|
|
Post by beverley61 on Sept 25, 2017 11:41:21 GMT
Lovely scenery and costumes but a bit dull so far. Any truth that there were rumours about Albert's parentage?!
|
|
|
|
Post by vicky on Sept 25, 2017 13:23:12 GMT
Lovely scenery and costumes but a bit dull so far. Any truth that there were rumours about Albert's parentage?! I'm not watching Victoria any more but assume you're talking about the rumours that his mother had an affair with a Jewish army officer which resulted in Albert .... if so, yes that was true (that there was a rumour, I mean. No idea if it was true!) |
|
|
|
Post by geometryman on Sept 25, 2017 14:01:27 GMT
In the programme it's not a Jewish army officer, but her brother in law - Albert's uncle Leopold!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 25, 2017 21:52:16 GMT
As I understand it, although there was speculation about Albert's real father, Leopold didn't enter the frame until the 1970s in a book widly criticised at the time as being based on dubious theories and wild speculation. There is no evidence Albert's mother had an affair, and although his parents divorced and his mother remarried, that was several years after Albert's birth.
The first series played with history, somewhat, but this second one seems to be drifting even further from the facts.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 1, 2017 21:59:09 GMT
Well that was a barrel of laughs... Important subject, of course, and they could hardly ignore it, but I can't help feeling sceptical about how far Victoria was really concerned about the plight of the Irish. They've been playing with dates as well; Dr Traill died a year after Peel was forced to resign as Prime Minister. And, incidentally, we now appear to be in 1846/7, but Francatelli left the Royal Household in 1841 after a 'fracas', never to return! Unless I misunderstood, Albert was shown what was described as a hypocaust, which let to the statement that the Palace was built over a sewer; a hypocaust, of course, was a Roman underfloor heating system, not a sewer. On another note, I've used one of those toilets - not one in Buckingham Palace, of course, but that type! Very odd, with no water in the bowl like we're used to, and I had the strangest feeling I was going to get sucked down it  |
|
|
|
Post by beverley61 on Oct 2, 2017 12:06:43 GMT
Yes grim last night, did we skip a few years in one episode. I guess they can prove that Dr Taill visited the Queen, would they make that much up and perhaps she did put pressure on Peel but his point about the starving in Manchester was not I think fully explained. More people died of starvation in London alone than in the entire famine in Ireland and I appreciate that London was even then a large city but extrapolate that across the rest of the UK and you see Peel's dilemma. They weren't doing anything about the starving in any part of the country so if they suddenly sent millions (equivalent) to Ireland there may have been genuine riots on the streets. Not enough of this was covered when it should have been.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 2, 2017 21:56:17 GMT
It appears I may have done Victoria a bit of an injustice. Apparently she did care about the Famine and donated £2000 of her own money to the relief effort. Converting historical sums into modern terms is a notoriously difficult field, but a simple purchasing power calculator puts that at £177,700 by today's standards.
|
|
|
|
Post by cakewalk on Oct 2, 2017 22:11:06 GMT
Wow!! Good on Victoria!
|
|
|
|
Post by sootycat on Oct 4, 2017 11:42:22 GMT
I have learnt quite a lot about Victoria's reign from watching this...even though the truth is a bit stretched sometimes.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 4, 2017 14:39:17 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2017 21:16:39 GMT
An amiable episode, with nothing really eventful. The History Monks really have been playing with the timeline, though. Victoria's first visit to Scotland was in 1842 - three years before the Irish Famine! This was when she first encountered the Atholl Highlanders, although her stay at Blair Castle wasn't until 1844, after which she gave them official status by granting them a set of Colours.
I hadn't realised that Paget and Drummond are actually real people, but some brief googling indicates no evidence of a gay relationship. In fact Paget had no fewer that fourteen children(!) whilst Drummond was actually shot dead in 1843 after a would-be assassin mistook him for Sir Robert Peel.
This really has drifted far from mere 'artistic license' into something else altogether, and is too soapy. I'll finish the series for completeness (there's only one more episode) but I'm not sure I'll bother if there's another one.
|
|
|
|
Post by linseed on Oct 8, 2017 21:24:12 GMT
Good fun, but i did wonder as to it’s accuracy. Did Victoria and Albert really get lost and stay in a Croft?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 8, 2017 21:26:03 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by beverley61 on Oct 9, 2017 11:39:33 GMT
An amiable episode, with nothing really eventful. The History Monks really have been playing with the timeline, though. Victoria's first visit to Scotland was in 1842 - three years before the Irish Famine! This was when she first encountered the Atholl Highlanders, although her stay at Blair Castle wasn't until 1844, after which she gave them official status by granting them a set of Colours. I hadn't realised that Paget and Drummond are actually real people, but some brief googling indicates no evidence of a gay relationship. In fact Paget had no fewer that fourteen children(!) whilst Drummond was actually shot dead in 1843 after a would-be assassin mistook him for Sir Robert Peel. This really has drifted far from mere 'artistic license' into something else altogether, and is too soapy. I'll finish the series for completeness (there's only one more episode) but I'm not sure I'll bother if there's another one. The writer/producer has gone on record as saying the gay scenes were introduced deliberately so that audiences would be aware that there were gay men around in those days. Surely we know that, we would have to have been living under a rock to think homosexuality was invented in 2016!! Other than that there is no evidence at all that these people got on well with each other, were friends on any level and definitely no evidence they were gay and had a Highland fling so to speak. I wonder what their relatives think of it all. I mean if they were two entirely fictional characters put in for this purpose then it may have been acceptable but I don't think it acceptable to mess with real people's histories unless you have something to go on, some evidence somewhere. Badly done I think. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Victoria
Oct 9, 2017 12:33:25 GMT
via mobile
Post by Deleted on Oct 9, 2017 12:33:25 GMT
I for one would prefer it if the makers of TV or films about real people, either dead or alive, would not embellish the truth with fantasy and just stick to the facts where possible. Victoria has got far too "woolly" round the edges for my liking and the only thing going for this series is the scenery.
|
|
