The Alexander Palace Time Machine Discussion Forum

Presumably on the basis that the wild boar is member of the pig family, and therefore that the symbol might be offensive to Muslims. Leicester has a very large Asian population - about one-thid of the total when I lived there 12 years ago.

Have the council made any inquiries of the local Muslims?

Ann

I hadn't heard about this latest twist in an already incredibly serpentine story, but suspect that no enquiries were made.  Unless there was something inherently insulting about the depiction of the wild boar, I can't see that the Muslim community (equalled in Leicester, actually, by the Hindu and Sikh communities together, although it actually is the largest of the Asian religions there if you can call East African Indian origins Asian) objecting to the image in a Christian place of worship any more than they seem to object to images of pigs in shops or other public places.

Bit of an update. It seems that Richard is definately going to be reinterred at Leicester Cathedral. One thing mentioned that is beginning to make my blood potentially boil is this...
Leicester is a multicultural city, ( aren't they all!) and the council are feeling some disquiet over having Richard's "boar" on his tomb/tabletop tomb/slab.
The Richard III society has pointed out that this is his cognizance and as such, it is unacceptable to omit it.

On what grounds is the council feeling disquiet? 

What does everyone think about this? I'm skeptical, especially since they're interviewing Steve Berry in the article. Simply trying to get publicity for his book?

Or do you think there's any truth to this?

"Is This Proof the Virgin Queen Was An Imposter in Drag?"
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2337774/Is-proof-Virgin-Queen-imposter-drag-Shocking-new-theory-Elizabeth-I-unearthed-historic-manuscripts.html

It's hard to give any credence to this given there is no empirical evidence presented whatsoever, and the book Steve Berry has written is fictional, not a theory backed by documentary or other material presented to a reputable historical journal.  And the insertion of Bram Stoker, a writer of fiction himself, is hardly much of a argument for supporting the case that the queen was a man.  But full marks to the Mail for some nice pictures of actresses playing the queen, some of the queen herself (though the Darnley portrait seems to be a modern copy), and some excellent publicity for Steve Berry. 

It is what they call white mourning ? As the Queen and perhaps Princess Louise  (QV's daughter) are wearing diamonds and pearls amid their black morning clothes.

White mourning would be when women actually wore white, as at Nicholas II's wedding in 1894.  When women of high rank wore black on state occasions, or at formal dinners (they weren't supposed to attend balls or other entertainments during this period), it would have been inappropriate to have worn no jewellery at all, as it would have been paying no respect to the occasion.  Pearls and diamonds could be worn as they were essentially white, or at any rate colourless; coloured stones were considered inappropriate.

Thank you so very much for sharing thoughts, you helped me consider things I wasn't able to put together. At some point I thought the great passionate love that united Alix and Nicholas was somehow the reason they both became so isolated from everyone else, so maybe had Alix married Eddie, which was not the love of her life, things might have developed differently. Plus the problem with the (possible) haemophiliac sons (but also daughters, since we know not if some/any/which of Queen Victoria's grandchildren inherited the defective gene) would be a different problem in the U.K. than it was in the Imperial Russia.

I don't think that passionate love was the reason Nicholas and Alix began to isolate themselves from the court.  I think this was due to a number of factors, which included the continued leading role of Nicholas' mother, which effectively allowed Alix to reduce her role; her pregnancies and absorption in family life, and to a certain extent ill-health, which made her find social life physically difficult; her personal dislike of purely social duties, fostered by Queen Victoria, and her opposition to what she saw as a dissolute element in Russian high society, and indeed in the imperial family; actual shyness and social ineptitude; and support for her attitude from Nicholas.  It is hard not to see these factors not making difficulties in Britain for her, but as I suggested, there were likely to be mitigating factors.  However, it is worthwhile mentioning that there is no indication that Eddy would have been particularly sympathetic to social withdrawal on her part or her preference for a life focused on the family, which doesn't say a lot for there being any commonality of attitudes or interests or a very good outcome for their marriage had it taken place.

What was the mourning for?

It says in the text accompanying the painting: "This distinctive scene portrays one of the earliest deputations to arrive to congratulate the new Sovereign on his accession. Despite the fact that the court was still in mourning for Queen Victoria, King Edward VII agreed to the visit and the reception was arranged to take place on June 10 at St James’s Palace."

Well, my thoughts were mostly of how Queen V supposed the ladies should manage Eddy, the Queen knew her grandson weaknesses and all, she was fond of Alix but thought very highly of May. And I do not have the idea Eddy was ever really in love with someone unless he was told that someone was somehow available and suitable. So, supposing Alix and Eddy did get married, and he didn't die so soon, do we have any reasons to believe dear Alix would feel more loved by her mother in law Alexandra than she was by her sister in Russia? Do we have any reason to believe she would be less possesive, less shy, less unlucky to have an haemophiliac son?

I am not convinced that Eddy fell in love with women because he was told they were available/suitable.  Eddy certainly thought himself he was in love with Alix, who was both available and suitable, and was certainly encouraged by Queen Victoria, but she was very beautiful even for the pretty low standards of current European princesses and given his limited options, there is no reason to believe he wasn't actually smitten.  Whether he would have remained in love had Alix been in any way forthcoming is open to doubt, since he in fact subsequently fell in love with Hélène of Orleans who was available but unsuitable, and shortly after that came to nothing he wrote flirtatious letters to  Lady Sybil St Clair Erskine who was available/unsuitable (not royal) in which he referred to yet another love who was probably at least unsuitable since he did not name her.  There is no indication he fell in love with May of Teck - she was merely Queen Victoria's second choice, another serious young woman who Queen Victoria primarily, but also the Prince of Wales, thought would help to steady this rather feckless young man.
I assume you mean that Alix was shy and unlucky to have a haemophiliac son, and Alexandra was possessive and not likely to be very welcoming to her as a daughter-in-law.  Since Alexandra was possessive of her second son George, and would probably have proved to be the same to her first son Eddy (and in reality was difficult as a mother-in-law to Mary), it is likely that she would have been the same as her sister - difficult and possessive - had Alix married Eddy.  However, Eddy and Alix would have had longer to develop their roles before taking centre stage as monarchs which of course in Great Britain were not political and there would have been less pressure on Alix as a social leader and her shyness might have been less of an issue. 
Since haemophilia is transmitted in the female line, if Alix were to have had sons had she married Eddy, they would have had a high likelihood indeed of having haemophilia.  However, there would have been somewhat less pressure on her to have sons since daughters could inherit the throne of Great Britain and that would presumably make the issue less important in a dynastic sense.  So I agree with the previous remarks that the things that worked against Alix as Empress in Russia would not necessarily have worked against her in Britain, or at any rate not nearly to the same extent.
The one great problem would have been in WW1 when her Germanic ties would have been quite as disadvantageous in Britain as they were in Russia.

Just watched a BBC documentary on King George and Queen Mary. Very nice portait of both. And I still wonder, how could Queen Victoria think so well of Alix and of May as for becoming queens of England. I mean, the two had so little in common, and also proved to be different, so why do you think the Queen really thought both could be fine for wives and queens?

I'm not sure that being two different personalities with little in common had much to do with why Queen Victoria considered that they both could make good Queens of Great Britain and good wives to their husbands.  She was extremely fond of her first choice for her grandson, Alix, who was very much at home in the UK and Prince Eddy had fallen in love with her, quite an advantage when royal couples had restricted choices of marriage partners.  She no doubt thought Alix was a serious-minded young woman who would steady the rather unsteady Prince Eddy - exactly in fact what she thought about the second choice, Mary.  There is no evidence that the traits of personality which made Alix a less than satisfactory empress later on were obvious to Queen Victoria during her lifetime. 

Van Hoogstraten notes of 'Eddy & Hélène, an impossible match' that "This product will be in stock on Tuesday 30 July, 2013".

I've always liked the charming portraits by Francesco Liani of the daughters of Carlos III:

I don't know what I was thinking.  Of course the portraits are by Giuseppe Bonito.

The following portrait is being sold at Bonhams as "Studio of François Hubert Drouais" and described as "A portrait of a child of the royal family, half-length, wearing the Order of the Holy Spirit and the Order of the Golden Fleece, thought to be Charles Philippe of France".  However, it's clear that the boy has blue eyes, and the portraits of Charles Philippe of France, Comte d'Artois and later Charles X, show him to have brown eyes.  From their portraits, the eldest brother, the short-lived Duc de Bourgogne, had brown eyes, the Comte de Provence, later Louis XVIII, also had brown eyes, and in fact the only boy in that family who had blue eyes was the Duc de Berry, Louis XVI.  I can't think of any boy of that age who would have been wearing the orders of the Holy Spirit and the Golden Fleece except one of the lineal descendants of Louis XV, and the costume seems a miniature version of the costume in the portraits of Berry, Provence and Artois as teenagers.  I don't think it's their father, the Dauphin, either since the wig in his portraits at roughly the same age is different.  So I think this is in fact Louis Auguste, Duc de Berry and later Louis XVI - what do others think?

I've always liked the charming portraits by Francesco Liani of the daughters of Carlos III:



Maria Isabel (1743-1749)



Maria Josefa (1744-1801)



Maria Luisa (1745-1792)

It does look as if she's wearing that costume, or at least the artist's interpretation:

In Naples ?

Foggia is not, as far as I am aware, in Naples.

It seems that the absolutely standard response to any form of royal favoritism in the eighteenth century to assume that the favorite of whatever gender was the mistress or lover of the royal in question, or if they were too young, of their parents or older siblings.  Sometimes of course this was indeed the case, such as Louis XV and Mmes de Pompadour, du Barry et al, but not always.  Therefore, Lord Bute was thought to be the lover of George III's mother, Sir John Acton the lover of Queen Maria Carolina of Naples, and Gabrielle de Polignac and the Princesse de Lamballe were credited with being Marie Antoinette's lovers.  Partly of course this malice was due to the jealousy of the favourites' close hold on very valuable royal patronage, but generally the age of enlightenment was pretty cynical with regard to genuine friendship and not inclined to believe that was all there was.