King Edward VII (1841-1910) and Queen Alexandra (1844-1925)


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Queen Alexandra attended the West Norfolk Hunt Dog Show and presented prizes in 1922.
 
Is it true that Queen Alexandra demanded to have precedence over Queen Mary at Edward VII's funeral?

She also appeared to be sort of slow in moving out of Buckingham Palace, leaving only in early 1911.
 
I think the consort of the deceased monarch should have precedence at the funeral of her king, then never again.
 
Kronprinz said:
Is it true that Queen Alexandra demanded to have precedence over Queen Mary at Edward VII's funeral?

She also appeared to be sort of slow in moving out of Buckingham Palace, leaving only in early 1911.
Click to expand...

She was encouraged by her sister - the Dowager Empress of Russia - as that was the tradition in Russia.

Mary didn't want a fuss and so allowed it although in the UK the precedence changed instantly Edward VII died.

One of the scenes I find interesting in the first season of The Crown was when the Queen Mother stopped Margaret from following Elizabeth down the corridor giving Philip that precedence even though he was only a Prince (in fact the Queen had to issue a statement to give him that precedence which she did so that he took precedence immediately after herself, except when specified in law - which actually related to the taking of seats in the House of Lords where Charles, as Duke of Cornwall would automatically take precedence over his father).

As things currently stand, if Philip were to survive The Queen, he wouldn't be the chief mourner at the funeral. That would be Charles - as was seen in 1936 when George V died and Edward VIII was the chief mourner, not Queen Mary and again in 1952 when Elizabeth II was the chief mourner not the Queen Mother and so Philip lead the funeral procession at George VI's funeral and not one of his brothers.
 
I doubt if Alexandra DEMANDED it, she problaby expected it, as his widow.. and Q Mary allowed it as it was her mourning her husband and her last time as first lady. When Alix became queen herself, I understand that she refused to allow people to give her full "royal treatment" in private until Q Victoria had been buried.. because she wanted to treat her late Mohter in law with the utmost respect...
 
Iluvbertie said:
As things currently stand, if Philip were to survive The Queen, he wouldn't be the chief mourner at the funeral. That would be Charles - as was seen in 1936 when George V died and Edward VIII was the chief mourner, not Queen Mary and again in 1952 when Elizabeth II was the chief mourner not the Queen Mother and so Philip lead the funeral procession at George VI's funeral and not one of his brothers.
Click to expand...

Hmm I think the Queen gave precedence to her mother at George VI's funeral.

At least from the videos of the casket arriving in London and again on the arrival at St George's Chapel, you can see the Queen Mother leading the procession.
 
King Edward VII laid the foundation stone at Dartmouth Naval College.
 
I am about to read a book on Queen Alexandra by Georgina Battiscombe. On the inside cover in the synopsis of the book, it says that Edward VII and Alexandra's was a true love story and that he only started cheating on her when she became reclusive after having rheumatic fever. Is that true? I just finished reading "Edward the Caresser" by Stanley Weintraub, but it did not strike me from that book that there relationship was a great love story at the beginning. However, that book didn't really spend enough time on their relationship for me to understand how the first few years of there marriage was. Anyway, I am just wondering if this is a true statement that he was faithful to her up until her rheumatic fever because, if it is not, I don't want to waste my time reading it.
 
Edward had had affairs before they were engaged but he did fall in love with her and she with him.

There is no suggestion of any affairs in the first three or so years of the marriage while the two boys and the first girl were on their way but after the trouble with the rheumatic fever which limited Alexandra's ability to socialise there is some suggestion he sought out others.

After the death of the youngest child and Alexandra being told to have no more children the affairs start in earnest.

Edward was often bored as he wasn't allowed to make a life for himself as PoW like Charles has been able to do. If he ever did something that should have been done by the Queen she immediately shut down that avenue for him.

Alexandra understood - to a large extent - and made friends with many of his mistresses. Of course she would have preferred him to have remained faithful but given she was only 26 when she had the last child and he was not yet 30 himself.

Her increasing deafness didn't help matters either as she became more reclusive - she did what she had to do as PoW and Queen but did prefer the company of her children to that of the social scene of Britain at the time.
 
Thank you, iluvbertie. I feel better about the book now.
 
duchessrachel said:
I am about to read a book on Queen Alexandra by Georgina Battiscombe. On the inside cover in the synopsis of the book, it says that Edward VII and Alexandra's was a true love story and that he only started cheating on her when she became reclusive after having rheumatic fever. Is it.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say it was a true love story. The truth was that there were very few women that Ed coudld marry, and he liked beautiful women.. so his family felt that to try and keep him faithful, (Victoria was very shocked at his affair with Nellie Clifden_) they had to try and find him a beautiful wife. But he wasn't faithful to her I think after the first couple of years, and as I recall when she was recovering from the birth of her third child, when she had had rheumatic fever, he was out having fun a lot of the time and quite neglectful of her. He was very immature and selfish. And he was never "deeply" in love with Alix, he ws fond of her, but they didn't have that much in common and he was a selfish man who didn't usually put himself out for anyone. He was restless and easily bored and the queen didn't let him have a role in her work.. and at the time, there wasn't that many options open to a Prince other than the military and a bit of charity wrork..
So for Edward, pleasure seeking esp with other women was his outlet.
Alix did become more quiet and reclusive when she got deaf and began to spend more time at home with her children and her home life and Edward found that confining and began to have more and more affairs.
But in hs way he cared for her and was usually respectful of her position.
 
Denville said:
I wouldn't say it was a true love story. The truth was that there were very few women that Ed coudld marry, and he liked beautiful women.. so his family felt that to try and keep him faithful, (Victoria was very shocked at his affair with Nellie Clifden_) they had to try and find him a beautiful wife. But he wasn't faithful to her I think after the first couple of years, and as I recall when she was recovering from the birth of her third child, when she had had rheumatic fever, he was out having fun a lot of the time and quite neglectful of her. He was very immature and selfish. And he was never "deeply" in love with Alix, he ws fond of her, but they didn't have that much in common and he was a selfish man who didn't usually put himself out for anyone. He was restless and easily bored and the queen didn't let him have a role in her work.. and at the time, there wasn't that many options open to a Prince other than the military and a bit of charity wrork..
So for Edward, pleasure seeking esp with other women was his outlet.
Alix did become more quiet and reclusive when she got deaf and began to spend more time at home with her children and her home life and Edward found that confining and began to have more and more affairs.
But in hs way he cared for her and was usually respectful of her position.
Click to expand...
Yes, the book I just read on Edward VII left me thoroughly disgusted with him.
 
I have started reading "Queen Alexandra" by Georgina Battiscombe. I thought I had figured out a lot of the family relationships, but there is a statement in this book that confuses me. Battiscombe describes Queen Victoria's first cousin Prince George, the Duke of Cambridge, as the cousin of Queen Alexandra's mother. Wouldn't be be her uncle by marriage since Augusta, the Duchess of Cambridge, is her aunt? Or am I totally confused?
 
duchessrachel said:
I have started reading "Queen Alexandra" by Georgina Battiscombe. I thought I had figured out a lot of the family relationships, but there is a statement in this book that confuses me. Battiscombe describes Queen Victoria's first cousin Prince George, the Duke of Cambridge, as the cousin of Queen Alexandra's mother. Wouldn't be be her uncle by marriage since Augusta, the Duchess of Cambridge, is her aunt? Or am I totally confused?
Click to expand...

Augusta Duchess of Cambridge was the daughter of Frederick of Hesse-Cassel.

Her brother William of Hesse-Cassel was the father of Queen Louise of Denmark, mother of Queen Alexandra.

So Augusta's son George Duke of Cambridge and Alexandra's mother Queen Alexandra were indeed first cousins. This made Augusta Queen Alexandra's great-aunt.

See this family tree, starting with Queen Louise (Luise, Prinzessin of Hesse-Kassel in German):

Luise, Prinzessin von Hessen-Kassel : Genealogics
 
Oops - I meant "So Augusta's son George Duke of Cambridge and Alexandra's mother Queen Louise were indeed first cousins. This made Augusta Queen Alexandra's great-aunt.
 
duchessrachel said:
I have started reading "Queen Alexandra" by Georgina Battiscombe. I thought I had figured out a lot of the family relationships, but there is a statement in this book that confuses me. Battiscombe describes Queen Victoria's first cousin Prince George, the Duke of Cambridge, as the cousin of Queen Alexandra's mother. Wouldn't be be her uncle by marriage since Augusta, the Duchess of Cambridge, is her aunt? Or am I totally confused?
Click to expand...

The safe assumption when it comes to European royals is to assume that any two Royals are related in at least 3 different ways.
 
To throw another tidbit in there, I recall that Princesses Alexandra and Mary Adelaide referred to each other as cousins, although I did not take it to mean they were first cousins. Alexandra's son married Mary Adelaide's daughter and they became the future George V and Queen Mary.
 
Queen Claude said:
To throw another tidbit in there, I recall that Princesses Alexandra and Mary Adelaide referred to each other as cousins, although I did not take it to mean they were first cousins. Alexandra's son married Mary Adelaide's daughter and they became the future George V and Queen Mary.
Click to expand...

They were first cousins once removed. Mary Adelaide’s maternal grandparents were Prince Frederick of Hesse-Kassel and Princess Caroline of Nassau-Usingen. Frederick and Caroline’s son, Prince William of Hesse-Kassel, was Alexandra of Denmark’s maternal grandfather.
 
Ish said:
They were first cousins once removed. Mary Adelaide’s maternal grandparents were Prince Frederick of Hesse-Kassel and Princess Caroline of Nassau-Usingen. Frederick and Caroline’s son, Prince William of Hesse-Kassel, was Alexandra of Denmark’s maternal grandfather.
Click to expand...

Thank you. I think I understand. Somewhere in my list I was making to refer to as I read the book, I had listed Augusta as the Duke of Cambridge's wife :lol:
 
I am about halfway through with the book "Queen Alexandra" by Georgina Battiscombe. I am really enjoying it. It talks about how Queen Alexandra ordered her letters destroyed, which I think is so sad. I know she had a private life and had the right to request this, but letters are essential from historical point of view. Anyway, just my thoughts. Does anyone know why she would have ordered them to be destroyed?
 
:previous: Her husband Edward VII had his papers destroyed as well, so maybe she was following his lead or they had an agreement.

I have read that there are letters from Alexandra in Denmark and Russia so there is stuff out there reflecting her thoughts, and I think some of those correspondences have been tapped into, but IIRC there's documentation that has not been tapped into, perhaps it's the Russian correspondence that did not become available until interest in Alexandra had faded.

Also correspondence and diary entries from from Queen Victoria were edited/rewritten by her daughter Beatrice and the originals destroyed. I wonder if Beatrice was acting alone, or was she under orders from her brother, Edward VII.
 
Last edited:
duchessrachel said:
Thank you. I think I understand. Somewhere in my list I was making to refer to as I read the book, I had listed Augusta as the Duke of Cambridge's wife :lol:
Click to expand...

This is where it gets confusing...

There are four women at play; 1. Princess Augusta of Hesse-Kassel married Prince Adolphus, Duke of Cambridge; 2. their daughter was Princess Mary Adelaide of Cambridge; 3. Princess Louise of Hesse-Kassel married the future Christian IX of Denmark; their daughter was Princess Alexandra of Denmark.

Augusta's father (Frederick) and Louise's father (William) were brothers, making Augusta and Louise first cousins and their children (Mary Adelaide and Alexandra) second cousins, and their children (Mary of Teck and George V) third cousins.

duchessrachel said:
I am about halfway through with the book "Queen Alexandra" by Georgina Battiscombe. I am really enjoying it. It talks about how Queen Alexandra ordered her letters destroyed, which I think is so sad. I know she had a private life and had the right to request this, but letters are essential from historical point of view. Anyway, just my thoughts. Does anyone know why she would have ordered them to be destroyed?
Click to expand...

Probably because she realized that they were going to be viewed as essential primary sources and would be read by the masses if left untouched. Or, more likely, because others realized it and advised her to do so. Be that other her husband, their advisors, Queen Victoria herself...

I cringe at the thought of the insight into history lost by people destroying diaries, but at the same time I realize that the people who wrote these diaries probably didn't want their private diaries (and letters and the like) read by strangers in the future.
 
Edward VII did the same thing - ordered his diaries and letters etc destroyed when he died.

Queen Victoria's diaries were heavily edited by her daughter Beatrice so I wonder how accurate they really are now.

For the future we will have the issue that most of the younger royals, if any, don't even bother with diaries or letters and so there won't be that record available at all.

Even things like school reports are now sent via the web rather than in printed copy and, if other schools are like mine, there is no printed copy kept in the student's files so a future historian wanting to investigate the school record of say a future PM won't have access to that source either. Our school magazine is now 'online' as well so those comments that used to be written in the back by classmates and teachers aren't possible anymore either.
 
Funeral Of King Edward VII The Peacemaker (1910)
 
King Edward VII's favorite theatrical performances were plays about modern upper-class society, musical comedies and light opera. Queen Alexandra preferred grand opera.

Why did Queen Victoria stipulate that a princess for Prince Albert Edward must not be more than a year or two younger than him?

Albert Edward, Prince of Wales got a tattoo. He got five crosses forming a Crusader's Jerusalem cross on his forearm.
Banished to the Holy Land after a notorious sex scandal the future Edvard VII spent his days smoking, shooting crocodiles and drinking coffee... before returning home with a tattoo | Daily Mail Online
 
Last edited by a moderator:
:previous: I don't know for sure what the answer is but my guess is that Victoria (and Albert) thought that Prince Albert Edward was prone to wicked Hanoverian ways and for that reason they thought that his wife should be as appealing as possible in hopes that he would embrace the lifestyle and family values that Victoria and Albert put forth. While Alexandra fit the bill, suffice it to say that the scheme did not work.
 
Obviously Victoria wanted him to have a fiancée close in age, so there would be no delays in the marriage.. and so that they had the best chance of happiness, and getting on well.. as she DID believe that Bertie was a wild young man, who had shown that he was prone to his terrible great uncles' vices.. and she wanted to get him married young and to a pretty girl who had a chance of weaning him away from "bad ways". It didn't work. Bertie was fond of Alix, she was very beautiful.. but she wasn't sophisticated or that lively mentally, and he soon moved on to other ladies...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Blog Real
Prince Edward, Duke of Kent & Strathearn & Princess Victoria of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld
Replies
7
Views
1K
Prinsara
Prinsara
Blog Real
List of British Monarchs
Replies
14
Views
3K
Carin
C
CyrilVladisla
Princess Charlotte Augusta of Wales and Prince Leopold of Saxe-Coburg - 1816
Replies
9
Views
3K
CyrilVladisla
CyrilVladisla
vkrish
  • Locked
If The Queen Met Her Ancestors
Replies
23
Views
6K
CyrilVladisla
CyrilVladisla
R
"A True Mulatto Face" by Kimba Hudson (2014) [Queen Charlotte, consort of George III]
Replies
10
Views
11K
Prinsara
Prinsara

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom