The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   British Royal History (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f165/)
-   -   Princess Charlotte, tragic daughter of George IV (1796-1817) (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f165/princess-charlotte-tragic-daughter-of-george-iv-1796-1817-a-15536.html)

iowabelle 01-17-2008 03:14 PM

Princess Charlotte, tragic daughter of George IV (1796-1817)
 
I was surprised to see no previous comments about Princess Charlotte!

My last issue of Majesty has an interesting article about this forgotten princess. The author states that her last, and fatal, pregnancy was mishandled by the doctors throughout her term. My question is, what were these doctors doing to this poor girl for the period of her pregnancy? And what ultimately killed her?

Elspeth 01-17-2008 03:33 PM

I don't know how much truth there is to it, but I've read that she might have had porphyria and that it could have complicated her pregnancy.

Considering the state of medical science back then, it's a wonder more royal ladies didn't die in childbirth, to be honest. I think part of the problem with Princess Charlotte might be that there were different doctors with different opinions and nobody wanted to take responsibility.

ladybelline 01-17-2008 03:59 PM

Princess Charlotte had a short, and for the major part of it, a sad life. Apparently Queen Victoria looked like her physically, according to King Leopold of Belgium, her husband.

From what I've read of her, mostly through bigraphies of Queen Victoria, the physician who took care of her during her pregnancy was partly responsible for her death. He killed himself some days after Charlotte passed away.

ladybelline 01-18-2008 12:32 PM

Charlotte died aged 21, after just one year of marriage with Prince Leopold of Saxe-Coburg(later KIng Leopold of Belgium). The son she gave birth to was stillborn.

Princess Charlotte Augusta of Wales - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

iowabelle 01-22-2008 02:59 PM

I guess it would be likely that Charlotte and Queen Victoria looked similar, given that their fathers were siblings.

Just think... if Charlotte had survived with children, and Queen Victoria had also been born, how similar their offspring would have looked, with Prince Leopold and the Duchess of Kent also being siblings. But thinking about that contorted family tree gives me a headache!

It's rather touching that Leopold named his daughter Charlotte... and how that poor young lady became Mexico's Empress Carlotta.

ladybelline 01-22-2008 04:02 PM

Quote:

It's rather touching that Leopold named his daughter Charlotte... and how that poor young lady became Mexico's Empress Carlotta.
A nice gesture towards his first wife. Though one may wonders how the second wife, Louise-Marie of Orleans, felt about it!

Would have Charlotte lived, Leopold and her would probably have ended as happy as Victoria and Albert.
But Belgium probably wouldn't be ruled by the Saxe-Coburg today...There's no way the Consort of Queen Charlotte could have been King of the Belgians then.

gogm 01-23-2008 01:49 AM

Pics of Princess Charlotte Augusta
 
Here are some links:
Charlotte Augusta pictures from fashion photos on webshots

Princess Charlotte 1 pictures from fashion photos on webshots

Princess Charlotte 2 pictures from fashion photos on webshots

charlottewales1796 pictures from fashion photos on webshots

These are some of her special occasion dresses:
1814-1816 Princess Charlotte's court dress pictures from fashion photos on webshots

Princess Charlotte maroon dress pictures from fashion photos on webshots

Her wedding dress from 1816:
1816 Princess Charlotte's wedding gown pictures from fashion photos on webshots
:flowers:

She does look a great deal like Alexandrina Victoria!

Grace Angel 03-12-2009 07:23 PM

She was very Hanoverian looking, a bit more so than Victoria- she looks like the Georges. Had she and esp her son (or a future son) lived it's unlikely Victoria would ever have been born. It was Charlotte's death that set off all George IV's brothers trying to marry and have heirs.Otherwise, Victoria's father the Duke of Kent might just have stayed with his long time ( many years) mistress Julie St. Laurent.

iowabelle 03-13-2009 06:26 PM

I recently read an account of the last pregnancy and death of Princess Charlotte. It answers some of my questions, so I should probably summarize it here if anyone cares.

Charlotte seems to have been very popular, despite the variable popularity of her parents.

Grace Angel 03-13-2009 07:02 PM

Yes, her father and mother basically both had bad reputations. It can't be said it wasn't deserved in their cases. Charlotte was young and despite these parents was a different person in a good way. As a rare female heir to the throne who was young and had promise it isn't surprising she was popular- she was forgotten fairly fast, but in her lifetime was really the only legitimate grandchild George III had by his sons- a fact that helped her be popular I'm sure.

iowabelle 03-22-2009 09:52 PM

I wrote this up and forgot about it... By the way, there's a new book coming out about Princess Charlotte and the ensuing race to breed an heir for Britain.

From Carolly Erickson's Our Tempestuous Day


Early in her marriage to Prince Leopold, Charlotte had two miscarriages. Finally her pregnancy was announced in February 1817. Things seemed to go very well at first. Charlotte was in good spirits and put on a lot of weight, which caused the obstetrician, Sir Richard Croft, to try to calm her down by putting her on a very restrictive diet and letting her blood. Charlotte became worried and depressed, and her condition weakened.


Dr. Croft believed that the baby would be born about October 18 or 19. The last month was torturous for Charlotte, with more dieting and bloodletting. Queen Charlotte, who had undergone childbirth 15 times, was concerned that something was wrong about the shape and size of Charlotte's bump.


Char lotte finally went into labor on November 3. Although Doctor Croft was assisted by two other doctors, he refused to allow the others to see Charlotte and he even banished Prince Leopold and other relatives. Doctor Croft reported that Charlotte was well and things were going normally but slowly. By the time Charlotte had been in labor 2 days it was obvious that he should perform a forceps delivery. The common practice however was to allow nature to follow its course. Unfortunately the baby was in a transverse position [which means what].


After 50 hours of labor the baby prince was born dead. Charlotte had eaten nothing this whole time and was seriously weakened. Erickson thought that porphyria had set in and her weakness made her even more vulnerable to the effects of this disease (don't know what this means). The doctors dosed Charlotte with brandy and tried to keep her worm, but her pulse failed and she had chest and stomach pains. She was confusd, lost sensation and had continued problems breathing. This was followed by convulsions and death.

Grace Angel 03-28-2009 04:42 PM

I've never read that book, or the book about George IV's wife ( Charlotte's mother) either. Most of what I know comes from bios of Queen Victoria. As for the thing about porphyria that was a disease that could lead to madness that it is said George III had and it could have been passed on to some of his descendents. This was something Charlotte would have had prior to pregnancy, but if you look up the symptoms of porphyria, they do not seem to have been reflected in Charlotte ( at least not what we know of her, granted she didn't live very long). The passage is saying she may have had porphyria prior to pregnancy and then her weakness during the birth etc made her more vulnerable to the disease.

arrdoc 04-07-2009 07:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by iowabelle (Post 717565)
I was surprised to see no previous comments about Princess Charlotte!

My last issue of Majesty has an interesting article about this forgotten princess. The author states that her last, and fatal, pregnancy was mishandled by the doctors throughout her term. My question is, what were these doctors doing to this poor girl for the period of her pregnancy? And what ultimately killed her?

7 April 2009
You may wish to consult my latest book, Royal Maladies: Inherited Illnesses in the Ruling Houses of Europe, trafford.com/08-0070, in which I argue that Charlotte died of an attack of porphyria, which affected her father George IV and grandfather George III.
arrdoc

Grace Angel 05-04-2009 12:46 PM

Here's a link to a picture of some china featuring Princess Charlotte. It's a cup and saucer, but the saucer is broken- you'll see the cup if you click on the guy's photostream, but here is the saucer. Princesss Charlotte Augusta of Wales Saucer on Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Zonk 05-04-2009 10:31 PM

Can you imagine what the British Royal Family would be like today if Charlotte hadn't died? The Duke of Kent wouldn't have married, Victoria would have been born. Thus we wouldn't have had Victoria, Edward VII, King George V, Edward VIII, George VI or Elizabeth II!

Amazing how the death of one person could truly alter the dynastic line.

Royal Fan 05-04-2009 10:55 PM

Just wonder if it wouldve been for better or worse

Grace Angel 05-04-2009 11:29 PM

Nobody knows, if it would have been better or worse, although actually, it's been quite good. I had never realized that Princess Charlotte china was made, even. But the broken saucer reminds me of how Charlotte's line of descent to the British throne was broken when her son died at birth and then she too. Nothing remained to carry on, except the aging brothers of her father, determined to have heirs. I wonder what it would have been like had Charlotte died, but her son lived.

Vasillisos Markos 06-21-2009 07:58 PM

All of history is made up of "what ifs?" Suffice it to say, whether one believes in God or not, that destiny and fate determine the outcome of people and events. What is certain is the death of the heir to the throne, along with her child, influenced Leopold who in turn influenced his young niece who ascended to the throne once intended for Charlotte to occupy.

iowabelle 06-21-2009 08:43 PM

And it freed Leopold up to become King of Belgium...

iowabelle 06-22-2009 05:43 PM

Warren tells me I obviously meant to say that Leopold became King of the Belgians. :lol:

Once again, my attempt to be a knowitall has failed. :eek:


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:19 AM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises