"The Mystery of Princess Louise" by Lucinda Hawksley (2013)

[CarolynHarris]

Has anyone else read this book - I do not agree that Princess Louise had a secret child before her marriage for the reasons explained in my review of the book.

The Mystery of Princess Louise: Queen Victoria’s Rebellious Daughter by Lucinda Hawksley (Review) | Carolyn Harris: Royal Historian

v cover
illustration used for promotional purposes

 

[mslewis]

Has anyone else read this book - I do agree that Princess Louise had a secret child before her marriage for the reasons explained in my review of the book.

The Mystery of Princess Louise: Queen Victoria’s Rebellious Daughter by Lucinda Hawksley (Review) | Carolyn Harris: Royal Historian

Unfortunately, this author, the man claiming to be her son (or grandson, whatever) and any other person can write whatever they want to write about Princess Louise because the Royal Family will never comment and there will be no DNA tests so we will never know the truth. I refuse to think about, read about or believe any speculation based on rumors regarding the life of this woman. What's the point?

So, the short answer is . . . NO I have not read this book and I will never read it or your review of it. I have better things to do with my time, thankyouverymuch!!

 

[Ish]

@CarolynHarris: here you say that you believe Louise had a secret child because of the book's argument, but I got the impression from your review that you weren't impressed with the book itself or the way that the author didn't seem to get her history right. What exactly about this book made you believe the secret child argument?

 

[CarolynHarris]

Whoops - I meant to say I do not agree - sorry about the typo!

 

[Ish]

Haha, that makes a lot more sense.

 

[Iluvbertie]

One thing Queen Victoria was very, very strict about was that her daughters were never left alone with a man, any man from about the age of 12 - 13 (except Albert with the two older ones before he died of course) until they were married - not even their brothers or fiancées.

 

[kathl29]

I read your review with interest and agree that it is very unlikely that Princess Louise had a secret love child for some of the reasons you mentioned.

It seems to be a common theme in authors that do not have strong arguments to claim that all documents are being with held from their research. While in some circumstances this is undoubtedly the case it is also a convenient way of not citing actual evidence to prove your claims.