Talk:Lady Randolph Churchill

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Marriage and Adultery[edit]

It should be noted that Lord Randolph Churchill had contracted the syphillis that killed him at the age of 45 prior to marrying Jennie. This inclines one to believe that "Randy" (as he was ironically known) was not Jack's father, since Jennie would presumably cease having sex with her husband immediately upon discovering that he was syphallitic. Besides, 56 isn't so remarkably old to father a child with a young and fertile woman.

Oh, and what the Churchills were doing in Ireland was that they had to leave England after Randy deeply offended the Prince of Wales by brandishing a stack of the latter's love letters to one of his early mistresses. Dick Kimball (talk) 20:19, 11 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It should be noted that the Halls' always believed there was Iroquois blood in their family.Sometimes it's difficult determining who was Indian or not.The fact that the Hall family admitted it (before it was "trendy" to claim American Indian ancestry) should be taken into consideration. Jennie, in fact looks far more Indian than most celebrities claiming it today.jeanne (talk) 15:20, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I now want to eat my words about Jack Churchill's parentage. Having seen a photo of Jack and Winston together, the family resemblance is so strong that I now doubt that they might have had different fathers. Dick Kimball (talk) 13:16, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It's ironic that despite the wikipedia entry "citing" Anne Sebba's recent biography on Jennie Churchill, this section is riddled with rumors, not fact. It really needs to be cleaned up. NoirFemme (talk) 9:09, 22 December 2008 (UTC)

Jennie's biographers insist that her maternal great-grandfather was an Iroquois Indian. The article keeps trying to downplay this fact. The Hall family themselves admitted it before celebrities started claiming Cherokee grandmothers.--jeanne (talk) 15:51, 1 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Lord Randolph Churchill was the third son of the Duke of Marlborough, not the second son. Dick Kimball (talk) 19:27, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Syphillis: Did Jennie ever show signs of infection with the disease, herself? Apparently her first husband went into long periods of remission, but I'd think he'd be infectious nevertheless (?) Codenamemary (talk) 21:23, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Early Life[edit]

According to her 1969 biography, Lady Randolph Churchill, by her niece, Anita Leslie, Jennette "Jennie" Jerome was the second of Leonard Jerome's three (not four) daughters: Clara, Jennie, and Leonie, in that order. I also definitely think it's worth mentioning that Leonard owned The New York Times. Dick Kimball (talk) 13:16, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

According to Winston Churchill in "My Early Life" His mother Jennette Jerome was born in Rochester, NY not Brooklyn. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 149.69.100.56 (talk) 14:54, 10 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The New York Times in 1899 also claims that Lady Churchill was born in Rochester, though most other sources claim Brooklyn. There is also some confusion over the date. There used to be a link to the Times article in the main article, which has been removed. Some reference to this debate should be included in this article. This site gets at some of the debate: http://www.hmdb.org/marker.asp?marker=18318 as does this book: http://books.google.com/books?id=Zh4t6QtruF8C&pg=PT682&lpg=PT682&dq=Jeanette+Jerome+birth+rochester&source=bl&ots=H2zm9hg04z&sig=jN7Jt25CpJh6kNc0jyhS__48Uhk&hl=en&ei=aw8vTY2ZJcSt8Abm6YDbCQ&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=4&ved=0CCoQ6AEwAw#v=onepage&q&f=false —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.95.126.178 (talk) 14:48, 13 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Winston Churchill[edit]

Given that I would venture to say that her number one claim to fame is her being the mother of Winston Churchill, I think a greater elaboration of her rather dysfunctional relationship with him would be appropriate. 152.15.161.242 (talk) 18:29, 17 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Evidence.[edit]

I Should have thought that some of the more outradious claim made in this article should be presented alongside some for of evidence before posted in Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 192.114.91.226 (talk) 16:03, 1 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What are these "outradious" (normally spelt "outrageous", btw) claims to which you refer? -- Jack of Oz ... speak! ... 21:29, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Birthplace[edit]

There seems to be some dispute over Lady Randolph's birthplace. In her autobiography, she clearly states she was born in Brooklyn. Blake McKelvey's Rochester: A Panoramic History (ISBN 978-1892724243) indicates that there has been some confusion over the years: "A tradition, confusing Jenny with one of her cousins, that she had been born in Rochester and attended school here (though refuted in her autobiography) was widely enough held to persuade the University of Rochester to confer an LL.D. on Winston in 1942."

On the other hand, Leonard Jerome, Jennie's father, is said in the same book to have moved to Brooklyn in 1856, which is two years after this article indicates she was born. If that's true, then she was born in Rochester but not schooled there, which fits with the quoted sentence but flatly contradicts Jennie's own autobiography.

I think we can agree she was raised and schooled in Brooklyn; if she ever lived in Rochester, it was likely for less than three years. But on the question of whether she was born in Rochester, I'm not sure how to resolve it.

Thoughts? -- Powers T 20:51, 16 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Date of death: 9 June or 29 June?[edit]

We currently say 9 June, as do most of the other interlang WPs, and various external sources.

But there seems substantial evidence she died on 29 June, including:

I'm inclined to change it to 29 June, but the number of opposing sources is substantial enough for me to raise the matter here first for comment and discussion. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 13:16, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Anyone? -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 09:15, 26 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Here's something interesting: In the spring of 1921, Churchill had just returned from Italy and accepted an invitation to visit her friend, Lady Frances Horner, at Mells Manor in Glastonbury. Sporting a pair of new Italian shoes, she was descending the stairs to go down to tea, when she slipped and fell, breaking her ankle on both sides. Gangrene set in and her leg was amputated above the knee on June 10. ... Then on June 28, 1921, suddenly without warning, a main artery burst and Jennie slipped into a coma, dying later that day..[1]
The 28 June date also appears here.
It seems very clear she couldn't have died as early as 9 June if her leg wasn't even amputated till 10 June. And very clear from the 3 sites cited above that she died in late June, the only real question now being whether it was 28 June or 29 June.
Then there's this site, that says she died "on the morning of 29 June".
It's odd to come across refs like the following, which seem to be completely unaware her leg was amputated: In June 1921 Jennie slipped on the stairs and broke her ankle, then on the 29th June, recovering in bed, she called the nurse to say her hot water bottle had burst. The nurse pulled back the bed clothes to check and saw signs of a haemorrhage. Jennie died almost immediately. - [2].
So, I propose for the moment to change 9 June to 29 June. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 09:28, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]
29 June is cited in several sources, including the 1974 biography by Peregrine Churchill and Julian Mitchell. They cite a letter to Jennie from her last husband, Montague Porch, dated June 27, which she is reported to have read on June 28, the day before her death. Mary S. Lovell's recent, The Churchills, (2011) also has the same dates, although strangely, Martin Gilbert's one-volume life of Churchill has the 26th (not sure about the multi-volume official biography). Incidently, when time permits, and assuming it is not considered too irrelevant a detail, I want to mention in the article that Jennie's piano teacher at one stage was Stephen Heller, a friend of Chopin, who according to Lovell believed that Jennie could have developed her playing to 'concert standard' with the necessary hard work . As is well known, Jennie was a highly accomplished amateur pianist. Welham66 (talk) 14:57, 14 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Lady Randolph's Lovers[edit]

I've removed the unreferenced claim that one of Lady Randolph's lovers was King Milan I of Serbia and added another lover who at least is cited in Manchester. I simply don't have a reputable source to hand that cites King Milan. If anyone does, please add him him back, although I think the three lovers cited is an adequate sample. Welham66 (talk) 13:07, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Try these sources about Lady Randolph & King Milan Churchill College Cambridge Acquired Papers. Letters to Lady Randolph Churchill from various correspondents. 1. http://www-archives.chu.cam.ac.uk/perl/node?a=a;reference=CHAR%2028%2F54%2F34 "Telegram from Milan [King of Serbia](Belgrade [Serbia]) to Lady Randolph [Churchill]. Torn in half. 1895" 2. http://www-archives.chu.cam.ac.uk/perl/node?a=a;reference=CHAR%2028%2F54%2F35 "Telegram from Milan [King of Serbia](Regent Street [London]) to Lady Randolph [Churchill] wishing her a happy new year. 1895" 3. http://www-archives.chu.cam.ac.uk/perl/node?a=a;reference=CHAR%2028%2F59%2F19 Telegram from [King] Milan [of Serbia] (Paris [France]) to Lady Randolph Churchill expressing sympathy [on the death of Lord Randolph Churchill]. 4. http://www-archives.chu.cam.ac.uk/perl/node?a=a;reference=CHAR%2028%2F101%2F20-22 a dinner hosted by Milan [King of Serbia] for Clara [Frewen, earlier Clara Jerome]; 5. Google Books: The Titled Americans http://books.google.rs/books?id=YY-xRA4qOekC&pg=PA446&lpg=PA446&dq=Lady+Randolph+Churchill+serbian+king+milan&source=bl&ots=GyAcMoLUEs&sig=6OgQvLs67rzMD_shcLHH6yFtDVE&hl=en&sa=X&ei=hr4zUf65HoPUtQbN4YCIDQ&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=king%20milan&f=false — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.101.189.78 (talk) 21:23, 3 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Montague or Montagu Phippen Porch?[edit]

I'm not sure which sources to rely upon on the issue of the spelling of Montague or Montagu Phippen Porch. Another editor corrected from the former to the latter recently. I had adopted the spelling in Mary Lovell's 2011 book about The Churchills. I assumed I must be in error when I checked that 'Montagu' is indeed the spelling in sources such as Martin Gilbert and William Manchester. Then, I checked around the web. On this site we have the article Robert Porch where the 'e' is used, documented by a genealogical site link. Another genealogical site, which looks reputable, also includes the 'e': http://www.thepeerage.com/p10620.htm#i106195 There appear to be reputable sources for both spellings. Can anybody help or suggest a solution? Welham66 (talk) 13:15, 27 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I'm going to have to answer my own question here because the issue of Montague or Montagu has been bothering me for the last day or so. I've found some time to do some deeper digging. The renowned genealogist Arthur Charles Fox-Davies, in his 'Armorial Families: A directory of gentlemen of coat-armour Vol. 2, Here, has Montagu. So does the British Government National Archives, in its catalogue entry for the British Army 'medal card' of Porch, Montagu P, Intelligence Officer, Attached Nigeria Regiment Here These authorities, plus authors of the reputation of William Manchester and Martin Gilbert are unlikely to be wrong. If you look at the web, by my estimate at least half of the references to Porch I've stumbled across over a sample of 50 or so, use 'Montague'. I suspect it is simply because the misspelling is such an understandable one and once it becomes embedded in so many popular genealogy sites, it goes viral, with no disrespect to these interesting sites intended. Thanks to JamesD'Alexander for correcting the article on this point. Welham66 (talk) 14:41, 28 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Legacy[edit]

Apparently, her entire "legacy", apart from being the mother of Winston Churchill, is that she named a drink. And that story has been debunked as impossible. Therefore, I recommend that this entire article be deleted as this person is not noteworthy, and does not meet the Wikipedia standard for noteworthy persons. She did nothing in her lifetime that would merit an article in Wikipedia. 98.194.39.86 (talk) 10:18, 26 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Absurd suggestion! Mother of Sir Winston makes her very notable, along with much else.--Dthomsen8 (talk) 18:13, 21 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]
One major problem is that this article is structured far too heavily on her personal life, which obscures her achievements aside from marrying and birthing famous people. There have literally been books written about Lady Churchill yet this article makes the briefest mentions (if at all) of her as a playwright, philanthropist, artist, etc. I suspect the editors have been too strongly influenced by snippets of Lady Churchill found in her son's numerous biographies. We need better coverage from works that focus on Lady Churchill herself. Its lazy to leave a list of books in "Further reading" without actually using any of their content. --Animalparty! (talk) 22:48, 5 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lady Randolph Churchill. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:18, 9 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Name[edit]

According to Lady Randolph's biographical entry on Encyclopaedia Britannica , her name was given as "Jeanette", and was later abbreviated to "Jennie". For further information check out this link: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Jennie-Jerome-Churchill.

Thus, based on the information provided by that biographical entry, I believe it is right to refer to Lady Randolph as "Jeanette". However, it could be argued that she was known throughout her life as "Jennie". So I suggest that Lady Randolph's original name (Jeanette) be mentioned on the Wikipedia page that is referring to her and not be wholly omitted, as is now the case. A solution for that matter could be that we mention once that her original name was "Jeanette Jerome", but she was commonly known as "Jennie Jerome", in order to provide better information. So, the best solution for me would be that Lady Randolph's name written in bold letters at the beginning of the article be "Jeanette (Jennie), Lady Randolph Spencer-Churchill", (née Jeanette (Jennie) Jerome). Yours sincerely. DukeofCleveland DukeofCleveland (talk) 22:27, 29 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DukeofCleveland. Except that, without trying to be pedantic, 'later abbreviated to "Jennie"' is not what Britannica says; it merely says she was 'née Jeanette Jerome' while naming her (well, naming the article) 'Jennie Jerome Churchill', which is similar, but not actually the same. Since there is a specific note and reference given in the article which strongly implies that Jennie was the name, not Jeanette, unless we have a specific reference ~ ideally one which addresses the marriage certificate itself, so we don't engage in our own research/assumptions ~ i suggest we leave the name as Jennie. Happy days, LindsayHello 12:26, 3 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

"impecuniosity"?[edit]

She was poor after the death of Lord Randolph??? 72.49.111.86 (talk) 13:08, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's all relative, I expect. Some people then thought they were poor if they only had 3 servants. Johnbod (talk) 15:37, 21 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Mistress of Edward VII"?[edit]

I’ve heard mention she may have been a mistress of Edward VII, and she is even placed in a Wikipedia category of such mistresses. Yet no mention of it is made in the article. SecretName101 (talk) 06:42, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Quite right; well spotted. I've removed the category as, according to the requirements at WP:CAAP, it does not belong; even Edward VII says Letters written by Edward to Lady Randolph may have "signified no more than a flirtation" but were "[w]ritten in a strain of undue familiarity", implying there is no certainty about it. If at some point an RS making it clear she was a member of the category appears, and if we subsequently add the information to the article, i would think it would be appropriate; otherwise, surely not. Happy days, ~ LindsayHello 12:17, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lady_Randolph_Churchill&oldid=1192955245"