The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   British Royal History (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f165/)
-   -   Queen Victoria and Haemophilia (http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f165/queen-victoria-and-haemophilia-6931.html)

betina 04-18-2005 04:44 AM

Queen Victoria and Haemophilia
 
I saw a program on Discovery about Queen Victoria as a carrier of the Hemophila gene and Porphyria gene. They traced it back to George 3. and they said that he wasn´t mad but only suffered from Porphyria. They could also trace it back to James 1. and queen Mary of Scots.
Does anybody know if there is present decendants og Queen Victoria who suffers from Hemophelia?
Betina

wymanda 04-18-2005 07:21 AM

bettina,

I'm not sure about the porphyria but I dont think that there are any living descendants of Queen Victoria who have the haemophilia gene. The disease found its way into the Spanish, Russian & German royal families through daughters of Princess Alice & Princess Beatrice. Prince Leopold's daughter was Princess Alice, Countess of Athlone who was a carrier. She had one son who had the disease. Princess Victoria (Princess Royal & Empress Frederick of Germany) was a carrier and had one who was a sufferer and one son who married his cousin, Princess Irene of Hesse, who was a carrier. They had two haemophiliac sons. Irene's sister Alix married the Tsar of Russia. Their son Alexis was a sufferer and it is unknown if any of their daughters were carriers. It is likely that at least two of the daughters would have carried the gene. Princess Beatrice's daughter, Victoria Eugenie married the King of Spain and produced two haemophlic sons. It does not appear that any of her daughters were carriers.
Of the families that descend from these princesses, there is no sign of the disease in the Spanish royal family as the present King is descended from a son who did not have the disease. The russian line became defunct in 1917. I do not have any information on the Germans.

lashinka2002 04-18-2005 12:17 PM

Even if there were decendants today, royal famalies may choose to keep that information private.

There is now treatment for hemophlia, but no cure

Treatment involves infusion of the missing blood clotting factor taken regularly as a preventative therapy, or taken when needed to control a bleeding episode.

This must be a difficult disease to live with.

I heard that Princess Margaret suffered from porphyria but that could just be tabloids.

MoonlightRhapsody 04-18-2005 01:49 PM

I can't recall any of Queen Victoria's descendants currently living who has haemophilia or porphyria (http://www.porphyriafoundation.com/about_por/index.html <---Good link about it from the American Porphyria Foundation). However, her current descendants could be carriers for haemophilia, therefore, a good reason why royals shouldn't inter-marry. You need a genetic analysis to find out if you're a carrier for haemophilia. I doubt the royals have had an analysis done but I'm certain they would not publish the results, if ever.

magnik 04-18-2005 02:22 PM

I think that I watch it or mybe similar program. But it was said that porphyria start much earlier than George III. Probably it began by Stuarts - James V but that's sure that Mary "Queen of Scots" had it.

Alicky 08-19-2005 06:44 PM

Victoria/Duke of Kent/Haemophilia
 
-Continuing the topic in a new thread as Elspeth suggested.

Quote:

Originally Posted by emily62_1
a mutation is quite rare, anyway, her father, whoever he was, did pass the silent gene to her, QV, who was not ill, as women are - sane bearers- and passed the gene to her sons, of course, not to all, she passed it only to 1, Leopold- as for mutation, it should have occured in the Duke of Kent, who, witnesses tell this, was not with his wife when she concieved, she was in Prussia, or a country of the modern Germany- I did not want to believe it, but who should be sitting on the throne, now, is Edward George, Duke of Kent, son of that Duke of Kent, George, who married P. Marina of Greece. He died in 1942.

But it might not have been a silent gene from a parent, de novo cases do occur. Queen Victoria would most likely have been a silent carrier, it's pretty rare to find female hemophiliacs that exhibit the symptoms.

Is it a fact that the Duke of Kent was away from his wife when Victoria was concieved? Who were the witnesses? This is a very interesting tilt to the story. Better than any soap opera that's for sure! :)

Elspeth 08-19-2005 08:13 PM

The origin of this story seems to be the book "Queen Victoria's Gene" by D. Malcolm Potts, who's an obstetrician. He claims that the most likely way Queen Victoria became a haemophilia carrier is by being the daughter of a haemophiliac man, which the Duke of Kent obviously wasn't. According to reviewers at Amazon, the book doesn't give any evidence for the allegation.

There are other stories about her being the illegitimate daughter of the Duchess of Kent's close friend Sir John Conroy, but I suppose that sort of gossip is inevitable.

wymanda 08-19-2005 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by emily62_1
a mutation is quite rare, anyway, her father, whoever he was, did pass the silent gene to her, QV, who was not ill, as women are - sane bearers- and passed the gene to her sons, of course, not to all, she passed it only to 1, Leopold- as for mutation, it should have occured in the Duke of Kent, who, witnesses tell this, was not with his wife when she concieved, she was in Prussia, or a country of the modern Germany- I did not want to believe it, but who should be sitting on the throne, now, is Edward George, Duke of Kent, son of that Duke of Kent, George, who married P. Marina of Greece. He died in 1942.

Emily,
The Haemophilia gene is carried by the mother. It is present on the X chromosome and as all of us who have studied genetics know you have the following possibilities

+ A female Carrier
+ A female free of the disease
+ A male haemophiliac

If a female carrying the disease were to marry a male with haemophilia the result could be a female child with haemophilia.
Only one of Victoria's daughters was DEFINITELY not a carrier. This was Empress Frederick (The Princess Royal). As Princess Louise, Duchess of Argyll did not have children it is impossible to know if she was a carrier. The disease was passed into other royal families in the following ways

+ Princess Alice - Passed into the Russian royal family by her daughter Alix
+ Princess Beatrice - Passed into the Spanish Royal family by her daughter Ena

It is unsure if Princess Helena was a carrier because she produced healthy children but her daughters had no issue so it is unknown if they inherited the carrier gene from her.

Prince Leopold was a haemophiliac and his daughter Princess Alice (Countess of Athlone) was a carrier (she could not have been anything else). Both of her sons were haemophiliacs but it doesn't appear that her daughter, Lady May Abel-Smith was a carrier.

The following link explains it all and also provides the information on Queen Victoria's mothers family and the strong chance that the gene came from there.

http://www.geocities.com/jesusib/haemophilia.html

Alicky 08-19-2005 09:22 PM

So I guess it most likely was new case of hemophilia in ole Vicky. :)

emily62_1 08-20-2005 12:18 AM

yess, u're right, women are sane carriers, in fact, what I'm saying here, is that the Duke of Kent should have been himself a carrier, that would mean that in the Hanoverian RF, should have occured, in the centuries be4e QV's birth, some haemophiliac cases btw the Hanover Princes, but I have never heard of any, have u ? we all know about Mendel and his theories, but only if QV's father was a carrier of the gene.... well, I know u understand me. It would be easy to know the truth, some members, of British RF , could make his/her DNA compared to Ernst Augustus' DNA, well, I know they would never do it.....

tiaraprin 08-20-2005 12:18 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elspeth
The origin of this story seems to be the book "Queen Victoria's Gene" by D. Malcolm Potts, who's an obstetrician. He claims that the most likely way Queen Victoria became a haemophilia carrier is by being the daughter of a haemophiliac man, which the Duke of Kent obviously wasn't. According to reviewers at Amazon, the book doesn't give any evidence for the allegation.

There are other stories about her being the illegitimate daughter of the Duchess of Kent's close friend Sir John Conroy, but I suppose that sort of gossip is inevitable.

I don't believe the Duchess of Kent and Sir John were close then. It was only after the Duke's death did he make himself utterly irreplaceable to the Duchess, realizing Victoria's potential future position. The man was a social climbing, greedy monster!!

Do you think the Duchess and Conroy were lovers as Victoria grew up?? There is a question!!

emily62_1 08-20-2005 12:31 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by emily62_1
I'll check out, but I read he was.... well, u know, quite old at the time and very ill, don't know which illness he suffered from, but I'll make researches.


George IV was still alive, he died when Victoria was 1 years old, then William IV, her uncle, succeeded, but he had no issue, then was the turn of the Duke of Kent, who had died be4e William IV, so when she was 18, QV succeeded on the throne. It was 1837.

wymanda 08-20-2005 12:37 AM

Actually it is not haemophilia that links Victoria undenyably to the Hanoverians, it is porphyria. There is strong evidence that this condition, which was the cause of George III madness, came through the family from Mary Queen of Scots and it is present in the descendants of QV. At least one of her grandaughters was a sufferer and there was some suggestion that so was Princess Margaret. Given E-A's regular outbursts and is recent bout of ill health I wonder if he is also a sufferer?

tiaraprin 08-20-2005 12:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by emily62_1
George IV was still alive, he died when Victoria was 1 years old, then William IV, her uncle, succeeded, but he had no issue, then was the turn of the Duke of Kent, who had died be4e William IV, so when she was 18, QV succeeded on the throne. It was 1837.

George IV died in 1830 when Victoria was 11. King George III died before Victoria's 1st birthday. William IV died a few weeks after Victoria turned 18.

Warren 08-20-2005 12:51 AM

Hanover or Kent?
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by emily62_1
I did not want to believe it, but who should be sitting on the throne, now, is Edward George, Duke of Kent, son of that Duke of Kent, George, who married P. Marina of Greece. He died in 1942.

Sorry emily62_1, I can't follow this.
If for whatever reason the young Princess Victoria was passed over for the succession then following the death of King William IV his next surviving younger brother, Prince Ernst August, Duke of Cumberland, would have taken the Thrones of Great Britain (and Hanover).

Due to Salic Law Ernst August became King of Hanover when Queen Victoria became Queen of Great Britain in 1837. This first Ernst August's senior living descendant is today Prince Ernst August (V), Prince of Hanover, Head of the Royal House of Hanover, and it is he who would be King of England, not the Duke of Kent.
.

Elspeth 08-20-2005 02:14 AM

Well, he wouldn't be King of England, having married a Catholic, if that's any consolation. Anyway, no doubt the Hanoverians would have made different marriages as kings of England from the marriages they made as Electors of a small German house and then ex-rulers, so who knows who the current monarch would be.

Mapple 08-20-2005 03:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by emily62_1
yes, u're right, women are
sane carriers, in fact, what I'm saying here, is that the Duke of Kent should have been himself a carrier, that would mean that in the Hanoverian RF, should have occured, in the centuries be4e QV's birth, some haemophiliac cases btw the Hanover Princes, but I have never heard of any, have u ? we all know about Mendel and his theories, but only if QV's father was a carrier of the gene....
...

Not necessarily; it could have been a sperm mutation in the Duke of Kent, and Viktoria of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld could have been a carrier of the disease herself.

emily62_1 08-20-2005 07:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by tiaraprin
George IV died in 1830 when Victoria was 11. King George III died before Victoria's 1st birthday. William IV died a few weeks after Victoria turned 18.

sure, 1830, I get easily confused when it comes to the British Rf in the 1800s.

emily62_1 08-20-2005 07:58 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wymanda
Actually it is not haemophilia that links Victoria undenyably to the Hanoverians, it is porphyria. There is strong evidence that this condition, which was the cause of George III madness, came through the family from Mary Queen of Scots and it is present in the descendants of QV. At least one of her grandaughters was a sufferer and there was some suggestion that so was Princess Margaret. Given E-A's regular outbursts and is recent bout of ill health I wonder if he is also a sufferer?


QV had no porphiria, was she a carrier ? don't know......she was not a Hanover Princess.

Alicky 08-20-2005 08:00 AM

I just don't understand what a "sane carrier" is. I never heard that terminology used, I thought you might mean someone who carries it without exhibiting the symptoms, a silent carrier. Is that what you meant? :)


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:10 PM.

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises