If It's In the Paper, It Must Be True!

If it's in the paper, it must be true! A couple of weeks ago, I wasn't sure whether to be amused at such ignorance, or irritated at such blatant disregard for the truth, when I read an article supposedly about Queen Victoria's daughter, Louise, in the Daily Mail (not a paper I choose to read!) in which it was written:

“Victoria made no secret of the fact that she was disappointed in her children. As babies, they bored and even revolted her; as children, they were dressed up like dolls to be formally presented to her a few times a day.”

The Queen was disappointed by her eldest son's behaviour - and she had good reason to be so! The heir to the throne repeatedly involved himself in scandals, and behaved quite abominably to several of his former mistresses - but I am convinced that virtually all the criticism of Queen Victoria's parenting skills comes from her supposed mistreatment of him. Queen Victoria was proud of her children - her letters and journals bear testament to that fact:

She was brokenhearted at parting from her eldest daughter, Vicky, when she married and moved to Berlin. Of her second daughter, Alice, she wrote:

“She is a dear amiable sensible child, - quite grown up; very pretty and with perfect manners in society, quite ladylike and cercléing extremely well,” and again, “[She] has a sweet temper and is industrious and conquers all her difficulties; she is such a good girl and has made such progress recently.”

Of her son, Arthur, she wrote: “He is so beloved in the house and by everyone – for he is so good and unassuming, always cheerful and never makes mischief.”

Her youngest son, Leopold, she wrote: “Is very clever, taking interest in and understanding everything. He learns, besides French and German, Latin, Greek and Italian; is very fond of music and drawing, takes much interest in politics – in short everything.” 

 

These are but a few minor examples of the numerous lines she wrote in praise of her children and they do not sound to me like someone who was disappointed in her children!

As for dressing them like dolls and having them presented to her a couple of times a day - what utter nonsense!! They were simply dressed in the style of the time! They were often with their parents, who regularly attended their lessons and took time to play with them!

Why do they continue to repeat and print these blatant untruths as though they are facts?? Probably because they are sponsored by publishers wishing to create scandal in order to sell books...