him and he was devoted to her. But I don't believe they were ever lovers.
 
I think Queen Victoria was a romantic and loved the company of handsome and virile men. I doubt very much she knew any man in the biblical sense after the death of Albert. But she did have friends and John Brown was one of them. She was devoted to him and he was devoted to her. But I don't believe they were ever lovers.
 
Queen Catherine, I saw a little of the movie on youtube and I think there was a deep loving affection there but not necessarily romantic. I recall once reading about Victoria that because she had no father growing up that she was very open to men "fathering" her in a way or taking charge if you prefer. Albert, Lord Melbourne and then John Brown seemed to have this effect on her. The way she behaved after Albert's death I highly doubt if she looked at any other man in a romantic fashion; plus her morals might have been of the kind where sex out of wedlock was a definite no no.
 
I highly doubt she was in love with Brown since Prince Albert was the only man she was ever going to love.
 
I think Queen Victoria loved Brown, but in a platonic way.
 
So far she is my favorite British monarch an love her story and is the reason I had to get "the young Victoria";)
 
Does anyone else think that Victoria continued the Hanoverian tradition of parents not getting along with their children, especially the ones who were going to succeed them? She didn't get along with her mother for the first 2 decades of her life, but her mother wasn't a Hanoverian. Victoria famously did not like her eldest son who was going to be King when she was dead.
I think the Hanoverian tradition ended with Victoria and her son was different, despite the famous line about George V wanting his sons to be afraid of him because he was afraid of his father, and his father was afraid of his mother; Edward VII never seemed to ever thoroughly hate either of his heirs, Albert Victor and George.
 
I think Victoria, and Albert, were disappointed in Bertie because he enjoyed gambling, wine, women, disliked his studies and suffered by comparison with his intellectual sister, Vicky. This disappointement carried over to Victoria's misgivings about whether Bertie would make a good monarch and she did him and the country a great disservice by deliberately keeping him from assuming any responsibilities.

But he proved his parents wrong. Bertie was a great statesman and diplomat and his outgoing nature served the country well when many of the crowned heads of Europe were his relatives. And I believe it was also Alexandra's influence which made him tolerant and fond of his own children. Of course, he had an explosive temper and was often angry but my father was the same way and I loved him and was loved in return. The same with the Wales children and their father.

Victoria's prickly relationship with her mother was due to her mother's dislike of the Hanoverians and also the influence of Conroy. The duchess and Conroy isolated the young princess which caused resentment in Victoria and her royal relatives. Conroy was angling to be her protector and thereby control the young woman. The duchess was duped by him. This breach was healed before the duchess died.
 
I am very much aware of the history, thank you. I am just comparing Victoria and her Hanovrian ancestors with each other and the similarities they all had with the treatment of their heir. All of the Hanoverian's distaste of their sons was rooted in something their children were doing that they did not approve of, seems whatever drove her predecessors also drove Victoria as well.
 
And of course, VM, was not Victoria's dislike and distaste of Bertie compounded when he became the "cause" of "darling Papa's" untimely demise? I'm not sure that negative feelings about the heir's capabilities are entirely Hanovarian and I think that human psychology comes into the mix. There is the need to ensure that the heir is a competent follow on-but possibly no different from- the monarch, Victoria and George V coming instantly to mind but undoubtly those with broader knowledge will know of others. There is the undenyable fact that in the heir, lays not only the nation's future, but the monarch's end and there is the kind of jealousy which shows itself in George V when he maintains that he will make certain that his children will be as scared of him as his forbears had been of their fathers. One has to wonder what pleasure it gave him. There is always the possibility that had he been more tolerant, David may have not been so contraversial.
 
And of course, VM, was not Victoria's dislike and distaste of Bertie compounded when he became the "cause" of "darling Papa's" untimely demise? I'm not sure that negative feelings about the heir's capabilities are entirely Hanovarian and I think that human psychology comes into the mix. There is the need to ensure that the heir is a competent follow on-but possibly no different from- the monarch, Victoria and George V coming instantly to mind but undoubtly those with broader knowledge will know of others. There is the undenyable fact that in the heir, lays not only the nation's future, but the monarch's end and there is the kind of jealousy which shows itself in George V when he maintains that he will make certain that his children will be as scared of him as his forbears had been of their fathers. One has to wonder what pleasure it gave him. There is always the possibility that had he been more tolerant, David may have not been so contraversial.

I personally think that GV attitude towards fatherhood was typical of a lot of men, of all classes, of his era, where fatherhood was seen as being the disiplinarian more than anything else.
 
Back
Top Bottom