The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   Royal Life and Lifestyle (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f161/)
-   -   Most Children In Shortest Time (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f161/most-children-in-shortest-time-31546.html)

Mariel 03-28-2013 11:04 PM

If Julie de Laurent was the mistress of Edward, that too was a long-term relationship. I forget how many years past twenty it is said to have lasted. Edward and Julie lived outside England during most of that time, as he was in military service and posted abroad. He is said to have had a child with Julie while in Canada, and given the boy to be raised by Robert Woods, his employee, and the boy was also named Robert Woods. I read this in the couple of books on the subject, some years ago, and the Mormons have good records, easily available at my local Mormon church, where I spent hours looking at old records. The books stated that Queen Victoria did not wish knowledge of her father's other children to be known, and suppressed this. Whether or not this is true or a rumor, who of us can tell?
The Mormon records showed that Robert Woods of Kent (a person of the time period) married Lady Charlotte Grey, daughter of the well known parliamentarian, Earl Grey, for whom the tea "Earl Grey" is named (one of my favorite teas).
Edward and Julie are thought to have had more children born in other spots than Canada. Then they lived for a while in England but found it expensive and retired to Belgium, where it was less expensive, but he was summoned to England to try for an heir to the throne, and left his longtime mistress, who disappeared from history at this point. He only lived about a year and a half after marrying Victoria's mother; perhaps he was heartbroken? We cannot know.

I am a descendant of the Woods family of Kent so that's why I was looking at the genealogy records, wondering if I might be a descendant of Robert Woods. But the time period is not quite right, and the name Robert Woods occurs a thousand times in the records, so I gave up on this as futile.

Julie's mother was a Colonna.

NGalitzine 03-28-2013 11:51 PM

There has never been any proof of Edward having children with Julie or a good reason given to hide tham if he did since his brothers were quite open about their illegitimate children. I think the whole Woods story is a family fantasy/legend rather like today people claim to be descended from illegitimate children of assorted royal or noble families or early in the last century the long lost children of the Tsar. Makes a nice family story but doesnt hold up.

Not exactly sure what Edward and Julie have to do with having the most children in a short period of time though.

Mariel 03-29-2013 01:59 AM

No NGalatzine, the Woods story was not MY family's story. They never heard any of this, never mentioned it anyway, so it isn't a fantasy they had. Someone else's fantasy if it is one.
Well, we just got off on the many children of George III, and since he had lots more illegitimate grandchildren than legitimate, it was a natural development of the theme.
It IS true, however, that the story of his many children (15, I think) who had a very small number of children themselves is interesting. I read a book not long ago on the "Daughters of George III" and their life was mostly pain. They really didn't have opportunities to marry their "equals" and others were not allowed. Some of them were chronically sick. One married a prince but lost her only child. One of them probably had an illegitimate child who was treated well by the family, and known to the whole family. How many of them inherited George's illness? Not discussed at all in this book,
but probably some of them. It is amazing how many children he and Charlotte produced, that is a fact. All sources say they were a loving couple, although she was very distressed in later years by his attacks of illness.

Ish 03-29-2013 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mariel (Post 1533406)
If Julie de Laurent was the mistress of Edward, that too was a long-term relationship. I forget how many years past twenty it is said to have lasted. Edward and Julie lived outside England during most of that time, as he was in military service and posted abroad. He is said to have had a child with Julie while in Canada, and given the boy to be raised by Robert Woods, his employee, and the boy was also named Robert Woods. I read this in the couple of books on the subject, some years ago, and the Mormons have good records, easily available at my local Mormon church, where I spent hours looking at old records. The books stated that Queen Victoria did not wish knowledge of her father's other children to be known, and suppressed this. Whether or not this is true or a rumor, who of us can tell?
The Mormon records showed that Robert Woods of Kent (a person of the time period) married Lady Charlotte Grey, daughter of the well known parliamentarian, Earl Grey, for whom the tea "Earl Grey" is named (one of my favorite teas).
Edward and Julie are thought to have had more children born in other spots than Canada. Then they lived for a while in England but found it expensive and retired to Belgium, where it was less expensive, but he was summoned to England to try for an heir to the throne, and left his longtime mistress, who disappeared from history at this point. He only lived about a year and a half after marrying Victoria's mother; perhaps he was heartbroken? We cannot know.

I am a descendant of the Woods family of Kent so that's why I was looking at the genealogy records, wondering if I might be a descendant of Robert Woods. But the time period is not quite right, and the name Robert Woods occurs a thousand times in the records, so I gave up on this as futile.

Julie's mother was a Colonna.

This story doesn't add up and in actuality isn't correct - even if we allow for the possibility of Robert Woods having been Edward's child.

To start, the Mormons may keep really good records, but the church wasn't founded until 1820 so I would question the validity of any records they have that predate then.

To continue, as per the peerage.com, Charles Grey, 2nd Earl Grey did not have a daughter named Charlotte. Nor did any of the 6 daughters he did have marry someone named Robert Woods. Given as the peerage does make note of Charles Grey's illegitimate daughter, I would think that had he had a child named Charlotte it would be noted.

Robert Woods, had he been Edward's child, would not have been "of Kent" owing to his illegitimacy. We see this in the naming schemes used by the other illegitimate children of Princes at the time; William's children were the FitzClarences, Augustus' children were the d'Estes. There is no "of x" with illegitimate children unless they're given titles themselves or marry someone who holds titles.

There is also no reason to believe that the birth of an illegitimate child would have been covered up in the first place - and if Robert Woods was in fact Edward's child that's what happened, not retroactively as is often implied. Robert Woods, Jr is reported to have been born in Quebec in 1871 to Robert Woods, Sr, who had been a servant who accompanied Edward to Canada. Woods, Jr later married the daughter of a military clerk, Charlotte Gray, with whom he had 11 children, before dying in 1847. Consequently, he was born 28 years before Victoria, with absolutely no reason to take measures to cover up the origins of his birth. The FitzClarences and d'Estes were both born around this time without any cover up, so there's no reason to think that Edward's child would have been covered up at this point either, 28 years before the birth of his legitimate daughter, and 46 years before she came to the throne.

It should also be noted that the peerage does recognize the birth of one illegitimate child to Edward, Adelaide Victoria Augusta Dubus, born in 1789 and died in 1790. That seems more like the child whose existence Victoria would have hidden, had she even known about it in the first place.

It's also commonly accepted that Edward died of pneumonia and not a broken heart.

Mariel 03-29-2013 05:41 PM

Easy to see how things get falsified, Ish. There are no really good records of Julie de Laurent, the books on her could be fiction. It does not matter to me, as I seem to be not related to Julie and Edward.

However, the Mormons do keep a data base going back before the 19th century. It goes back very far in some cases. They keep putting new information in all the time, and almost every Mormon church has a genealogy room with links to headquarters in Salt Lake City. They take it seriously because they want to baptize every antecedent by proxy. I believe I was baptized by proxy by one of my students who liked me and wanted me to have the benefits of Mormon baptism, even though I was not a Mormon.
We have genealogy rooms at both the church near me and the one in the other part of town, usually staffed with several volunteers to help those researching. They probably have the best genealogy data base in the world, covering as many countries as possible.

Grandma828 03-29-2013 07:48 PM

The Mormons have traveled the world, making copies of all the church and civil records they can find. It is possible to find baptism records back a long way, depending on what was recorded in a particular country. To be sure, you always start with yourself and work backwards. Most church records list birth date, baptism date, parents and sponsors. If you search, make sure you have the correct Mother and Father, as there were many men with the same name, but had different wives. It is time consuming, but can be done. Clues can be taken from place of birth, names of sponsors (usually relatives). Have fun.

Mimi1984 06-28-2015 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MAfan (Post 1289053)
The first one who comes to my mind is Holy Roman Empress Maria Luisa (1745-1792), wife of Emperor Leopold II; they married in 1765, and in 8 years between 1767 and 1774 they became parents of 8 children, one for each year.
They had a total of 16 children born between 1767 and 1788.

2 of them died in childhood, and 2 other in there early years, but the other 10 became very old.

Albrecht (1773-1774)

Maximilian (1774-1778)

Maria Amalia (1780-1798)

Leopold Alexander (1772-1795, died at the age of 23)

Mimi1984 06-28-2015 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Countessmeout (Post 1533241)
Edward has at least two children from before he married. A daughter Adelaide born in 1789, her mother died giving birth to her. And a son Edward, who married but had no kids.He had an 18 year relationship wit Thérèse-Bernardine Montgenet, who accompanied him until his marriage. There is no recognized children, but some families claim descendence from them.

Realy ? I only know, that Victorie, Victorias mother had two children (1 son, 1 daughter) from her first marriage and was a widow in 1817.

Victorie outlived her two husbands and died in 1861. (was born in 1786).

Mimi1984 07-31-2015 09:51 AM

Maria Theresia (1717-1780) was married to Franz Stephan (1708-1765) , 1736-1765 and hat 16 children with him.

The first child Maria Elisabeth (I.) (1737-1740) and the last child Maximilian Franz (1756-1801).

16 children in 19 1/2 years.

As far as I know, Maria Theresia never had a misscarriage.

Maria Karolina (I.) (1740-1741) and Maria Karolina (II.) (1748-1748) died in childhood, Karl Joseph (1745,1761) - 15 years old, Johanna Gabriela (1750-1562) and Maria Josepha (1751-1767) died in his/her early Teens.

Mimi1984 06-15-2018 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Countessmeout (Post 1533124)
Of his 13 children to reach adulthood, only 4 sons had legitamite chilldren, a fifth had kids from an invalid marriage. Of course, none of his daughters had kids, 3 didn't even marry.

George: had Charlotte
Edward: had Victoria

Ernst: had one son George. Three royal families can directly trace through him. Of course the main one would be EA, Princess Caroline's husband, the current Prince of Hannover. But The Greek and Spanish royal families as well. Sofia and Constantine's mother Frederica was born a princess of Hannover, and is the great-great granddaughter of George III's son Ernst.

Adolphus- his title and male line died out legitamitely with his only son George who never married. He had three illegitamite children, George who had three kids but no grandkids, Adolphus had one daughter who gave him grandchildren, and a third who never wed. But Adolphus had two daughters. Princess Augusta married the Duke of Mecklenberg-Strelitz, and her line continues through her daughters. Mary Adelaide, married the Duke of Tech and her daughter Mary was Queen of Great Britain. She also has descendents from two sons.

Augutus had two children from his invalid marriage, none from his valid. His son is one of the first reporter sufferers of MS, and never had children. His daughter wed, but she had no kids either.

What's about Wilhelm/William ? Two daughters, who died in childhood, with Adelaide of Saxe-Meiningen, but ten children with her mistress Dorothy Jordan.
The children lived in the royal house and called their "stepmother" "dear queenie".

Denville 06-16-2018 07:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Countessmeout (Post 1533404)
I am surprised, I don't think Victoria had any real issue with her Uncle's marriages or children born from them. The Duke of Sussex's second wife was created Duchess of Inverness in her own right. She had been unable to sit with the Duke at royal functions, due to her lower status, so Victoria has her raised to a Duchesss in her own right. If they had children, the title could have passed to them. So it seems at least the sake for her Uncle, Victoria could over look that. Her opinion on her father's children from other women may be a whole new issue.

I doubt If Victoria would have wanted there to be public knowledge of any illegitiamate children that her father had produced.. but there doesn't seem to be any firm evidence that he did hve children by any mistresses including Julie St Laurent...

Countessmeout 06-16-2018 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mimi1984 (Post 2123270)
What's about Wilhelm/William ? Two daughters, who died in childhood, with Adelaide of Saxe-Meiningen, but ten children with her mistress Dorothy Jordan.
The children lived in the royal house and called their "stepmother" "dear queenie".

I didn't include Dorothy's kids as I said 'legitimate children:flowers:

But yes I should have included Elizabeth who at least lived three months. Their other children were either were stillborn, or the eldest daughter died hours later (alive just long enough to baptize and name).

If I included illegitimate children, the list of George III's grandkids would be longer.

Denville 06-16-2018 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Countessmeout (Post 2123578)
I didn't include Dorothy's kids as I said 'legitimate children:flowers:

But yes I should have included Elizabeth who at least lived three months. Their other children were either were stillborn, or the eldest daughter died hours later (alive just long enough to baptize and name).

If I included illegitimate children, the list of George III's grandkids would be longer.

It was nearly all illegitimate children..for the George III family. the legitimate ones were Princess Charlotte, Victoria, the 3 Cambridges and George of Hanover.. plus the 2 short lived daughters of Adelaide... None of the daughters had any legit children...


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:27 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2018
Jelsoft Enterprises