Author Topic: The Non-Hetero Royals  (Read 110748 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline William

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12
    • View Profile
Re: The Non-Hetero Royals
« Reply #360 on: July 09, 2008, 04:44:33 AM »
This is such an interesting topic!
Sexuality was viewed very differently in the 19th centrury, and there were huge variations across the European nations and cultures.
Rich titled people rubbed shouloders (mongst other things!!) with the great and good from the arts, where, many, as today, were gay.  In those days these "differences" were understood, perhaps acknowledged but rarely talked about.

In Russia, where men were thrown together in vast military organisations, it was not that unusually for the boys to form romatic attachments (whether they led to anything physical or not). It was not that ususual for a certain amount of physical affection to be shown between men in russia, whereas in England this would have seemed odd.

I also believe that there is a percentage of straight men who, in the right (or wong - depending on how you look at it), can be influenced to taste the forbidden fruits of homosexual dilly dallying and emegrge non the worst for it.   All part of a young man's progress.  After a bit of naughiness with a handsome guards officer they marry, have kids and move on.

More up to date, we have another decendant of Grand Duke Vladimir, HRH the (late) Duke of Kent, who was killed during WW2, who was allegedly gay, and had a fling with Noel Coward.  there are rumours to this day that he was bumped off because of his indiscretions.  That did not stop him having three children, HR the Princess Alexandra, HRH The Prince Edward, the present Duke of Kent, and HRH The Prince Michael of Kent. These are all grandchildren of the Grand Duchess helen Vladimirovna and Prince Nicholas of Greece (their mother being Princess Marina of Greece & Denmark).

Prior to that we have HRH Prince Albert Victor ("Eddie" ) Duke of Clarence & Avondale, eldest son of Edward VII, who is rumoured to have had interludes in London's Gay bordellos (well, haven't we all).   Rumour surrounds his sudden demise too, a he would have inherited the throne had he not popped off!!

I am sure there are many more.

Offline William

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12
    • View Profile
Re: The Non-Hetero Royals
« Reply #361 on: July 09, 2008, 05:24:24 AM »
Re various posts about the possible sexual orientation of the Prince of Wales, and the Earl of Wessex.

Rumours about Charles were common enough in the 70's, and more recently there has been a lot of bitching about Edward.  I don't believe there is any substantial evidence about Charles, and as far as Edward is concerned I am sure this is just the British press having a pop at him because he is a bit "arty", and went through a stage of being an arrogant little pup, which probably got them going.  There were also rumours about Prince Andrew being caught in a bunk with a rating, Cdr Timothy Lawrence (husband of the Princess Royal) caught doing something similar.  Doubtless these will wind up in history books to titilate future generations. Can't say I believe a word!!

Where there is much more evidence is the late Duke of Kent, where contemporaries have given first hand (or second hand) witness to the fact that he loved fellas!!  It didn't stop him having 3 kids though.

One of the greatest heroes of our time, Louis Mountbatten, Earl Mountbatten of Burma (nee HSH prince Louis of Battenburg) was also rumoured to have unusual sexual tastes, including voyeurism, and possibly man on man hanky-panky - possibly with Edward Prince of Wales (Edward VIII), with whom he had a very close friendship in their younger years.

Sergei Vladimirovitch was almost certainly as queer as they come (queer meant affectionately, although i don't actually like the Grand Duke very much).  There were almost certainly people around him who would pander to his tastes without spilling the beans and giving evidence.  Let's face it - if you tried to out a member of virtually any powerful family at that time, you would have been taking on a very big problem.  And in reality - everyone knew - it just didn't need to be talked about (unlike today where EVERYTHING has to be pecked over by the lower orders like a pack of hungry chickens).

KR was, by his own admission, at least bisexual, and tormented by it....but he still managed to father a litter of Imperial princes. 

It is rather comforting to know that the great and the good have their own "issues".  It just makes them more real and a little more lovable (sometimes).

Offline StevenL

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 107
  • Don't believe everything you think.
    • View Profile
Re: The Non-Hetero Royals
« Reply #362 on: July 09, 2008, 06:06:19 AM »
Sergei Vladimirovitch was almost certainly as queer as they come

Serge Alexandrovitch.
What hard evidence, if any, have you about his sexuality to support the above strongly worded opinion?

Offline StevenL

  • Boyar
  • **
  • Posts: 107
  • Don't believe everything you think.
    • View Profile
Re: The Non-Hetero Royals
« Reply #363 on: July 09, 2008, 06:18:48 AM »
I am sure there are many more.

Given statistical evidence about the general population you are probably correct. However,
most speculation about long-dead people's sexuality is just that -- worthless idle speculation
based on appearances, or gossip which may or may not be based on fact. Without a paper
trail such as the diaries of KR, or corroborated eye-witness accounts by credible contemporaries
of the subject, one is merely "profiling" and repeating worthless gossip, and not adding
anything substantive to the body of historical knowledge.

Offline William

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 12
    • View Profile
Re: The Non-Hetero Royals
« Reply #364 on: July 09, 2008, 09:32:16 AM »
Worthless idle speculation can be such fun though.............

Of course unless you can find the real "hard" evidence (no double entendre intended, by the way) we will never know, and it doesn't matter.  What does matter is that people are interested in this and the many other facets of this slice of history.  Much of what I have read in these pages has no great contribution to make to the pot of historical fact either.  It is enough that people care enough to write their thoughts and feelings down and share them with others. 

Offline Robert_Hall

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 6649
  • a site.
    • View Profile
Re: The Non-Hetero Royals
« Reply #365 on: July 09, 2008, 09:48:07 AM »
How many heterosexuals leave a paper trail of their sexual adventures?  Most of that is gossip and innuendo as well, is it not? Memoirs of courtiers, servants, observations from contemporary observers. All are equally valid sources for such an evaluation, as I see it.
 Catherine II the Great was well known for her many  amours but did she ever  put it down in writing? Everyone else around her did, certainly.  In the case of Grand Dukes who had an eye for the  most handsome guards, well, I doubt they put it in writing either, but everyone around them  noticed.
 
 
Life may not be the party we expected, but while we are here, might as well dance..

Do you want the truth, or my side of the story ?- Hank Ketchum.

Offline Martyn

  • Velikye Knyaz
  • ****
  • Posts: 7022
  • Martyn's Chips
    • View Profile
Re: The Non-Hetero Royals
« Reply #366 on: July 09, 2008, 11:55:58 AM »
How many heterosexuals leave a paper trail of their sexual adventures?  Most of that is gossip and innuendo as well, is it not? Memoirs of courtiers, servants, observations from contemporary observers. All are equally valid sources for such an evaluation, as I see it.
 Catherine II the Great was well known for her many  amours but did she ever  put it down in writing? Everyone else around her did, certainly.  In the case of Grand Dukes who had an eye for the  most handsome guards, well, I doubt they put it in writing either, but everyone around them  noticed.
 
 

Exactly so Robert.  And all worthy of discussion.

We have discussed this issue previously and everyone accepts that sexual definitions were less precise in previous eras and that the mores and sexual behaviour of many royals (living and dead) are in a class of their own.

William is quite within his rights to mention the rumours that surround some of these royals.  There is little doubt that in some instances there may well be some truth; proving it of course being another matter.  No harm at all in discussing it though.......

'For a galant spirit there can never be defeat'....Wallis Windsor

'The important things is not what they think of me, but what I think of them.'......QV