What do you think?
Rate this book
Queen Victoria's Gene
Queen Victoria's Gene is the first extended scientific examination of the history of haemophilia in the royal families of Europe. The book asks where the disease came from and what effect it had on history, and in so doing it presents some startling new perspectives.
Queen Victoria's son, Prince Leopold, died from haemophilia, but no member of the royal family before his generation had suffered from this very visible condition. Medically, there are only two either one of Victoria's parents had a 1 in 50,000 random mutation, or Victoria was the illegitimate child of a haemophiliac man.
However the haemophilia gene arose, it had a profound effect on history. Two of Victoria's daughters were silent carriers who passed the disease to the Spanish and Russian royal families. The disease played a role in the origin of the Spanish Civil War; and the tsarina's concern over her only son's haemophilia led to the entry of Rasputin into the royal household, contributing directly to the Russian Revolution.
Finally, if Queen Victoria was illegitimate, who should have inherited the British throne? The answer is astonishing.
Queen Victoria's son, Prince Leopold, died from haemophilia, but no member of the royal family before his generation had suffered from this very visible condition. Medically, there are only two either one of Victoria's parents had a 1 in 50,000 random mutation, or Victoria was the illegitimate child of a haemophiliac man.
However the haemophilia gene arose, it had a profound effect on history. Two of Victoria's daughters were silent carriers who passed the disease to the Spanish and Russian royal families. The disease played a role in the origin of the Spanish Civil War; and the tsarina's concern over her only son's haemophilia led to the entry of Rasputin into the royal household, contributing directly to the Russian Revolution.
Finally, if Queen Victoria was illegitimate, who should have inherited the British throne? The answer is astonishing.
160 pages, Hardcover
First published June 1, 1996
15 people are currently reading
446 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews
July 25, 2022
An odd book which doesn’t quite match its title. An alternative might be: ‘Coburg Ambition and Queen Victoria’s Gene: Haemophilia and the Royal Family’.
Was Queen Victoria legitimate and if so where did the haemophilia gene come from? A big question, particularly in view of the havoc the gene wreaked on the international royal stage.
An interesting read at least in part but it lacked structure and the later chapters were rambling. I began to doubt its veracity after spotting a number of inaccuracies, two of which are : Prince William of Gloucester (1941-72), described as a nephew of George V. He was the King’s grandson. Reference is made to ‘descendants’ of Frederick the Great. But he died childless.
The index was far from comprehensive: eg on more than one occasion Frederick the Great (of Prussia) is cited in the text but he doesn't appear in the index nor William of Gloucester, cited above, diagnosed with porphyria, the malady which afflicted George III (and Mary Queen of Scots amongst others) so surely worthy of one.
Was Queen Victoria legitimate and if so where did the haemophilia gene come from? A big question, particularly in view of the havoc the gene wreaked on the international royal stage.
An interesting read at least in part but it lacked structure and the later chapters were rambling. I began to doubt its veracity after spotting a number of inaccuracies, two of which are : Prince William of Gloucester (1941-72), described as a nephew of George V. He was the King’s grandson. Reference is made to ‘descendants’ of Frederick the Great. But he died childless.
The index was far from comprehensive: eg on more than one occasion Frederick the Great (of Prussia) is cited in the text but he doesn't appear in the index nor William of Gloucester, cited above, diagnosed with porphyria, the malady which afflicted George III (and Mary Queen of Scots amongst others) so surely worthy of one.
December 11, 2014
One of the first instances of "genetic genealogy" was the investigation into the roots of the hemophilia that plagued the czarevich Alexei of Russia, the only son of Nicholas II, who probably wouldn’t have lived long enough to become czar even if the Bolsheviks hadn’t liquidated the imperial family. But Victoria’s son, Leopold, also died of complications of the disease, and it made its way into the Spanish royal family, as well. Where did the defective gene Victoria carried come from? There are only two medical possibilities: Either she was the victim of a random mutation — one chance in about 50,000 — or her father was hemophiliac. And since her father, Edward, Duke of Kent, did not have the disease, that would mean Victoria was illegitimate, the offspring of a hemophiliac lover of the Duchess of Kent. The duchess certainly did have a lover, and it’s also possible, from all the evidence, that her husband the duke was sterile. In which case, the throne should rightfully have gone to King William III’s next closest relative, . . . and who would that have been? This is quite a fascinating detective story, investigating in considerable depth the private lives of the Coburgs, and it leaves one to wonder how the 19th century in Britain might have been different if Ernest Augustus, Duke of Cumberland and subsequently king of Hanover (a very distasteful individual by all accounts, and a very unpopular ruler), had become king of Great Britain. (His eldest living descendant in the male line today is Ernest Augustus, Prince of Hanover and present husband of Princess Caroline of Monaco.)
December 7, 2017
A couple of weeks ago, I read and reviewed a new book by British author Deborah Cadbury, "Queen Victoria's Matchmaking: The Royal Marriages that Shaped Europe". The book was excellent and while Cadbury didn't write much about the hemophilia gene, I became curious about it. Looking through Amazon, I found this book, "Queen Victoria's Gene: Hemophilia and The Royal Family"., by DM Potts. Published in the 1990's, the book is well-written in a sort of wandering way through Victoria's life and those of her children and grandchildren.
The gene for hemophilia was either passed down to Victoria by her father or it spontaneously appeared in her gene pool. Potts does look at Victoria's parents. The gene was passed along to three of her children; one son suffered from the disease and two daughters were carriers. The two daughters carried the gene by marriage into the Russian and Spanish royal houses. Potts does a good job in showing how the hemophilia of the tsarvich Alexei basically destroyed the last Romanov tsar and his family. Potts writes more about the Russian revolution and the fate of Nicholas, Alexandra, and their four kids. I mentioned the publication date above because information about the murders and the dispersal of the bodies was not well-known til after this book was published. That's a problem with reading a book that is almost 20 years old and is certainly not the fault of the author. DM Potts wrote what was known at the time.
DM Potts book is shortish and was a good read after Cadbury's longer book. I'd advise both books to the Victoria-fanatic!
The gene for hemophilia was either passed down to Victoria by her father or it spontaneously appeared in her gene pool. Potts does look at Victoria's parents. The gene was passed along to three of her children; one son suffered from the disease and two daughters were carriers. The two daughters carried the gene by marriage into the Russian and Spanish royal houses. Potts does a good job in showing how the hemophilia of the tsarvich Alexei basically destroyed the last Romanov tsar and his family. Potts writes more about the Russian revolution and the fate of Nicholas, Alexandra, and their four kids. I mentioned the publication date above because information about the murders and the dispersal of the bodies was not well-known til after this book was published. That's a problem with reading a book that is almost 20 years old and is certainly not the fault of the author. DM Potts wrote what was known at the time.
DM Potts book is shortish and was a good read after Cadbury's longer book. I'd advise both books to the Victoria-fanatic!
May 19, 2017
Very disappointed with this book. Writing quality was shoddy, in parts read like an undergraduate essay. Some concepts/statements were not fully supported or expanded upon sufficiently. Authors also made conjectures that lessened the overall academic credibility. Finally, the text was poorly organized, and the latter half had little to do with the initial premise.
I only finished this book because it was relatively short and it counts towards my Reading Challenge.
I only finished this book because it was relatively short and it counts towards my Reading Challenge.
June 19, 2017
Despite a sensational title, it was a good book that marked the rise of the Coburg family. Haemophilia is a large part of the story, how from a sudden outbreak in Vicky, it went around to many Royal Families, not unknowingly it seems as often is reported, but uncaringly. Only in Spain was having a sick heir a problem -- most countries do not care, which in itself is a sad statement. Crisp story, some good pictures but their politics mars many of the conclusions.
June 26, 2011
The theories in this book are based on a lot of conjecture, but the conclusions are fascinating. Did Queen Victoria's gene for hemophilia actually cause World Wars I & II and the assassination of the Russian royal family? An engrossing, thought-provoking read.
April 10, 2018
The Royal Gene
Although dated, this book is still worth reading because it recounts briefly but clearly European history of the 20th century, focusing of course on the various dynasties and in particular Queen Victoria’s descendants. Haemophilia and the way the illness is carried from mothers to their offspring is well explained and documented, even for people like me, who are not at all competent in medical knowledge. For the royalty buff this book is a must, of course.
Although dated, this book is still worth reading because it recounts briefly but clearly European history of the 20th century, focusing of course on the various dynasties and in particular Queen Victoria’s descendants. Haemophilia and the way the illness is carried from mothers to their offspring is well explained and documented, even for people like me, who are not at all competent in medical knowledge. For the royalty buff this book is a must, of course.
April 1, 2015
I found this a very interesting read - Queen Victoria passed on the haemophilia gene to a number of her children which due to marriages between the royal families of Europe had a huge impact.
The book goes into detail about how the gene is passed on - initially I thought it would dwell on one possibility that Victoria had been fathered by someone other than the Duke of Kent as this is the most sensational option but in fairness it covered gene mutations as well.
As this book is a few years old now, it would be interesting to read an updated version as our understanding of genes is more advanced.
The book goes into detail about how the gene is passed on - initially I thought it would dwell on one possibility that Victoria had been fathered by someone other than the Duke of Kent as this is the most sensational option but in fairness it covered gene mutations as well.
As this book is a few years old now, it would be interesting to read an updated version as our understanding of genes is more advanced.
June 10, 2010
I found the topic interesting but the treatment someone dry.
To describe the murder of the Romanov family and some of the other tragedies contained herein in such a passionless way is certainly the detachment one might expect from a scientist, but perhaps not what yo expect from soeone trying to tell an audience a story
To describe the murder of the Romanov family and some of the other tragedies contained herein in such a passionless way is certainly the detachment one might expect from a scientist, but perhaps not what yo expect from soeone trying to tell an audience a story
February 9, 2017
This book started out well - interesting and informative - but as it progressed it seemed to get more and more off-topic. It's like the authors ran out of things to write about and began including descendents of people related to people who had hemophilia. I found it hard to pay attention to the second half as it wasn't exactly continuing with the topics and themes of the first half of the book.
February 13, 2014
Very interesting book with a lot of information about the royal families and how the introduction of hemophilia gene/disease really impacted the royal families of Europe and as a side affect, the rise and fall of nations. I highly recommend.
May 10, 2012
Brillaint. Loved this book.
July 11, 2012
Fascinating!
November 17, 2013
Dry and drawn out.
May 8, 2024
[2017] This is a short, well written introduction to the science behind Haemophilia (a genetic blood disorder) and how, in particular, it affected the British Royal family from the nineteenth century, a period of time that saw Queen Victoria's descendants spread to occupy thrones around Europe. It is 150 pages and is divided into concise chapters and each explore various themes. The language is clear and it is an easy read, which holds interest and engages you. On the whole, the balance between science and history is right, although there are times when perhaps a lack of historical analysis shows through. There are a couple of factual errors in describing relationships, but they don't detract too much.
There are issues several issues that I thought were slightly amateur in their focus. There is very limited information about how Haemophilia may sometimes just occur as a result of a mutated gene; whilst they acknowledge this, they don't really explain it and seem not to accept it was the explanation in this case. They search for evidence of infidelity on the part of the Duchess of Kent (Queen Victoria's mother) and when they don't find any that doesn't stop them casting doubt on the Queen's paternity. Slightly at odds with the fact that Queen Victoria couldn't look more Hanoverian if she tried! The next much-repeated comment, which grated somewhat, was that which was reflected in the books title 'Queen Victoria's gene.' Do we own our genes or do our genes own us? Are we responsible for our genes? Should we be blamed for our genes? Especially when they go tragically wrong? I thought this was unnecessary and perhaps a tad unkind. They also go off on several 'sensationalist blind alleys'. One is the 'missing daughter of Tsar Nicholas,' could she have escaped? Not entirely sure how this relates to the theme, but it is interesting nonetheless. The book was written in 1995, and of course, all the assassinated Russian Royal family were accounted for by 2007. The book sort of frizzles out toward the end - Haemophilia in Queen Victoria's descendants may still exist it says, but we can't be bothered to research them.
The desperate attempts to link Haemophilia to subsequent events like the Great War, the second World War or the fall of various Monarchies was tenuous at best. I would recommend it as an interesting light-touch history meets science book, but ultimately and quite strangely for two Doctors it lacks understanding and compassion for what is and was then an awful condition with which to live and one that until recently was a life-limiting condition.
There are issues several issues that I thought were slightly amateur in their focus. There is very limited information about how Haemophilia may sometimes just occur as a result of a mutated gene; whilst they acknowledge this, they don't really explain it and seem not to accept it was the explanation in this case. They search for evidence of infidelity on the part of the Duchess of Kent (Queen Victoria's mother) and when they don't find any that doesn't stop them casting doubt on the Queen's paternity. Slightly at odds with the fact that Queen Victoria couldn't look more Hanoverian if she tried! The next much-repeated comment, which grated somewhat, was that which was reflected in the books title 'Queen Victoria's gene.' Do we own our genes or do our genes own us? Are we responsible for our genes? Should we be blamed for our genes? Especially when they go tragically wrong? I thought this was unnecessary and perhaps a tad unkind. They also go off on several 'sensationalist blind alleys'. One is the 'missing daughter of Tsar Nicholas,' could she have escaped? Not entirely sure how this relates to the theme, but it is interesting nonetheless. The book was written in 1995, and of course, all the assassinated Russian Royal family were accounted for by 2007. The book sort of frizzles out toward the end - Haemophilia in Queen Victoria's descendants may still exist it says, but we can't be bothered to research them.
The desperate attempts to link Haemophilia to subsequent events like the Great War, the second World War or the fall of various Monarchies was tenuous at best. I would recommend it as an interesting light-touch history meets science book, but ultimately and quite strangely for two Doctors it lacks understanding and compassion for what is and was then an awful condition with which to live and one that until recently was a life-limiting condition.
February 11, 2019
This is a book which demands more than one reading, and I am in the process of re-reading some of the chapters. It is a fascinating and detailed account of how haemophilia spread from Queen Victoria to many of the monarchies in Europe, with serious consequences in Russia and Spain, to name but two countries affected. It discusses how Victoria may have come to carry the gene, and speculates on whether she was really Edward's daughter, as he was certainly not a carrier. There is also the statistically unlikely chance of a mutation in her own genes, but it does seem more likely to have been the former explanation, which in turn leads to speculation about who would have inherited the throne if Victoria had been shown not to be of Royal Blood. The book rather leaves this question hanging in the air, but this question will probably never be answered. In the section on Russia, the book was written before the bodies of the remaining two of the Tsar's family, Alexei and Maria, were found, and this rather limits the conclusions on that topic (noting that is not the fault of the authors, although an update would be very interesting if this were a possibility). All in all I enjoyed the book and recommend it to anyone interested in Queen Victoria, the last years of the Tsar, or the outbreak of the First World War.
October 9, 2023
Scientifically and historically very interesting.
The historical side, however, required some proofreading as there were a number of inaccuracies.
For instance:
The future Edward VII and Queen Alexandra were married at St George’s Chapel, Windsor, not Westminster Abbey, as stated in the text.
Dmitri Pavlovich is listed as Nicholas II’s nephew when they were first cousins.
There are also inconsistencies regarding Prince Alfonso (son of Victoria Eugenie). In a family tree he is listed as having 2 unnamed sons. It then goes on to say that when he died “he left no family” and yet three pages later “Alfonso left two sons.” (Assuming the internet is correct, he did not have children).
It is also important to remember that there have been developments in the Romanov story since the publication of this book. As the bodies of of the Tsarevich and missing Grand Duchess had not at that time been found there is inevitable speculation as to their survival that would likely not be present in a book written today.
The historical side, however, required some proofreading as there were a number of inaccuracies.
For instance:
The future Edward VII and Queen Alexandra were married at St George’s Chapel, Windsor, not Westminster Abbey, as stated in the text.
Dmitri Pavlovich is listed as Nicholas II’s nephew when they were first cousins.
There are also inconsistencies regarding Prince Alfonso (son of Victoria Eugenie). In a family tree he is listed as having 2 unnamed sons. It then goes on to say that when he died “he left no family” and yet three pages later “Alfonso left two sons.” (Assuming the internet is correct, he did not have children).
It is also important to remember that there have been developments in the Romanov story since the publication of this book. As the bodies of of the Tsarevich and missing Grand Duchess had not at that time been found there is inevitable speculation as to their survival that would likely not be present in a book written today.
March 15, 2019
I am a poet, an artist. My daughter is a PhD genetecist. I find what she does fascinating even though I don't understand it. As a stocking filler she bought me this book from a charity shop. I found this book fascinating. Scientific, but written in such a way that the lay person would enjoy it, be intrigued and learn a lot. I certainly did. It is very well written. As well as the scientific side there is a lot of history within this book. I love hiistory, and to use the word fascinating again, it was fascinating. Thoroughly recommended.
August 2, 2020
An interesting and thought provoking little book, similar to purple secret but it traces hemophilia through the royal families of Europe instead of porphyria. Both books do overlap a bit though, and it’s interesting to see how the theories differ. I especially enjoyed how in depth they went into the family trees, especially in the Spanish royal family. While it was a bit short and I didn’t quite agree with all of the authors’ claims, it clearly tracks the spread of hemophilia and makes interesting arguments for how this one gene could have changed history.
March 2, 2025
This book tells the story of the emergence of hemophilia into the British royal family and its subsequent scattering through the royal families of Europe. One of the books main focuses is perhaps the most well known story, that of Nicholas and Alexandra of Russia and their afflicted son, Alexei. The authors make the supposition that World War I may have been avoided had Alexei not been a hemophiliac. In my mind, one of the best features of this book is the break-down of the way that hemophilia works and its effects on its victim.
April 14, 2022
This started out pretty interesting and the theories about Queen Victoria’s origins were a new spin, but this went into a lot of detail about the Russian royal family that has been covered many times before. There were a few family trees included, and though they were helpful, the sheer number of people included (especially those with the same name) would have been clarified with additional charts or lists. It got a little dry in parts but overall it was a well researched, interesting book.
December 21, 2019
I was really interested in the subject of this book because I have a family history of Hemophila and I knew Queen Victoria was the first known carrier. The beginning of the book with the genealogy was a bit tedious for me. I also found some inconsistencies in some of the facts. But all in all it was an interesting book about the spread of Hemophila in Europe.
February 18, 2023
Quite clearly the person who wrote this book knew nothing about genetics, haemophilia or probability, or they knew and chose to ignore it.
Today with modern treatments for haemophilia 1/3 of new cases are due to a mutation.
This does not prove Queen Victoria is legitimate , but for proof of illegitimacy look elsewhere from haemophilia
Today with modern treatments for haemophilia 1/3 of new cases are due to a mutation.
This does not prove Queen Victoria is legitimate , but for proof of illegitimacy look elsewhere from haemophilia
January 7, 2023
Errores de todo tipo. Especulaciones sin base probatoria. El terraplanismo argumental.
Displaying 1 - 24 of 24 reviews