Jump to content

Talk:Lillie Langtry/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Copyrighted text?

A large portion of this entry is a direct cut-and-paste from the "History of the Langtry Manor" section of the Langrty Manor homepage (http://www.langtrymanor.co.uk/history.htm). The Langtry Manor text is copyrighted and no permission from the owners is seen.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 131.25.245.4 (talk) 16:59, 18 November 2004 (UTC)

"This text is reprinted here with permission of the Howard Family" at the bottom seems pretty explicit. It ought to be rewritten in a "more encyclopedic" style, but until we get a letter from the owners to the effect that the permission statement in the article is erroneous, I don't we need to worry about it. Stan 05:05, 19 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Might it be an idea to move the Langtry Manor text to Langtry Manor? It is rather more about the history of the house than the life and works of Lillie herself. Man vyi 14:32, Nov 19, 2004 (UTC)

Frederick Gebhardt

Wasn't Lillie married to Frederick Gebhardt after Edward? 86.25.60.178 (talk) 15:21, 25 April 2009 (UTC).

No, she did not divorce Edward Langtry until after Gebhardt had diedAnthonyCamp (talk) 18:00, 28 April 2009 (UTC).

Claret

How can she have produced claret (i.e., Bordeaux) in California? 62.25.106.209 18:26, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

The article on claret says "The name Claret is occasionally used in the United States as a semi-generic label for any red wine in a style similar to that of Bordeaux." I suspect this was more often done in the past than it is now, so I've changed it to "red wine". William Avery 19:06, 17 January 2007 (UTC)
and Monty Python says "a bordeaux IS a claret" so that decides it.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 02:56, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Parentage of child

Hasn't anyone done DNA analysis of Langtry's grandchildren? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.21.92.10 (talk) 18:48, 21 November 2011 (UTC)

Just a note to say I've removed the link to Arthur Jones as I was not sure it was right (it was linking to an American inventor, and then a cricketer).jguk 17:31, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)

Dartmouth

Langtry is reputed to have been installed in Dartmouth in Warfleet Lodge by Ed VII for assignations. These were alleged to be very secret, thus rather hard to cite and prove. There is some supposition at http://dartmouthmuseum.org/collections/picture-archive/c/c0405.html but nothing citable. The reason for this message is to alert those interested in this article that there may be another facet to research. Fiddle Faddle (talk) 20:23, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

White Ladye

Bit of "work in progress" on this topic at the moment. Some photos yet to come from Lloyd's Yacht Register. I have to get these from Southampton Library maritime section in the next few weeks - February 2013. -Sidpickle (talk) 20:55, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Who song

Regarding the Lilly Langtry section on her cultural influences Wikipedia doesn't refer to the Who song "Pictures of Lilly" which is a song about a boy's obession with a picture of Lilly Langtry given to him by his dad. The boy's becomes so obessed with the picture he asks his dad if he can meet her and the dad states it is impossible because she has been dead since 1929. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.169.211.130 (talk) 23:39, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Mentioned in the penultimate paragraph of the section Lillie_Langtry#Cultural_influence_and_portrayals. William Avery (talk) 23:45, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Acting career

I'm trying to extend section on her acting career as this was such a large part of her life. -Sidpickle (talk) 19:37, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

I've removed the link to the Langtry Manor page at the moment as to be quite honest the article is better worded the way it was previously and the link isn't really needed. I'm also going to try and check history of the Langtry Manor article as I can't help but, wonder whether one with better content previously existed and was removed. I find it hard to believe that the article could be referenced over 3 years ago and was never created in the meantime. I think if we are to put the link back in than the article should maintain its current wording but, with the link added. Thanks. Jasynnash2 (talk) 14:55, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

A previous version was deleted as a copyvio. See http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Log&page=Langtry_Manor William Avery (talk) 16:45, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
I have provided a new article about Langtry Manor. There is no evidence whatever that the Prince of Wales or Lillie Langtry even went or stayed there let alone built it. AnthonyCamp (talk) 15:59, 9 June 2015 (UTC).

A timeline

There's a timeline of Langtry's life at the bottom of this page (do Control+F historical background to find it) [1]. By the way I'm only talking about that timeline, as the rest of the webpage is the plot summary of the bio-pic miniseries Lillie, which is fictionalized and not entirely accurate. Softlavender (talk) 07:15, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

The timeline repeats the fable that the couple had a connection with the Red House at Bournemouth. There is no evidence of any such connection. Many of the stories about this very sad lady are grossly exaggerated. AnthonyCamp (talk) 09:28, 23 December 2015 (UTC).
Oops, thanks for pointing that out. Readers should ignore that fable. It doesn't even fit into the actual timeframe of their relationship (which is noted therein)! Softlavender (talk) 10:16, 23 December 2015 (UTC)

Suggest deletion of portion

This seems a rather lengthy digression for an article about Lillie Langtry. It is not the place for the house history, especially as the Berkeley family history appears to be covered in his own article. I recommend that this material be deleted here. "During the early years of the 19th century Woodend had been owned by Sir George Cranfield Berkeley (1753-1818). He married Emilia Charlotte Lennox, a grand-daughter of the 2nd Duke of Richmond. Their daughter, Louisa Emily Anne, married Sir Thomas Hardy, 1st Baronet, who commanded HMS Victory at the Battle of Trafalgar. After Hardy’s death in 1839, Louisa remarried to Lord Charles Ellis, 1st Baron Seaford, and they lived at Woodend until his death in 1845.[1]— Preceding unsigned comment added by Parkwells (talk • contribs) 14:45, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Beckett, J. V. (1994). The Rise and Fall of the Grenvilles: Dukes of Buckingham and Chandos, 1710 to 1921. Manchester University Press. p. 104. Retrieved 3 April 2016.

Where was she born?

Can we say plainly and somewhere near the front where Miss Langtry was born? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.157.67.12 (talk) 19:35, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Date style – British or American?

While Langtry did travel and perform in the United States (and gained citizenship in 1897), she was there only a very small part of her life. She was clearly British and never relinquished her British citizenship, returning fairly quickly to Britain and then at th very end of her life to Monaco as a British citizen. Logically it would seem this article should use British date styles, spelling etc. Softlavender (talk) 16:30, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Prince Leopold

"Then Mr Miles came and begged me to sit for my portrait. I consented, and when the portrait was finished he sold it to Prince Leopold."

This is presumably Prince Leopold, Duke of Albany (1853–1884), but could conceivably be Prince Leopold of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (1824–1884) or Leopold, Prince of Hohenzollern (1835–1905) or Prince Leopold of Bavaria (1846–1930). Is it known for sure which? —Tamfang (talk) 20:22, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

Undoubtedly Prince Leopold, Duke of Albany, Lillie Langtry's first friend in the Royal Family; he was in the studio and watched Miles drawing her; he hung the portrait over his bed until Queen Victoria removed it. See Charlotte Zeepvat, "Prince Leopold: the untold story of Queen Victoria's youngest son" (Sutton Publishing, 1998) pages 139, 158, 162.AnthonyCamp (talk) 21:01, 14 December 2016 (UTC).

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Lillie Langtry. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 22:01, 15 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Lillie Langtry. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 00:42, 20 May 2017 (UTC)

Husband's attitude

Why were they together so long when his wife was such a slut? Are there any historical studies or contemporary records that discuss this? 65.89.68.24 (talk) 12:15, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

In Victorian and Edwardian times, a beautiful married woman who took high-born lovers was not considered a slut, but a stud who happened to be a female. Lillie Langtry's beauty and fame, and the fact that her paramours were usually aristocrats, protected her from ordinary moral judgments. Another example is Mrs. Trefusis, a longtime mistress of Prince Edward VII. She occupied the highest level of society, and often hobnobbed with Edward's wife, Princess Alexandra. The husbands were not only complacent, they were often complicit. Younggoldchip (talk) 16:04, 18 March 2018 (UTC)

Husband's madness and death

Edward Langty died in the Chester Mental Asylum, it's site is now part of the Countess of Chester. He is buried in an inauspicious grave in Overleigh Cemetery. Here is a reference [2] . Maybe some of the details could be worked into the article.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.169.5.36 (talk) 19:47, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Images recently deleted

Images that were removed from the article on 11 February 2020 by User:Animalparty. Reason given: removed frivolous extraneous images that make this look like a fan's scrap book, not an encyclopedic article

  • De Bathe property sale 1919 – Sussex properties
    De Bathe property sale 1919 – Sussex properties
  • De Bathe property sale 1919 Woodend details
    De Bathe property sale 1919 Woodend details
  • De Bathe property sale 1919 Woodend photograph
    De Bathe property sale 1919 Woodend photograph
  • De Bathe property sale 1919 Hollandsfield details
    De Bathe property sale 1919 Hollandsfield details
  • De Bathe property sale 1919 Hollandsfield photograph
    De Bathe property sale 1919 Hollandsfield photograph

Images that were removed from the article on 11 February 2020 by User:Animalparty. Reason given: removed more primary source images: not relevant for a general encyclopedia

  • Lloyd's yacht register Lord Asburton
    Lloyd's yacht register Lord Asburton
  • Lloyd's yacht register Lillie Langtry
    Lloyd's yacht register Lillie Langtry

Any opinions on them being removed them from the Lillie Langtry article? If not these images will be removed from this Talk page after four weeks.

Sidpickle (talk) 10:06, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Sid and Nancy

According to a line in the movie 'Sid and Nancy', Lilly Langtry stayed at the Chelsea Hotel in New York City. Any confirmation of this? Zweifel (talk) 10:42, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

According to the Famous Hotels Org. site, Lillie Langtry did stay at the Chelsea Hotel (Manhattan/New York City). No dates and/or length of stays given.
Source: https://famoushotels.org/news/the-infamous-chelsea-hotel-the-iconic-artist-hideaway Inspector Colombo (talk) 16:27, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

Caesar

Does anyone have details of Edward VII's dog Caesar? Some references seem to think Princess Alexander gave Caesar to Lillie but the is difficult to verify. Caesar led the mourners at Edward funeral, following the gun carrage that carried the coffin. -Sidpickle (talk) 19:32, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

I don't but Wikipedia does. Looks like "Caesar" stayed with Queen Alexandra. More details about it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesar_(dog) Inspector Colombo (talk) 01:56, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

Lillie Langtry and Hampstead

Is there any direct contemporary evidence that Lillie Langtry lived in Alexandra Road, Hampstead? Her cousin the well known Hampstead politician Philip Hemery Le Breton (1806-1884) is said in the Victoria County History for Middlesex, vol. 9, pages 60-63, to have lived at Leighton House [No 103] in Alexandra Road in the 1870s. Lillie is there, said to have been another inhabitant. However, it seems from his other known addresses that Philip was only here for a very short time. The London Encyclopaedia, edited by Ben Weinreb and Christopher Hibbert (1983) page 16, says that Lillie lived here "behind a high brick wall at Leighton House" which (now that other details of her biography have been established in some detail) seems most unlikely. Perhaps she visited her cousin when he was here, but again evidence seems lacking. The eastern end of Alexandra Road was named Langtry Road in 1967. AnthonyCamp (talk) 11:00, 11 June 2017 (UTC).

Inspector Colombo: Two bytes worth considering: (1) "... while the rest of the estate was 'well-to-do, middle-class'. (fn. 26) Inhabitants included Lillie Langtry, a cousin of the local politician Philip Le Breton, who lived in Leighton House in Alexandra Road in the 1870s, the Harmsworth family at no. 94 Boundary Road from 1874 to 1888, and Herbert Spencer, the philosopher, at no. 64 Avenue Road from 1889 to 1897. (fn. 27) Samuel Palmer, of the biscuit firm, lived at no. 40 College Crescent, a large house called Northcourt built in 1881. (fn. 28) Source: https://www.british-history.ac.uk/vch/middx/vol9/pp60-63#anchorn26 (2) Now, when you check the reference in the quote above (fn.26) you will realize the source (of this information which includes the reference to Lillie) could date back to 1889 (...)

A. Camp: Lillie Langtry did not meet the Prince of Wales until the dinner given by Sir Allen Young on 24 May 1877. What one needs in this connection are a few more facts and far less speculation and wild imagining. AnthonyCamp (talk) 09:08, 11 July 2020 (UTC).

Inspector Colombo: In my reply to Mr. Camp (below) I was referring to an early comment (investigation leads really) which I unfortunately deleted when updating the two above points - and earlier points (mine) had become irrelevant as my investigation went on. Reply: Are you saying that the date of 24 May 1877 is incompatible? Incompatible with 103 Alexandra Road? With Lillie staying there now and then for short or longer periods, sometime between 1877-1880? Look at these as "working hypotheses" - based on common sense and the mores of the time. Who knows if the dots were accidentally joined?

LATER ADDENDA

Inspector Colombo: The main section's recent addition does not provide conclusive evidence (or bona fide sources) that Electra Yaras, Adrienne Corri et al, invented such a story for their own ends.

Electra may have been telling a story she had heard from others (adding to it her paranormal experiences). Lillie's name or that of her cousin Philip Le Breton needed not to be in any register. Please read on (Laura Beattie's admonition below).

Also, Anita Leslie ("The Marlborough House Set") was likely to have had her own bona fide sources. Her great aunt was Winston Churchill's mother Jennie, said to have had (or "not have had") an affair with the king. I don't see her book having to rely on the Evening Standard's 1965 feature, for a description of Leghton House. It was more likely that it was the other way around. The way I see it, this is the problem with an Occam's Razor approach, which is vaguely reminiscent of Procrustes approach! Ref. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Procrustes

Also, let us not forget Laura Beattie's admonition, "Lillie was a master at covering her tracks. Like all of her generation who availed themselves of the fin de siècle loosening of morals, she was fanatically discrete" (adding) "important people like the Prince of Wales and the Marquess of Hartington had private secretaries who were responsible for their good character" ("Lillie Langtry: Manners, Masks and Morals").

The other detail is...

Where is the evidence that Leighton House was named after Leighton Buzzard (Bedfordshire) or for that matter that Samuel Litchfield's wife was from there? Sources? The author's blog? The Camden New Journal? No details are given in either. Probably there is evidence, except the researchers are not telling us. Also, the idea that those high walls (Leighton House) were common is not computing. Not from the photo they provide of old Alexandra Road (...)

This is not a thorough approach to research. It brings us back to what Max Arthur, OBE ("Lost Voices of the Edwardians") said: "There is often no stronger proof than rumour concerning historical anecdotes and speculation - and often no stronger proof is needed".

The investigation goes on.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Inspector Colombo (talk • contribs) 18:31, 6 June 2021 (UTC)

A. Camp: If you confine your investigation to 103 Alexandra Road (in the period when Lillie Langtry was supposed to be living there) you will soon see that the man who built it, Samuel Litchfield (1819-1894), a dealer in antique furniture, had for some years (as the London Post Office directories show) premises at 19 Green Street, Leicester Square, and at 28-30 Hanway Street, Oxford Street. He had married at St Marylebone in 1846 Catherine Helen Collings (1817-1885) and in 1861 the census tells us that he was living at 26 Belsize Road, Hampstead, and that his wife and his mother-in-law (who was living with them), were born at Leighton Buzzard. The City of Westminster Polls show that he voted in respect of the Green Street property as from 103 Alexandra Road from 1873 to 1875 but in 1876 moved to Coppins, Iver, Buckinghamshire, where he lived until 1881 when he moved to Cheshunt, Hertfordshire.

Inspector Colombo: Most the information you provide here is superflous. The only relevant byte was that about Samuel Litchfield - namely that in "1876 he moved to Coppins, Ive!". What you are telling us is that those polls place him there between 1873-1875 ONLY - and what we are after here IS: who stayed there on-and-off between 1877-1880? That is the question!

A. Camp (continued): No 103 was taken by William George Strickland, a master tailor, who in 1871 had lived at 71 Boundary Road, Hampstead, and employed some 30 hands. The 1881 Census of No 103 shows him and his family and two servants occupying the whole house with Thomas Harden, a gardener, his wife and a son who was a groom, also there. Strickland died at 32 Priory Road, Kilburn, in 1891, and by 1884 the Directories shown that No 103 was occupied by Alfred Savill. Samuel Mayne Frankstein, an oil merchant and dry salter, was there in 1891, and it seems that the house remained a single family residence until 1945 when its lease for twelve and a half years, with vacant possession, was auctioned, and its furniture sold on 20 June 1945 [the details appear in the Marylebone Mercury for 26 May and 2 June 1945]. Presumably this was the lease that Mrs Yaras bought. Thereafter, the house, which had twelve or so main rooms, was sub-divided, the Electoral Registers showing Electra and Romuald Yaras there with about ten other couples from 1956 onwards. The publicity given to the house in newspapers in 1971 (The Times on 8 October 1871 and the Daily Telegraph on 9 October 1971) gave ample information to Anita Leslie for her book, which came out the following year. AnthonyCamp (talk) 15:27, 8 June 2021 (UTC).

Inspector Colombo: Again, too much irrelevant information. What you are NOT telling us, IS the year William George Strickland took over 103 Alexandra Road. All you are telling us (or those records are telling you) is that he and his family are on voting records for 1881 - repeat 1881 - in connection with 103 Alexandra Road AND that Samuel Litchfield left 103 Alexandra Road in 1875-76 (as per Census and London Post Office Records).

BUT what did those records tell you about the "critical period between 1877-1880? Nothing? That is the question and you know that.

Just one aside in connection with Leighton Buzzard and Leighton House, if I may - a bit of lateral thinking I am inclined to agree with but, by the same token, I have to pose this question to you: Did you know there is a place in Leighton Buzzard named "Langtry Court"? What should we make of it? Any suggestions? Source (several): https://www.zoopla.co.uk/property/uprn/10002271577/

TO SUMMARIZE:

(1) Litchfield (assuming the data you collecteItalic textd is correct) left 103 Alexandra Road in 1875 (-76 at the most). (2) The Prince's affair with Lillie, as you point out, was between 1877-1880 at the most. (3) NOW, was Strickland - the master tailor - already living at 103 Alexandra Road in that period (1877-1880)? According to your records Litchfield left in 1875 (-76 at the most) and Strickland does not appear on record as living there until 1881. So I must infer that you don't know and/or that those registers are not telling you either. Correct?

THE QUESTIONs REMAIN:

(a) Was Strickland living at 103 Alexandra Road between 1877-1880? (b) YES or NO? (c) And if NO - then WHO? (d) And if YES - what evidence do you have, such was the case? Checkable sources with links, please. Thank you.

I need not remind you that "Important people like the Prince of Wales and the Marquess of Hartington had private secretaries who were responsible for their good character" (Laura Beattie's in "Lillie Langtry: Manners, Masks and Morals"). I suspect that "reputation management" in those days could take many forms, "special arrangements" (with master tailors if necessary particularly those from Savile Row); erasing and falsifying records (if needed be) - particularly when you consider the parties involved! A future king, on the one hand, and a lady whose cousin was the MP for the Hampstead area, on the other (...) Lateral thinking is of the essence! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inspector Colombo (talk • contribs) 01:46, 13 February 2023 (UTC)

You ask where Lillie Langtry was between 1878 and 1880. There is no mystery about that and the details appear in Laura Beatty's 1999 book. Lillie and her husband leased 17 Norfolk Street, Park Lane, early in 1878 (a small house with a tiny staff) and gave it up in October 1880. Her husband was hardly ever there except in the early days and Lillie used his absences to entertain a variety of gentlemen including Arthur Jones, the Prince of Wales and Lord Shrewsbury. She sometimes muddled her afternoon callers and Wilfrid Scawen Blunt's diary (quoted by Beatty, page 165) noted that on one occasion the Prince came and was not pleased to find Shrewsbury there. There was obviously no need for her to go anywhere else. AnthonyCamp (talk) 16:21, 18 February 2023 (UTC).

THAT WAS NOT THE QUESTION
Welcome back Sir! I am afraid you're evading the question! Again ...
The question was NOT where Lillie Langtry matrimonial home was between 1877 and 1880.
Everyone, who has researched the subject, knows that was in Mayfair - or more precisely at 17, Norfolk Street - now 19, Dunraven Street - and before that in Eaton Place, in nearby Belgravia.
The question was (and I made this very clear) whether Mr. Strickland - the master tailor from Mayfair - was living at 103 Alexandra Road between 1877-1880, as you have lead Wikipedia readers to believe. Simple.
POINT REMINDERS
This is what you wrote in the main page:
"No 103 (Alexandra Road) was taken (in 1876) by William George Strickland, a master tailor (evidence?) The 1881 Census of No 103 shows him and his family and two servants occupying the whole house." (quote)
I am afraid that one census document alone (for 1881) which you mentioned, does not prove Mr. Strickland and family were living at Leighton House in 1876, 1877, 1878, 1879, 1880, does it?
Do you have any other bona fide document proving that Mr. Strickland bought the lease of the place from Mr. Litchfield in 1876?
Interesting to note that those Kilburn 'storians you took under your wing, seem to have made the same jump to conclusions. I guess that's the problem with the athletic approach to problem-solving! Here is a quote from them:
"Using a variety of sources, such as the census, rate books, and electoral registers, we have looked at ALL the people who lived at Leighton House between 1870 and 1907."
They looked at "ALL the people"? Really! That's impressive! "ALL the people"! And they credit you for it. How nice of them. I can only hope the Media outlets who wrote about their scoop credited them too. Their fiction was gripping.
"We would like to thank Anthony Camp MBE, the former director of the Society of Genealogists, for his help and information about Lillie Langtry."- wrote the Kilburn 'storians.
THE SOG
You were a director of the SOG? And an MBE at that! Mamma mia!
Adrienne Corri - the talented actress you cast as a fictile character in your version of events - was also a member of the SOG! And an Art expert at that! Which for the purpose of our investigation, counts more than an MBE. No disrespect intended.
Incidentally, if I remember correctly, she had a few words to say about your society in general, and you in particular. This was in a book she wrote in 1984 entitled ... let me think ... "The Search for Gainsborough"! That's it!
Where did I put it?
Aspettare!
I found it! Here it is!
Page 58!
On her diary for June 13th 1978 Adrienne wrote and I quote:
"I have joined the Society of Genealogists in South Kensington, a glorious muddle of information and confusion...there is a certain amount of upmanship from the staff...Mr. A.J. Camp the expert on wills, thinks I am an idiot and shows it. I am determined to prove him wrong".
Which she proceeded to do with great aplomb. Never underestimate a refined lateral thinker with investigative skills (...)
Something just occurred to me! You don't hold a grudge against her, do you Sir? Just asking ...
I particularly liked that later paragraph (p.262) in which she wrote:
"To make an honest mistake is not the end of the world, but to have lost the wish to find the truth, or to deny it because it is not your truth, is bigotry." (Adrienne Corri)
THE DECONSTRUCTION OF SOME OF YOUR ASSUMPTIONs CONCERNING 17, NORFOLK STREET
Quite frankly, I didn't expect a pro who tends to rely on census, rate books, electoral registers, lease records, London post office directories, birth/death certificates and such paraphernalia, to try to prove - or evade a point - by collating, and then elaborating, a few details from a book! Including details that pertain to 1880 or thereabouts! Prego!
Let's examine some of these fallacies, shall we?
1) You state that "her (Lillie's) husband (Edward) was hardly ever there except in the early days" (Norfolk Street that is, no mention of Eaton Place). Except in the early days? How early?
Perhaps you meant early years - unless you were referring to the first few days she and her husband moved in 1878? First few weeks, say. I am sure you meant "early years". Right?
2) Then, Sir, you go into what you might call "wild-imagining" mode (not to be confused with lateral thinking!) and try to convince us that "Lillie used her husband's absences ("he was hardly there" you wrote) to entertain a VARIETY of gentlemen including Arthur Jones, the Prince of Wales and Lord Shrewsbury" (sic). Did you forget to include the bailiffs?
3) You are entitled to your own hypothesis, but "a variety of gentlemen?" That sounds like an overgeneralization, Sir, does it not? Quite a jump to conclusions ...
Looks like you have ignored a statement by the author (Laura Beattie) - on the same page - that says: "There is no further mention of elopement in her correspondence". Apparently there was just one and that dated to early 1880 (...)
4) I am familiar with Laura Beattie's work and the names you throw in to support your fallacy, but are you asking Wikipedia's readers to believe that at the height of the Victorian Age, Lillie was having trysts with gentlemen (inc. the PoW) in her own marital home in Norfolk Street? With resident staff? In Mayfair, of all places? That beggars belief!
Moreover! All these comings and goings taking place at a time when "the Prince was keenly spied on by the new society papers such as "Truth", "Vanity Fair" and the "World"? Which were competing for royal scoops and syndicating their scoops to the provincial press"? (Prof. Jane Ridley). No one with a modicum of common sense will believe that. Sorry.
5) Also, it is interesting to note that on the same page (p.165) Beattie refers to Scawen Blunt maliciousness in relation to Lillie, yet you seem to rely on him as a reputable source. The end justify the means, I guess.
6) Let me (politely) remind you, if I may, of what Laura Beattie writes at the very beginning of the book you quote (p.9) - perhaps to absolve herself later ...
"The sources are scarce...she (Lillie) was fanatically discreet...important people like the Prince of Wales and the Marquess of Hartington had private secretaries who were responsible for their good character...Lillie did not have the services of secretaries (reputation managers as such). She did it herself... Lillie was a master at covering her tracks".
7. Please reflect on Laura Beattie's expert statements above - not to mention Prof. Jane Ridley's - and then, when you're ready, confirm (if possible) whether Mr. Strickland - the master tailor from Mayfair - was living at 103 Alexandra Road between 1877-1880? Please add any bona fide evidence to support it if you have.
Grazie tanti!
THE BOTTOM LINE IS:
If you are unable to provide an answer for Mr. George Strickland charade (and provide bona fide evidence to support it) then we have to assume that you jumped to conclusions - in which case your mainstream argument loses its credibility, and Lillie Langtry's page must be amended accordingly. Wikipedia's principles must be upheld!
Inspector Colombo (talk) 16:44, 30 April 2023 (UTC) NEXT EPISODE : A LIST OF FALSE STATEMENTS AND ERRONEOUS ASSUMPTIONS
The number of such instances is increasing as my investigation proceeds.
Incidentally, I am learning a lot from Adrienne Corri's approach. She is a natural! They don't work like this in the LAPD! Nor do they in Kilburn, I assume! Inspector Colombo (talk) 23:51, 4 March 2023 (UTC).

I am sorry that this talk page, designed to discuss improvements to the article and in which good faith is assumed and personal attacks are avoided, has descended into a tirade of invective which adds nothing to the points at issue. The local historians have shown that no evidence cane be found that Lillie Langtry ever lived at 103 Alexandra Road (Leighton House), Hampstead, or ever visited the house, in the years 1877-1880 when she was involved in an affair with the Prince of Wales. The yearly City of Westminster Polls, already cited and available online, show that the house was occupied by Samuel Litchfield from 1873 to 1876 (when the entry was struck through and Coppins, Iver, Bucks, inserted) and then yearly from 1877 by William George Strickland, the retired tailor whose family appears at that address in 1881 (with a cook and housemaid and the family of Thomas Harden, a gardener), but who had himself been replaced by Alfred Savill by 1884. My quote about Electra Yarris, who lived later in the house, being 'a former actress' came from the Evening Standard for 2 April 1965. Lillie's relationship with her husband Ned, as Beatty shows, changed considerably in the summer of 1878. That writer's surname, by the way, is not Beattie though that spelling is used twelve times above. "The Referee" for Sunday, 23 June 1878, page 8, says "Mr Langtry has gone off in his yacht, but Mrs Langtry did not go with him. The husband goes to sea, his wife remains to be seen". In May 1878 three portraits of the wife were exhibited at the Royal Academy and her photographs were 'ticketed up all over the town at one shilling' - the American Register commenting 'what a nuisance it must be to be the husband of a popular belle'. On 7 August 1878 Athletic News (page 4) asked 'I wonder how it is no one ever hears of Mr Langtry! Is there such a person, or is Mrs Langtry a widow'. The couple visited Jersey together in September 1878 but a year later Beatty says that Ned 'disappeared constantly' (Beatty, 159), and Lillie was living (as the Prince said) 'en garcon', though Ned 'appeared unannounced every now and again' (Beatty, 163). She met Jones then on 'long visits' to Brighton (seeing Jones at his mother's house at Worthing; Beatty, 14)). Beatty is not always correct and in 1999 she still writes several times of Lillie's house at Bournemouth, built for her by the Prince, when that myth had been challenged and destroyed some years earlier. AnthonyCamp (talk) 11:59, 10 May 2023 (UTC).

Bentornato signore! Let's have a look at what you have to say today, Sir! Hmm.
(1) "I am sorry that this talk page, designed to discuss improvements to the article and in which good faith is assumed, and personal attacks are avoided, has descended into a tirade of invective which adds nothing to the points at issue." (quote/unquote)
What you call a "tirade of invectives" and "personal attacks" Sir, is called "peer review" in Science. The same applies in any serious investigation and dare I say ... Wikipedia work.
"Peer review" is a process of ensuring that new research is original and uses valid science. It is used in all areas of scientific and academic research activity, from life sciences to astrophysics and psychology to social sciences".
Peer review can be rather robust at times, admittedly, but no animosity is necessarily implied. It is often a stratagem to fire-test the conclusions arrived at by a third party. Add to it the character and mise-en-scène of Inspector Colombo. He may not have added anything to "the points at issue", but that is just your humble opinion, Sir.
Please allow me to offer you another good example of a blunder. Your blunder, Sir. Please read on!
(2) "My quote about Electra Yarris (sic) who lived later in the house, being 'a former actress' came from the Evening Standard for 2 April 1965."(quote/unquote)
REALLY? THAT CANNOT POSSIBLY BE TRUE, SIR!
Yarris? You meant Yaras, right? In that case, I regret to inform you that you are - how to put it? WRONG!
Nowhere in the Evening Standard, you quote, is it written that Mrs. Electra Yaras was an actress! Have a look (below). I suspect the Kilburn 'storians invented it to spice-up their "scoop". Denotation-connotation (...) I have already addressed this issue elsewhere.
It looks like that you have sourced what the local 'storians said, without taking the time to read the actual newspaper. Faux-pas Sir! This way, you risk bringing Wikipedia into disrepute!
For your perusal - and that of Wikipedia readers - I have transcribed the FULL article from the Evening Standard of 2 April 1965 below. The one you quote. Here it is:
EVENING STANDARD, 2 APRIL 1965 FULL COPY TRANSCRIPT (microfilm original available at the British Library/St. Pancras/London)
"IT'S THE GHOST OF LILLIE LANGTRY - AS QUEER THINGS HAPPEN IN HER OLD HOME"
(Evening Standard reporter)
Tables bang in the night and voices whisper in the darkness of the Victorian house in Alexandra Road in St. John's Wood ... but the people living there do not stir from their beds. For they are convinced that the "visitor" is the ghost of Lilly Langtry, actress and society beauty of Victorian and Edwardian times.
She lived at Leighton House for a number of years. It is said that she built a glass corridor connecting the front door and the roadway so that King Edward VII could visit her in privacy.
"So many memories"
Now Leighton House, with its stained-glass windows and marble floors, has been earmarked for demolition to make way for a housing scheme.
Mrs. Electra Yaras, a dark haired Athenian who bought the lease of the "haunted house" 18 years ago, said today: "I am all in favour of progress, but it will be terrible if they pull down this historic building. It has so many memories.
"Lily Langtry's ghost appeared one day at my bedroom door and asked if I would like to have a baby boy. Some time later, my son was born in that very room" - her old boudoir.
Mrs. Yaras, 39-year-old step-daughter of General Theodorus Pangalos, a Greek leader of the 1920s, admits that her first encounter with the Jersey Lily's ghost was a little frightening.
"I awoke to see a book I had been reading banging up and down on the bedside table" She said: "My husband woke too...we were powerless to move. But I have become used to her visits now. It was with her approval that I converted the stables of Leighton House into a studio".
Mrs Yaras who works as a tour director (bolds and underline mine) and has travelled throughout Europe, claims she has seen Lily Langtry "vanishing over the garden rockery into a misty cloud."
"Painted cherubs"
The decorations of many of the rooms at Leighton House have not been touched since her departure. Painted cherubs still dance on the ceiling of the drawing room, and the adjoining conservatoire retains the original tapestries and woodcarvings. As she surveyed the house, Mrs. Yaras said; "It would be wonderful if all this could be saved when the new flats are built here".
(Transcribed with tacit agreement from the Evening Standard)
Oops! La prego di scusarmi, Signore!  I shall have to address some of your other erroneous assumptions later (mostly logical fallacies) as I am pressed for time. I have a real investigation going-on. LAPD just paged me (smiles).
Inchino profondo a te Signore!
Ciao!
Inspector Colombo (talk) 18:03, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Sorry Sir! I am back! Where were we? Oh! Yes! You were trying to provide "evidence" that Mr. Edward Langtry or "Ned" - Lillie's husband - was hardly ever at home (Norfolk Street) whereas your source, Laura Beatty - states that her husband was "ever watchful". Here, you have also attempted to clarify some details concerning Leighton House/103, Alexandra Road. Grazie Signore!

(3) "The yearly City of Westminster Polls, already cited and available online, show that the house was occupied by Samuel Litchfield from 1873 to 1876 (when the entry was struck through and Coppins, Iver, Bucks, inserted) and then yearly from 1877 by William George Strickland" (quote/unquote)

Probably it won't matter, but just in case it does. Do you happen to know exactly "when the entry was struck through"? Was it in 1873? 1874? 1875? 1876? Source as quoted? Oui? Non?

"And then yearly from 1877 by William George Strickland". Meaning 1877, 1878, 1879, 1880 and so on. Is that it? Just to make sure! Grazie Signore!

Let me recap - if I may, Sir ...

Samuel Litchfield (assuming the data you collected is correct) built Leighton House (103 Alexandra Road) in 1873 and (you assumed) named it after his wife's place of birth - Leighton Buzzard. Then just three (3) years later in 1876, he sold the house or lease to William G. Strickland and left. Bye! Bye!

The Prince's affair with Lillie, according to cited sources was, between 1877-1880 at the most but, we also know, that their friendship lasted many, many years. In fact, it looks as if it never ended. Perhaps we should keep that in mind, just in case.

So, according to you Sir, William George Strickland, was living at 103, Alexandra Road during the 1876-1880 period.

My previous understanding of your theory was, that Samuel Litchfield left in 1876, and that William G. Strickland did not appear on record as living there, until the 1881 Census - leading you to assume that he had been there as far back as 1876.

Now you are telling us that the "yearly City of Westminster polls" prove (as if it were) that Strickland was living there in 1876-77-78-80 even before he appears in the Census in 1881. Is that so, Sir? Let's assume so.

Better still! Let's test the link you suggest by placing it on a search engine! Here we go: "Yearly City of Westminster Polls" - adding "103 Alexandra Road" for good effect.

Oops!

When we place "Yearly City of Westminster Polls + 103 Alexandra Road" on a search engine, we get something along the lines:

"General elections: See details of our polling places, dates and deadlines, and results of the most recent General elections"

General elections? Polls? Did I miss something?

Are you sure you have given us a proper link or, like in the case of Electra "Yarris", you were just quoting a source, without double-checking it? No criticism implied. Just saying, Sir.

OK? Let us assume the data you have given Wikipedia is bona fide. Fingers crossed!

Now, if these dates are for real, Mamma mia! that could be ground-breaking!

"Ground breaking? Why?" I hear you asking ...

William G. Strickland was, for all we know, a bespoke tailor in Mayfair (Clifford Street) right around the corner and almost next door to Henry Poole in Saville's Row!

How could you possibly have missed that, Sir? This was not the Strickland in question? Maybe he was! Did you check that?

And if he was, the two could have been friends! At the very least they were neighbours and colleagues - that much the data is telling us!

You see, Sir, the Prince of Wales - as well as Lillie Langtry - were Henry Poole's customers!

https://henrypoole.com/individual/lillie-langtry/ https://henrypoole.com/individual/hm-king-edward-vii/ http://www.stricklandandsons.co.uk/index.php/about/company

Lateral thinking suggests, that at some stage, Lillie and the Prince might have been acquainted with Mr. Strickland, and might even have relied on him to tailor a piece or two of apparel and erm ... whatever.

And by the way, if you feel these bytes are not enough, here is another thought-provoking bit:

Did you know that Samuel Litchfield's son, Thomas, had an antiques' shop at 3, Bruton Street (Mayfair) - not far from Lillie's Norfolk Street address? Did you miss that too?

Ref. https://bifmo.furniturehistorysociety.org/entry/litchfield-samuel-frederick-thomas-1876-1911

Could Lillie have been Thomas Litchfield's customer around the time (1878) she was furnishing her Norfolk Street home?

Laura Beatty, one of your sources, wrote: "Lillie went out and was comprehensively hoodwinked by the antique dealers, returning with plenty of artificially worm-eaten and blackened oak for her terracotta dining room..." (op.cit. p.98)

Is it possible that the Litchfield's and the Strickland's knew each other before the sale of the house? It is, isn't it? Lateral thinking obliges...

I guess this only goes to show that Reality is far more complex than what a Census or a "poll" entry can give it credit for. Extrapolate at your own peril.

Could it be, Sir, that you and the Kilburn 'storians have been relying on simplistic sources and as a result, drawing the wrong inferences? No criticism implied!

That has happened to me many a time, in many an investigation, but like your nemesis, the talented Adrienne Corri, said:

"To make an honest mistake is not the end of the world, but to have lost the wish to find the truth, or to deny it because it is not your truth, is bigotry." (op. cit. 262)

Max Arthur's insight, again, comes to mind:

"There is often no stronger proof than rumour concerning historical anecdotes and speculation - and often no stronger proof is needed" (in "Lost Voices of the Edwardians")

(4) "Lillie's relationship with her husband Ned, as Beatty shows, changed considerably in the summer of 1878." (quote/unquote)

Somehow in some-way, it probably did - if Beatty says so, but what's your point Sir?

Remember, you are trying to provide "evidence" that Mr. Edward Langtry or "Ned" - Lillie's husband - was "hardly ever there" at home (Norfolk Street) whereas your source, Laura Beatty - states that he was "ever watchful".

Probably the answer lies in the dates/periods. Your assumption being that Lillie did not need to have her trysts with the Prince elsewhere - like St. John's Wood's Leighton House. Her marital house in Mayfair, would do. Right-ho!

So, their "relationship changed". Assuming it did. How did it change? Does she say?

Are you trying to suggest (denotation & connotation) that Mr. Langtry was no longer chaperoning Lillie? "Ever watchful" as she put it? Any evidence? Any specifics?

Beatty does write that "Ned" could arrive unexpectedly - or words to that effect. Sounds like that could have instilled in Lillie a kind of "conditioned reflex"!

(5) The Referee for Sunday, 23 June 1878, page 8, says "Mr Langtry has gone off in his yacht, but Mrs Langtry did not go with him. The husband goes to sea, his wife remains to be seen" (quote/unquote)

How long did he "go to sea"? Did the journo say? Was it for an afternoon or two? Was it a few days? A week? A month? Did Ned go sailing solo around the world? Again, no specifics.

"His wife remains to be seen". So? What was the journo trying to tell his readers?

That she locked herself at home? That she went to live off Loudoun Road - like Jane Belmond, King George VI last mistress, did? Of course not!

Ref. Mireille Galinou “Cottages and Villas – The Birth of the Garden Suburb”. (University Press, 2010) p.194.

I hope that you are not suggesting that during her husband's sailing sabbaticals, Lillie turned 17 Norfolk Street, their marital home, into a bordello of sorts. That would be preposterous!

All these comings and goings in the heart of Mayfair? With living-in staff? With reporters shadowing the house? Sorry Sir! I don't get it.

(6) Then you go on providing us with more "evidence" - and I quote: "In May 1878 three portraits of the wife were exhibited at the Royal Academy and her photographs were ticketed up all over the town at one shilling - the "American Register" commenting - 'what a nuisance it must be to be the husband of a popular belle." (quote/unquote).

What have her portraits being shown at the nearby Academy, have to do with whether her husband was away or in residence? "Ever watchful" or "hardly there" - as you assumed? Looks like you have gone off on a tangent here Sir! No criticism implied!

(7) Then, you write: "On 7 August 1878 Athletic News (page 4) asked 'I wonder how it is no one ever hears of Mr Langtry! Is there such a person, or is Mrs Langtry a widow!" (quote/unquote)

What was the journo's point?

That no one ever heard of "Ned" because he was mostly at home? Because he had gone sailing? Fishing? What?

Maybe Edward Langtry was not so newsworthy. He would, if he was having an affair with Princess Alexandra but that, as far as we know, was not the case. Was it?

(8) Further on, you added: "The couple visited Jersey together in September 1878 but a year later, Beatty says that Ned 'disappeared constantly' (Beatty, 159). "Lillie was living (as the Prince said) 'en garcon' (sic), though Ned 'appeared unannounced every now and again' (Beatty, 163)

Does Beatty say that? Let me see! Yes she does! On the first paragraph. My attention however was caught by the fourth paragraph which reads: "she could return to Norfolk Street at the end of the day, without the prospect of his drunken accusations to greet her, or, as she left again to the entertainments of the evening, to speed her on her way out."

Adding on the next page (p.160): "So, she and Lady Lonsdale, whose husband was equally invisible, more often than not chaperoned each other around town..." ..."chaperoned each other around town!" This in late 1879 (1880?).

One thing is for sure, Beatty is not suggesting that Lillie had turned her house into a bordello of sorts - as you seemed to imply.

This period (again no specifics) might explain the Prince of Wales reference to Lillie "living en garçon", but wasn't the Prince doing exactly same? Well, honi soit qui mal y pense (...)

(9) "Beatty is not always correct and in 1999 she still writes several times of Lillie's house at Bournemouth, built for her by the Prince, when that myth had been challenged and destroyed some years earlier."(quote/unquote)

Beatty is not always correct. You are. Is that the point you are trying to make Signore? Point taken!

I think I have heard about the Bournemouth's house. Vaguely. Please allow me to google it out for more details. One moment.

Did you write "that myth has been challenged and destroyed" Sir?

Challenged perhaps, but I wouldn't say "destroyed"! I need more time to fully assess the damage (...) The Alexandra Road investigation is already taking me too much time and the LAPD is not happy! (smiles).

Having said that, the sniffer dog in me ("De Bone" as I call it) is already "barking" at the implications of something you seem to have repressed - namely that in 1881 (probably even before then) Emily Langton was living in Kensington (West London)! Was that so?

This means, either she had a house there - or someone she knew well, did. Elementary, my dear Watson! You said so yourself! Look!

"Emily was not always at the Red House and at the time of the Census (3 April) in 1881 she was staying in Kensington and the Red House had been let." (A. Camp)

Let to whom? Why didn't you mention it? Hmm

Now, Please follow my thoughts...

Was Bertie familiar with well-to-do Kensington?

Probably! His mother was brought up in Kensington Palace and other royals have lived there since. Bertie however, lived in Marlborough House by St. James-Green Parks. About 3 kilometres away. A 15-20 minute carriage drive up Knightsbridge and Kensington Road, or through the parks. Even less so for Lillie.

What about Lillie Langtry? Did she know anyone in Kensington?

Definitely! At the very least John Everett Millais, the artist who painted her iconic portrait: "A Jersey Lilly". Millais was descendant from a prominent Jersey family and a friend of Lillie (who was also from Jersey). He lived in Kensington!

Did Emily Langton knew or was acquainted with anyone from the so-called "Marlborough House Set" - including, of course, the Prince of Wales and her namesake Lillie Langtry?

Probably. I mean, given her avant-garde ideas and social activism (she was a sufragette for example), that wouldn't surprise me! Theirs was a small world (...)

Do you think that "arrangements" could have been made between the three, say?

I do.

Any bona fide sources supporting such hypothesis'?

Aside from the Census and the fact she lived in Kensington? Let me think - YES!

Laura Beatty remarks on p.210 (op.cit): "She (Lillie) must have missed Jeanne and worried about her in Bournemouth!" Jeanne, of course, was Lillie's babydaugther born on the 8 March 1881.

"Worried about her in Bournemouth?" in 1881? The year Langton was, according to the 1881 Census, living in Kensington!?

Correct! But that is not all...

Go on!

The well-known royal biographer, Theo Aronson, who wrote "The King in Love" would have probably disagreed with Camp on this - and let's not forget that Aronson, "being 'something of an outsider, unrestricted by the British class system' (Royal Subjects, pp. ix-x), (...) was granted almost unprecedented access to royal circles."

This is what Theo had to say, and I quote:

"Towards the end of the year that he met her, 1877, he (the Prince) started building her (Lillie) a home in the most decorous of seaside resorts (...) With the house leased, according to municipal records to an Emily Langton and the foundation stone revealing nothing more than the date and a cryptic E.L.L., the Prince was able to avoid any direct association with the house.."

"The Prince was able to avoid any direct association with the house!" I guess that wraps it up for me! Grazie tanti! Thank you!

(10) The local historians have shown that no evidence cane (sic) be found that Lillie Langtry ever lived at 103 Alexandra Road (Leighton House), Hampstead, or ever visited the house, in the years 1877-1880 when she was involved in an affair with the Prince of Wales.

Last but not least let us examine another of your statements that immediately caught my attention – particularly the ex-cathedra use of the adverb (ever). Ever lived, ever visited …

From a strictly pragmatic standpoint - formal logic obliges - the fact that a ‘storian or two, were unable to come up with what you consider “evidence”, does not necessarily imply that there isn’t any …

… it simply means that they failed to find evidence that Lillie Langtry “ever lived at 103 Alexandra Road …or ever visited the house”. And their failure (and yours) does not necessarily prove that she did not live in it at some stage - or otherwise visited the house now and then.

Do you follow?

What we have here is a hypothesis disguised as a foregone conclusion! And by the way, forget the dates – the real question is: Did she or did she not? To be on not to be!

WHY does the myth appear in the first place as far back as 1946? That is the real question we should be asking.

What we do know is that Lillie and the Prince remained friends for many, many years. That much seems clear from reading Laura Beatty opus citatum. Why focus solely on the period 1877-1180?

The other, more important, angle to the story is this:

WHERE did you/they look for this so-called “evidence”? Let’s find out from the horse’s mouth, shall we?

“Using a variety of sources, such as the census, rate books, and electoral registers, we have looked at all the people who lived at Leighton House between 1870 and 1907. For the most part they were wealthy businessmen and there is no record of Lillie in Alexandra Road.” (quote) Ref. https://kilburnwesthampstead.blogspot.com/2021/05/looking-for-lillie-langtry.html

What the ‘storians probably meant was that they failed to find any official documents with her name - or the Prince’s – in connection with the house BUT what did they expect? Were you/they, that naïf?

Census!? Rate books? Electoral registers? Did it occur to them, or to you, that women in those days were not even allowed to vote? Or that royals did not vote? Forget electoral registers!

Now census, rate books? Come on!

Did they really expect to find the name of Emilie Charlotte LeBreton Langtry or Prince Albert Edward of Saxe-Coburg and Gotha on any record , particularly after the Mordaunt case scandal in 1870? You are begging the question, Sir!

Sources: https://archive.org/details/cu31924031444437 https://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/transformingsociety/electionsvoting/womenvote/keydates/

I suspect your ‘storians had just an entertaining scoop in mind, not serious historical research (...)

The fact that they forgot (or avoided) speaking with the Yaras’ family – which they should have – makes me suspicious of your/their intentions.

Had they spoken with the Yaras, then they would have found (as I did) that the myth of Lillie and the Prince’s connection with the house was alive and well as far back as 1946 – and possibly beyond.

It was not just something two “actresses “(as if it was) “invented” back in the 1960s to try and save the house from demolition (...)

Incidentally, in this context, you forgot to mention that a former President of the Royal Academy of Arts (Sir Hugh Casson) and a founding member of The Victorian Society (Sir John Betjeman) were also involved in the case! Why? Because they did not look the part?

Source: Daily Telegraph 9, October 1971 (microfilm available in the British Library/St. Pancras/London)

The conclusions they arrived at look more like defamation to me than historical research, and I am afraid you Sir, swallowed it hook, line and sinker AND, by doing so, risked to bring Wikipedia into disrepute!

Maybe you should have listened to another of your sources: Laura Beatty, who aptly pointed out the following as a veiled admonition: 

“Lillie was a master at covering her tracks. Like all of her generation who availed themselves of the fin de siècle loosening of morals, she was fanatically discrete. Important people like the Prince of Wales and the Marquess of Hartington had private secretaries who were responsible for their good character (i.e. reputation managers!). Lord Esher … made a positive bonfire of Society’s intrigues; every personal letter or diary entry that was compromising was destroyed. Lille did not have the services of an Esher so she did it herself…”

Source: Laura Beatty in “Lillie Langtry – Manners, Masks and Morals”. Page 9. Chattus & Windus (1999 edition)

(¹) Concerning the name of the house (Leighton), it is interesting to note that the Prince of Wales was a close friend of Lord Leighton and that Lillie posed for the latter on more than one occasion. Leighton as in Leighton Buzzard? Hm. (²) What you call Hampstead (you meant South Hampstead, right?) was in fact an area of the St. John’s Wood Estate and that’s official. Please don’t try to disassociate Lillie and the Prince from St. John’s Wood. It won’t work (…)

Ref. https://www.artrenewal.org/Article/Title/biography-of-lord-frederick-leighton https://www.npg.org.uk/collections/search/personExtended/mp14015/lillie-%20langtry?tab=iconography#h1

Please stand by for even more revealing details in due time! It is crunch time at the LAPD (…)

AFTERTHOUGHT:

I do not wish to sound critical, but this - in my humble opinion - is exactly the problem with a strict Occam's Razor approach - with a penchant for Procrustes - that tends to rely, almost exclusively, on records such as census, rate books, electoral registers, post office directories and such paraphernalia, and then fails to use lateral thinking to extract the right inferences from them. I call it "camping". No pun intended.

GLOSSARY:

"The name Procrustes (Greek: Προκρούστης) refers to a bandit from Greek mythology who made his victims fit his bed either by stretching their limbs or cutting them off." (Wikipedia)



Inspector Colombo (talk) 16:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC) Inspector Colombo (talk) 20:32, 20 June 2023 (UTC) Inspector Colombo (talk) 16:07, 18 June 2023 (UTC) Inspector Colombo (talk) 17:24, 16 June 2023 (UTC) Inspector Colombo (talk) 00:46, 16 June 2023 (UTC) Inspector Colombo (talk) 00:24, 16 June 2023 (UTC) Inspector Colombo (talk) 19:46, 12 June 2023 (UTC) Inspector Colombo (talk) 17:12, 12 June 2023 (UTC) Inspector Colombo (talk) 01:21, 12 June 2023 (UTC) Inspector Colombo (talk) 01:11, 12 June 2023 (UTC) Inspector Colombo (talk) 23:22, 10 June 2023 (UTC) Inspector Colombo (talk) 16:25, 10 June 2023 (UTC) Inspector Colombo (talk) 17:22, 9 June 2023 (UTC)

  • Beatty DOES say that Ned "disappeared constantly" on page 159, as anyone can see by reading the book, available on Archive.org Beatty, Laura (1999). "XIX: Storm Clouds". Lily Langtry: Manners, Masks and Morals. London: Chatto & Windus. p. 159. ISBN 1-8561-9513-9.. @Inspector Colombo: you MUST NOT misrepresent sources, and you MUST NOT falsely claim that another editor has. DuncanHill (talk) 11:46, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
    Signor Duncan Hill! It has been a while! Come stai?
    Oops! I am afraid I did overlook that on the first paragraph, didn't I?
    There it is! "He disappeared constantly on fruitless money-raising expeditions to Ireland, and he drank". How did I miss that? It's an error, definitely! Has it ever happened to you? I am sure it has NOT! My apologies!
    I have corrected that byte now. Perfetto!
    If it helps to reduce my sentence, I did quote some of the third paragraph (which implies the same) and which I genuinely thought your friend was referring to in passing. Signore Camp, as you know, can be rather phlegmatic at times (...)
    "She could return to Norfolk Street at the end of the day, without the prospect of his drunken accusations to greet her, or, as she left again to the entertainments of the evening, to speed her on her way out."
    By the way, Mr. Duncan, here between us, may I suggest you use a bit more tact and diplomacy when pointing out another user's error in the "Talk" section of all places? Avoid making it sound as a scolding! Thank you!
    Always remember that Wikipedia belongs to all its users, not to you or those you may sympathize or be friends with (...)
    Insist in being rude, and I will report you directly to Jimmy Wales. We are working hard here to uncover the Truth. Truth has no sides. It might have enemies, but that is not my problem - nor Wikipedia's, dare I say!
    And since we are at it, could you please reprimand Mr A. Camp for insisting that he was quoting the Evening Standard of the 2 April 1965 when referring to Mrs. Electra Yaras a "former actress"?
    This is not true and I have told him! Nowhere, in the ES article he quotes, is such an assumption made. It is an error. Deliberate or otherwise, right in the "Article" page! This is serious!
    I have given him both the source (British Library) and the full transcript of the article - to no avail.
    Mr. A. Camp MUST NOT misrepresent, and MUST NOT falsely claim or suggest that another editor has!
    Molte grazie! Inspector Colombo (talk) 19:46, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
    And here you go changing your comments after others have replied to them. PLEASE re-read Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Also - try to be more concise. Great walls of text with countless unrelated points are off-putting to say the least. Concision and clarity will help you get your point across. Finally, I'm not anyone's friend or sympathizer here, so you can stop claiming that I am. DuncanHill (talk) 20:05, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
    Ciao Duncan! Thank you for your time and attention ...
    I rectified my error in a "Talk" page, of all places! What's wrong with that? Wasn't that you who pointed it out?
    Furthermore, I have not only rectified the text, I explained, immediately afterwards, why I did so. Anything wrong with that?
    Signore Camp felt insulted. I thought that was the right thing to do as a way of an apology, but now we know! NEVER change your comments in a "Talk" page AFTER others have replied to them. Actually, no one did! You did!
    No exception to the rules!
    Right-ho!
    I do have a question for you, then, if I may.
    Does this rule also apply to the main, "Article" page?
    I mean, if someone writes something totally untrue, defamatory even, in the "Article" page, he cannot change it? No one can?
    If that is the rule, then I guess that could be the reason why Signore Camp has been allowed to write in the "Article" page statements like: "On 2 April 1965 the Evening Standard reported an interview with the former actress Electra Yaras (died 2010, aged 88) who, in the 1950s, had bought the lease of Leighton House, 103 Alexandra Road".
    This statement is totally inaccurate, yet as the impartial referee or mediator you claim to be, you don't seem to be concerned about it. Which is thought-provoking to say the least.
    Let me elaborate further, if I may:
    (1) The "Evening Standard" - the edition Signore Camp quotes - or any other that I am aware of - NEVER said or suggested that Mrs. Yaras was an actress. She was not. I have double--checked that with her family, and even copied and pasted the full "Evening Standard" article for your perusal - in the "Talk" page, of course!
    Also, it is not clear why Mr. Camp placed the date of her death? What for? To add a touch of credibility to it? Typical!
    Secondly: The Yaras did not buy the lease in the 1950s. They bought the lease in January 1946 and moved in on the 13 February. Precisely. Documentation available.
    I could go on, but I understand you dislike complex explanations. Well, in the age of the Twitter, everybody does, but please remember the idiom: "The devil is in the details..."
    This is exactly what happens in a court of law if someone is being cross-examined, and that is more or less what we are doing here in the process of "peer-review".
    Please be patient. The result of my investigation might surprise you - if it hasn't done so already. The best is yet to come. Fingers crossed!
    Con i miei migliori saluti! Inspector Colombo (talk) 00:32, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
    Electra Yarras appeared as Ursula in The Two Gentlemen of Verona in 1951 at The Questors Theatre. So, actress she was, even if not a stellar career. Now look, this page is for discussing improvements to the article. It isn't for discovering the truth, cross-examination, or anything of the sort. On Wikipedia we use what we call reliable sources. I don't claim to be an "impartial referee or mediator". You have to stop making things like that up. It makes people take against you. What I am trying to do on this talk page is keep discussion on-track and within the bounds of "how we do things on Wikipedia".
    Now, you might make some good points, I don't know because you wrap everything up in so much needless verbosity, random foreign phrases, and rhetorical flourishes. It makes people turn away. Use short sentences, and short paragraphs. Try to stick to one or two points per thread. DuncanHill (talk) 01:02, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
    >>> DUNCAN, IF YOU ARE SHORT OF TIME OR JUST INTERESTED IN THE BARE BONES AND NOT THE PROVERBIAL DETAILS, JUMP TO SECTIONS 2. and 3."CHEQUE-MATE" <<<
    (1) ELECTRA YARAS WAS AN ACTRESS: THE "EVIDENCE" - OR LACK OF IT
    Bentornato Duncan! That's Italian for "welcome back!"  
    You stated: "Electra Yarras (sic) appeared as Ursula in the "Two Gentlemen of Verona" in 1951 at The Questors Theatre. So, an actress she was, even if not a stellar career...."
    Is this Camp's source? His evidence? Yours? A scrap of information no one did even bother to double-check and reflect upon? Please give me a break!
    I have exchanged e-mails with The Questors archives' director, Mr. John Dobson. His bottom-line was:
    "It seems that Electra was only with The Questors for a very brief period..." (quote/unquote)
    Now, Electra may have, as a young person, taken part in an amateur play once or twice. Who hasn't? But that was NOT her profession. As the Evening Standard (April 2, 1965) correctly reported, Electra Yaras was, at the time, a "tour director" (tour as in tourism).
    Please read on!
    I will try to clarify this further with my Yaras source who, by the way, least you forget, is the ONLY bona-fide source we have and the one your "pros" forgot to interview, and keep ignoring (...)
    Consider the following:
    In his younger days, the Prince of Wales - now King Charles III - took part in numerous plays and sketches at the Dryden Society Theatre (Cambridge), Should he (if convenient) be described on Wikipedia as a "former actor" who became King of Britain? Of course not! That would bring Wikipedia into ridicule!
    I cannot help thinking that Camp, and/or his sources, must have had an ulterior motive for portraying Electra as an "actress". Unconscious or otherwise. This is just my informed opinion. No allegations made.
    Why do the Kilburn 'storians (Camp's source) describe Mrs. Yaras as a "former actress"? Because they genuinely thought so? For added effect? Denotation and connotation? You tell me (...)
    My opinion is that by turning a tour director - or an amateur folk-dancer with some acting skills - into a full-fledged actress, absurd as it may seem, may have suited their underlying intentions as story-tellers. Actors (denotation) represent, pretend or in common parlance "invent", "lie" (connotation). Pure Semiotics!
    Was this deliberate on their part? No idea, but it did become a media scoop and reached Wikipedia via Camp, did it not?
    NOW, least you were trying to divert everyone's attention from the point at stake here, let me remind you of what Camp actually wrote:
    "My quote about Electra Yarris (sic), who lived later in the house, being 'a former actress' came from the Evening Standard for 2 April 1965." (quote/unquote)
    REPEAT:
    "My quote about Electra Yarris (sic), who lived later in the house, being 'a former actress' came from the Evening Standard for 2 April 1965." (quote/unquote).
    This is NOT true! THAT, is the point I was making. The ES of 2 April 1965 does NOT say THAT! Period!
    This statement by the way was in the "Talk" page, so no harm done.
    The problem is that in the "Article" page, Camp suggests almost exactly the same, and I quote:
    "On 2 April 1965 the Evening Standard reported an interview with the former actress Electra Yaras (...) who, in the 1950s, had bought the lease of Leighton House, 103 Alexandra Road, South Hampstead, and who now claimed that Langtry had lived in the house and been regularly visited there by the Prince of Wales." (quote/unquote).
    The ES reported an interview with the "former actress"?
    NO! It did not! The ES reported an interview with a "tour director"! That's what the article says.
    In other words, Camp led Wikipedia readers to believe that his assumption - of Electra being an actress - had come from the Evening Standard he quoted. It did not. It seems to have come from somewhere else. Probably the source he quoted on the "Article" - which oddly enough thanked Camp for his help and information about LL...
    ... it is not clear to what extent the ideas are his, or theirs. For the sake of diplomacy, I am assuming it is theirs.
    • Reference: https://kilburnwesthampstead.blogspot.com/2021/05/looking-for-lillie-langtry.html
    This kind of misrepresentation of the facts risks to bring Wikipedia into disrepute.
    Now, add to it the allegation implicit in the phrase: "now she claimed ..." (in the "Article" page)
    Electra Yaras did not "claim" anything. She was telling the reporter what (we now know) she had been told - at least as far back as 1946, adding to it her paranormal experiences. Paranormal experiences can be for real, and often are!
  • "Why didn't she mention that to the press before?" I hear you asking. Privacy concerns? Discretion? Ask the Yaras family!
    Don't get me wrong! I don't think for a moment Camp is a poor amanuensis! Not at all! He is a laureate pro at that. He may be full of his own opinions, but who isn't? His source on the other hand, made wrong inferences, yes, but who hasn't. They are 'storians! What to expect?
    In this particular case, Camp may have been misled by a source that could have been desperate for its "15 minutes of fame".
    Again, this is just my informed opinion. No allegations made. The fact was, theirs was quite a scoop that went all the way - via the mainstream media - to Wikipedia, and one that you seemed to have swallowed hook, line and sinker!
    (2) ELECTRA YARAS WAS NOT AN ACTRESS: THE EVIDENCE
    Let's google out the "Questors Theatre" and see if we find anything of interest...
    BINGO!
    The following passages immediately caught my investigator's attention:
    "The Questors THEATRE CLUB was founded in 1929 by a group of 17 AMATEUR performers and FRIENDS."
    "The Questors established a STUDENT GROUP in 1946 (...)"
    On 13 February 1946 when the Yaras moved into Leighton House, Electra must have been in her early twenties. By 1951 she was in her mid/later twenties. I acted a couple of times myself (as an extra in a James Bond film) in my younger days, but please DO NOT call me "a former actor". I wish!
    I mean, suppose Electra in her younger days liked to cycle from her house in St. John's Wood to Regents Park and back - a healthy past-time. Should Camp's entry on Wikipedia read: " Electra Yaras, a former cyclist..."? Of course not! The same faulty logic applies.
    (3) CHEQUE-MATE
    My source (Yaras family) has just e-mailed me!
    Herewith, some relevant passages from his e-mail:
    3.1 "Electra Yaras was involved in the Greek cultural scene in London..."
    3.2 "She was a great friend of Lady Crosfield..."
    3.3 "Lady Crosfield, was a leading player in numerous Greek cultural organizations. Electra Yaras was, likewise, part of a Hellenic traditional dancing amateur group that performed at various charitable events in London..."
    3.4 "As a part of her Greek traditional dancing activities, Electra may have been involved in some AMATEUR dramatics for a very short period in the early 1950’s or thereabouts..."
    3.5 "You can see from the Questors program of "Two Gentlemen of Verona" that she was also mentioned among the musicians and dancers. She was probably helping someone she knew and was among the dancers and joined in with another part to help with the production - as is quite common with amateur theatrical productions - everybody mucks in..."
    And then my source gave me a good example of this - which your source missed or deliberately hid.
    "3.6 If you check the programme for the play ‘By Further Request’ (Questors, Jan '51) you will find that on page 7 Electra is credited with the dance costumes.
    • Reference: http://archive.questors.org.uk/prods/1951/byfurtherrequest/docs/1951%20byfurtherreq%20prog.pdf
    3.7 "The role of Ursula is a very minor one. More of an extra part, really. Anyone could have done it. If you check with the Shakespeare's website, the sole description of Ursula you will find is on Act4, Scene 4, line 125. SYLVIA, calling Ursula, "Bring my picture there!". That's it. Not a word spoken by Ursula. It is evident that Electra's was an extra role! Not an acting one!
    3.8 "Do you want more, or will this suffice to convince the sceptics?" My source asked.
    "Enough! More than what I had bargained for! Thanks a million! Keep delving into your family archives! See you in LA sometime! Byye!" I replied.
    PSssst ...
    My source also reassured me that the myth of Lillie connection with the house was known to the family as far back as 1946 and possibly beyond (..........)
    Like Max Arthur, OBE said in "The Lost Voices of the Edwardians" and I quote: "There is often no stronger proof than rumour concerning historical anecdotes and speculation - and often no stronger proof is needed"
    • Reference: Max Arthur, OBE "Lost Voices of the Victorians". Harper Perennial, 2007 ISBN 13: 9780007216147
    Meanwhile, Camp's suggestion that Electra (possibly with the help of another actress, you know ...) invented the myth of LL and the PoW around 1965 "to suggest an historical importance for the house and support its preservation" is just, in my humble opinion, a result of his compulsive reliance on recorded paraphernalia bits, a strict Occam's Razor approach - with a penchant for Procrustes - poor lateral thinking and possibly an old beef with Adrienne Corri that still drives his Freudian Subconscious - or Jung's Collective if you prefer!
    No allegations made! I am just trying to make sense of what the data is telling me! No animosity implied.
    • Reference: Adrienne Corri "The Search for Gainsborough" p.58 Jonathan Cape, 1984 ISBN 0-224-02162-1
    (4) NOW! WHAT CAN BE DONE TO BRING THIS PAGE UP TO WIKIPEDIA STANDARDS?
    Do I need to tell you? I may be able to give you some suggestions some other time if you wish. The LAPD just paged me. They need me to help crack another case! Here we go again! Mi scusi! Inspector Colombo (talk) 19:27, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

A LIST OF FALSE STATEMENTS AND ERRONEOUS ASSUMPTIONS - A FOLLOW-UP

1. ERRONEOUS ASSUMPTION

In our previous Talk (above) you wrote:

“You ask where Lillie Langtry was between 1878 (sic) and 1880. There is no mystery about that and the details appear in Laura Beatty's 1999 book. Lillie and her husband leased 17 Norfolk Street, Park Lane, early in 1878 (a small house with a tiny staff) and gave it up in October 1880. Her husband was hardly ever there …“

Now let’s compare this with another quote, from the same source, you seemed to have missed.

"Prince Rudolph makes a nuisance of himself at Norfolk Street where he called at all times of day and night. When once he arrived alone and excited, having left his constant chaperone in an overturned growler in Oxford Street Lillie was forced to call upon the ever watchful Ned for protection” (Laura Beattie)

So, according to Laura Beattie, Lillie’s husband was mostly there - or “ever watchful”, as she put it.

What made you think that her husband (Ned) was “hardly ever there”?

Are we to assume that “her husband was there all the time - or “ever-watchful” - and therefore hardly ever there?” This clause does not make sense! Does it Sir?

Furthermore, we need to double check her address in Norfolk Street and take into account other dates. Please bear with me, Signore!

Reference:

Laura Beattie’s "Lillie Langtry: Manners, Masks and Morals", p.99. Chatto & Windus (1999)

2. FALSE STATEMENT

In the article’s main page you wrote: "On 2 April 1965 the Evening Standard reported an interview with the former actress Electra Yaras.”

Incorrect! Mrs. Electra Yaras was NOT an actress and had NEVER been one. She was a "tour director" - as the Evening Standard correctly reported.

References: Microfilm of the Evening Standard - 2 April 1965 edition. British Library (St. Pancras). This was confirmed by the Yaras' family.

DISCUSSION:

Why did you describe Mrs. Yaras as a "former actress"? For added effect? Denotation and ... connotation?

Turning a tour director into an actress, absurd as it may seem, may have suited your source hidden narrative and you Sir, followed suit!

Actors represent, pretend or in common parlance "lie". This is the main connotation.

The addition of a well-known actress (Adrienne Corri) - deeply disliked by your good self - further highlights the connotation, and made it all seem more plausible. Funny how the human unconscious works ...

It’s none of my business, but I suspect your grudge with Adrienne Corri can be traced back to her days as a member of the Society of Genealogists’ in the late 1970s. Am-I right? Sorry Signore! I have asked you this already in our previous talk. Moving on ...

Reference: [3]https://www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/oi/authority.20110803095710580

3. ERRONEOUS ASSUMPTION

Your source assumed that “Lillie would never have been seen dead here.”

Oh! Really? St. John’s Wood was known as “an abode of love and the arts” – if I may paraphrase Stella Margetson.

References:

The quote above is from an interview Mr. Dick Weindling of the "Kilburn ‘storians" gave to the Daily Telegraph (2 June 2021). Micro-film available in the British Library (St. Pancras).

The paraphrase is from Stella Margetson’s title: “St. John's Wood: An Abode of Love and the Arts”. Home and Law Publishing (1988)

A SHORT LIST OF LILLIE LANGTRY'S ASSOCIATIONS WITH ST. JOHN'S WOOD:

(1) Sir Arthur Conan Doyle (of Sherlock Holmes fame) seems to have known about Lillie Langtry's - and the Prince of Wales - connection to the area, as far back as 1891! Well before the Yaras' bought the lease of the house in January 1946. I am referring to his short-story "A Scandal in Bohemia".

Central to this story is a character (Irene Adler) apparently inspired by Lillie Langtry who resided - guess where? In St. John's Wood! Just like Lillie did or is said to have done.

Next time you happened to pass by the BBC studios in Portland Place, cross the street towards the Langham Hotel and look for the green plaque there. It reads:

"Oscar Wilde and Arthur Conan Doyle dined here with the publisher of `Lippincotts Magazine’ on 30 August 1889. A meeting that led to `The Sign of Four’ & `The Picture of DorianGray’.”

Ref. https://www.westminster.gov.uk/licensing/city-promotions-events-and-filming/green-plaques (click on the full list of green plaques for more details)

In case you didn't know, "The Sign of Four“ is the second novel by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle featuring Sherlock Holmes. "The Picture of Dorian Gray" is of course the title of Oscar Wilde's famous philosophical novel.

A shorter novella-length version of which was, as a result of this meeting, published in the July 1890 issue of the American periodical Lippincott's Monthly Magazine.

The point I am trying to make is:

Sir Arthur Conan Doyle must have been well acquainted with Oscar Wilde - that much that green plaque is telling us - or at the very least suggest…

Now, Oscar Wilde was, in turn, very well acquainted with Lillie Langtry. Indeed, it seems they were close friends. (Laura Beatty op. cit. et al).

Now ask your good self where Sir Arthur got the idea - and inside information - to write: "A Scandal in Bohemia"? If you know what I mean (…)

Anyway, Back to good old St. John’s Wood estate - and abode of Love and the Arts! Call it South Hampstead if you prefer. No harm done

(2) There is at least one painting of Lillie Langtry and the Prince of Wales attending a cricket match in St. John’s Wood. This can be seen at the Lord’s Cricket Ground Museum. The painting is by Sir Robert Ponsonby Staples and George Hamilton Barrable and is entitled: An Ideal Cricket Match (dated 1887). The painters, by their own admission, were just "wild imagining" things - or were they?

(3) Lillie Langtry's grand-daughter - Helen Mary Malcolm (1918-2010) - lived, albeit much later, at 30, Queen's Grove (St. John's Wood). Not that far from Alexandra Road but let’s call that a synchronicity (…)

In a letter she wrote from that address (in the Yaras family archives), Helen Mary mentions two (?) other addresses that her grandmother is said to have lived in St. John’s Wood, presumably for relatively short periods - namely “Regents Park (Road?) and Regents Park canal” (quote) - probably referring to Cornwall Lodge/Allsop Place where Lillie is said to have lived "at least between 1916-1920" (main text).

(4) Just off Alexandra Road, up Loudoun Road, in a house at the corner of Marlborough Place lived Jane Belmond.

"Who?"

Jane Belmond! The last mistress of King George IV (1762-1830)! This was, of course, well before Bertie, Prince of Wales (1841-1910) was in full swing. Draw your won inferences, particularly bearing in mind that ...

... King George IV brother, Edward Augustus (1767-1820) was the father of Queen Victoria (1819-1901) who, in turn, was the mother of Bertie – the Prince of Wales (later Edward VII). Small world indeed.

Signore! Aspetta! Aspetta! Quasi dimenticato!

(5) Also just off Alexandra Road, somewhere in Loudoun Road, lived Molly Baker, known as Mrs. Meeres, who according to Montgomery Eyre (1913) was possibly the model for William M.Thackeray's Rebecca Sharp in "Vanity Fair" (1847-48).

References:

(1) "A Scandal in Bohemia" was first published on 25 June 1891 in the July issue of "The Strand Magazine", and was the first of the stories collected in "The Adventures of Sherlock Holmes" in 1892" (Wikipedia). Note the connotation of "Bohemia" with "bohemian". What is Sherlock Holmes trying to tell you? Esattamente! https://www.oxfordreference.com/search?q=bohemian

  • More about the Irene Adler-Lillie Langtry connection can be found in a book by Christopher Redmond entitled: "A Sherlock Holmes Handbook", Dundurn Press. p. 51.

(2) For a photo of the Staples & Barrable painting click: [4]https://www.telegraph.co.uk/art/what-to-see/lords-art-collection-home-cricket-cultural-identity/

(3) The evidence for Helen Mary Malcolm (Lillie Langtry’s grand-daughter) address at 30 Queens Grove is from the Yaras' family archives. An handwritten letter by Lillie's grand-daugther posted to Mrs. Yaras at 103 Alexandra Road in April 1965.

(*) Reference to Laura Beattie passage (p.9 op. cit.) (added details):

“Lillie was a master at covering her tracks (...) she was fanatically discrete (...) Important people like the Prince of Wales and the Marquess of Hartington had private secretaries who were responsible for their good character (…) Lord Esther (…) every personal letter or diary entry that was compromising was destroyed” ( op. cit. page 9)

(4) For Jane Belmond, King George IV mistress, and Molly Baker, see Mireille Galinou “Cottages and Villas – The Birth of the Garden Suburb”. (University Press, 2010) p.194. Also, Montgomery Eyre “Saint John's Wood its history, its houses, its haunts and its celebrities”. (Chapman and Hall, 1913) p.148 and p.157.

4. FALSE STATEMENT

In the main page you wrote and I quote, that “Electra Yaras – in the 1950s had bought the lease of Leighton House, 103 Alexandra Road".

Incorrect! The Yaras’ bought the lease of 103, Alexandra Road in January 1946, therefore in the 1940s NOT in the 1950s. They moved into Leighton House, on the 13 February 1946, to be precise.

Reference:

The Yaras' family archives.

5. A BUNCH OF ERRONEOUS ASSUMPTIONS

(a) Circumstances were not properly addressed. Why?

According to the “Daily Telegraph” (11/3/65 edition) the occupants of the Victorians houses in Alexandra Road, supported by their MP (Henry Brooke) were, back then, protesting against a property company scheme for redevelopment of the area. The Yaras' were just one of the hundreds, if not thousands of individual lives affected.

Years later, the Daily Telegraph (9/10/71 edition) reported that the actress Adrienne Corri – along with Sir John Betjeman and Sir Hugh Casson plus the St. John’s Wood preservation societies - were leading a campaign to save Leighton House, and I presume the area, from demolition. It was not like "Electra Yaras and her son Andrew persuaded fellow actress (sic) Adrienne Corri" as your source (the Kilburn 'storians) tried to make us believe.

Adrienne found out about the house's connection with Lille Langtry and came to visit. Simple.

(b) Why did you place Mrs. Yaras and Adrienne Corri at the centre of the story (and ignored others)?

To underline the idea that the two “actresses” had concocted the myth of Lillie Langtry? Just asking ...

(c) Why didn’t you mention Sir John Betjeman - a founding member of The Victorian Society?

(d) Why didn’t you mention Sir Hugh Casson - Director of Architecture for the 1951 Festival of Britain and from 1976 to 1984, President of the Royal Academy?

(e) What made you think that Sir John Betjeman and Sir Hugh Casson would be fooled by a story crafted by a “former actress”(sic) - and her "colleague" Adrienne Corri?

Maybe they had bona fide reasons to believe that such was the case (...)

(f) I understand that you started working for the SOG in 1956. By 1962 you were the Director of Research. Why didn’t you address this question back in 1965? Were you too busy? It was not the right time?

(g) More to the point, what made you think Mrs. Yaras was lying?

Even assuming Lillie Langtry had NO connection whatsoever with Leighton House (which remains to be proven) that, did NOT make Mrs. Yaras a liar. Did it Sir?

If you had conducted your investigation properly you would have found, to start with, that Electra Yaras was brought up in an affluent Athenian family and was privately educated in Switzerland. Suffice it to say that she spoke four or five languages fluently - including yours. She was not your average bigot, that's for sure.

I am afraid it was uncouth of you Sir to assume, that someone with Mrs. Yaras education and social standing, would concoct such a tale in the hope it might change the course of events.

Didn't it occurred to you Sir, that Mrs. Yaras was sharing information that had been given to her and her husband, around the time she bought the lease of Leighton House - back in January 1946?

Information that was further substantiated by older neighbours and/or by the Eyre Estate employees, who - back in the 1940s-1950s - would, on occasion, service the house?

Why didn’t you ask Sir Hugh Casson, Sir John Betjeman – or your nemesis Adrienne Corri – what they thought? When they were around, that is. Why did you wait for so long?

Did you try to contact the Yaras' family. You couldn't find their birth certificates? Really? You did find (and quoted) Electra Yaras death certificate (not quite clear what for). Hm.

A proper investigation ought to start by interviewing those with first hand information about the “crime scene”. Wouldn't you agree. Sir?

(h) As for the "ghost of Lillie Langtry", that cannot be simply dismissed as (yet another) of the "former actress" fantasies.

Lillie's ghost is reported to have appeared too in her former house in Mayfair (Norfolk Street) as well as in Knightsbridge (Pont Street/ The Cadogan hotel). How do you rationalize that? That The Cadogan is earmarked for demolition? All these years? I doubt.

Apparently her ghost at the The Cadogan still appears now and then, usually around Christmas time (…)

Reference:

[5]https://www.mysteriousbritain.co.uk/?s=lillie+langtry+

In case you are not aware Sir, there is a considerable amount of scientific research covering all kinds of paranormal phenomena (including ghosts and apparitions) and many of these cannot be easily dismissed as taradiddle - except perhaps by the less well informed strata of the intelligentsia corps.

Reference:

[6]https://www.spr.ac.uk/about/whos-who-spr

OUTDATED

The main article reads: "further 'remembered' in the area (...) by the Lillie Langtry public house at 121 Abbey Road (built in 1969 to replace The Princess of Wales and briefly called The Cricketers in 2007–11)"

The Lillie Langtry public house has been closed for almost a year now and the building (Emminster Estate) is being demolished. Reference:https://northlondon.camra.org.uk/viewnode.php?id=10297

There is at least one other place associated with Lillie Langtry and the Prince of Wales in the area - and another elsewhere in Queensway.

Pronto?

The investigation goes on. Stand by for further announcements.

Inspector Colombo (talk) 19:57, 30 April 2023 (UTC)Inspector Colombo Inspector Colombo (talk) 19:44, 30 April 2023 (UTC) Inspector Colombo (talk) 20:05, 30 April 2023 (UTC) Inspector Colombo (talk) 19:01, 2 May 2023 (UTC)Inspector Colombo (talk) 15:59, 12 May 2023 (UTC) Inspector Colombo (talk) 16:43, 20 August 2023 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Lillie_Langtry/Archive_1


Inspector Colombo (talk) 20:20, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

Or you could just follow the link in the header. Where it says "Archives: 1". DuncanHill (talk) 20:23, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Except the link you refer to may not be so obvious (...) If you click on the word "archives" first - as most will do - what you get is NOT the archived page but a Wikipedia article entitled: "Help: Archiving a Talk Page". You would need to click the tiny number "1" - precisely - for the archived page to resurface! As a result, I had a couple of acquaintances (Media) e-mailing me to ask: "What happened to Lillie's Talk Page!? Has your research been censored? Is there a cabal?".

My reply: "That's ridiculous! Of course not!"' I thought I would make that clear for their benefit and that of others - not so savvy - Wikipedia users (...)

In retrospect, I am not so sure if the idea of a cabal was so ridiculous. I just happened to notice that the new page is set to "self-destruct" (archive) in 30 days! Who set up this bot? Was it automatic? Was it you? Of course not! The thing is, by keep deleting ("archiving") any new information, ideas and contributions, you are making it look as if some sort of "official narrative" must be protected at all costs - or, for that matter, convey the impression that Wikipedia belongs to a self-appointed few.

"When to archive, and what may be the optimal length for a talk page, are subjective decisions that should be adapted to each case. For example, ongoing discussions and nearby sections they reference should generally be kept intact."' ('Wikipedia)

Inspector Colombo (talk) 19:13, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

The assertion that Electra Yaras invented the legend of Lillie Langtry's association with Leighton House (103, Alexandra Road) “to suggest a historical importance for the house and support its preservation" is at odds with the facts...

Here is an article written by Sydney Catley and published by the "Hampstead News" on the 25 May 1950 - page 3. A game-changer. Let me share some of its bytes:

"Alexandra Road (...) at one time the street could boast that it housed no less a personage than Lillie Langtry (...) she lived at Leighton House, which has a covered canopy leading from the gate above the marble steps to the front door" (...) "Another and perhaps more intimate personality in Hampstead, who lived in this road was Mr Frederick Scarsbrook co-founder of the "Hampstead News" who died in 1948 at the age of 93 years. A previous occupier of his house, incidentally, was Miss L. Streetly-Smith, a former editor of this newspaper".

What the “Hampstead News” tells us here, invalidates assumptions made on Lillie Langtry's main page.

Assumptions made from an “Evening Standard” article (2 April 1965), published one and a half decades after the “Hampstead News” feature quoted here (25 May 1950) which oddly enough, was overlooked (...)

This piece of the Evening Standard was used "to prove" (as if it were) that Electra Yaras - a prominent member of the Greek community in London - had (in 1965) invented the association of Lillie Langtry's with Leighton House (103 Alexandra Road) during a campaign to save the house from demolition – or, as a curator of this page diplomatically put it:

"These claims (were) made to suggest a historical importance for the house and support its preservation" (verbatim).

This assumption was first articulated by two local 'storians - Dick Weindling and Marianne Colloms (with the help of Anthony J. Camp, MBE) in their blog “ History of Kilburn and West Hampstead” on May 27, 2021.

The story goes that in the following month (sales oblige, I guess) their "findings" were treated as a scoop by the local and mainstream Media (e.g. Camden New Journal, The Times and The Daily Telegraph) - and the defamation of Electra Yaras spread accordingly.

What's more, Adrienne Corri's name (then a well-known actress) was "dropped" in connection with Electra Yaras. Electra was described as an "actress" - "a former actress” (sic).

Electra Yaras was not an actress! I suspect she was called an actress with a denotation-and-connotation effect in mind - to make the argument more convincing; two "actresses" conspired to create a myth on the stage of ongoing events - do you follow?

Incidentally, the "Evening Standard" correctly reported Mrs Yaras's profession as a "tour director" - not as an "actress" (...)

Adrienne Corri was, for a while, a member of the Society of Genealogists - make of it what you wish - but the fact that the St. Johns Wood and Hampstead Preservation Societies, Henry Brooke (MP), Sir John Betjeman (a founder of the Victorian Society) and Sir Hugh Casson (ex-president of the Royal Academy) were all involved in the campaign to preserve most of the street and the house itself, that was blissfully ignored - as if they ALL had been fooled by Electra Yaras’ imagination. Really?

I have already addressed this blunder in the "archived" Talk Page (link at the top) but was ignored. Maybe the evidence was not convincing enough. I thought.

In the first interview, I had with the Yaras family, it transpired that Lillie Langtry's connection with Leighton House was well known in the area - even before Romuald and Electra Yaras moved into Leighton House on 13 February 1946 - that is, decades before the area was earmarked for demolition!

Was it possible that the facts did not fit the "official narrative" of a laureate Wikipedia editor or two? I wondered.

Looks like I was right. My contributions were subsequently archived as "offensive rubbish" - or words to that effect - and to this day, the same false assumptions remain in place to misinform Wikipedia users.

I suppose the rationale might have been - since my information was coming from Electra Yaras' family and someone had already assumed (without proof) that Electra was an "actress" - a professional pretender - whatever her family might have to say, was besides. The truth is that the Yaras family was not lying and the evidence (Hampstead News 1950) proves it beyond a shadow of a doubt.

IN SUM:

What the "Hampstead News" published way back in 1950, contradicts the assumptions expressed on Lillie Langtry's main page (2021) based on an article published by the “Evening Standard” one and half decades later (2 April 1965) AND an imaginative scoop written by Dick Weindling and Marianne Colloms with the help of Anthony J. Camp, MBE (27 May 2021).

Did Electra Yaras lie about her house's connections with Lillie Langtry?

The answer is: No! She did not! To assume otherwise is tantamount to defamation.

She told the "Evening Standard" what she knew - or was told - when she bought the lease of the house in 1946 - plus what transpired from some of her, much older neighbours, afterwards. As simple as that.

The fact is, the Lillie Langtry legend may have been in place decades before the Yaras arrived on the scene in 1946 - and for all we now know, possibly as far back as 1914 or even 1901 - as the new data is suggesting.

The immortal words of Max Arthur, OBE come to mind:

  • "There is often no stronger proof than rumour concerning historical anecdotes and speculation – and often no stronger proof is needed.” (in "Lost Voices of the Edwardians").

The investigation goes on. Stand by for further announcements.

  • “The truth is rarely pure and never simple …” (Oscar Wilde in “The Importance of Being Earnest”)
  • "To make an honest mistake is not the end of the world, but to have lost the wish to find the truth, or to deny it because it is not your truth, is bigotry." (Adrienne Corri in "The Search for Gainsborough")


References:

  • Relevant microfilmed copies of the “Evening Standard”, “The Times”, “The Daily Telegraph” and others, are available at the British Library (London/St. Pancras).

Addenda:

It seems that the "Hampstead News" was first published in November 1882 as the "South Hampstead Advertiser".

We know, from the article quoted above (1950) and the references indicated here (1914, 1933, 1948) that Frederick Scarsbrook (co-owner of the "Hampstead News") lived at 81 Alexandra Road - just a few numbers away from 103 (...)

We also know (same source) that Frederick passed away in 1948 and that "a previous occupier of his house was Miss L. Streetly-Smith, a former editor of the Hampstead News"!

It is also known that Miss Streetly-Smith was already living at 81 Alexandra Road in 1914 (possibly as far back as 1901) and that she died there on 26 October 1933 which was when, presumably, Frederick Scarsbrook moved in. According to the "Hampstead News" he lived there until 1948.

The years 1914 and 1933 (not to mention 1948) were both well before 1965 - or 1946 for that matter - the question here is; did these two know Lillie Langtry was supposed to have lived, or stayed, just a few houses away from them? Chances are, they did. They were, after all, journalists.

Now, a couple of things we may have missed:

One is if Lillie Langtry had lived or stayed at 103 Alexandra Rd. before 1883 say, you would not find her name on a lease. Why? Because married women could not own property, not until the Married Women's Property Act of 1882 came into effect on 1 January 1883. As for Census records, forget them.

All we have to go by (courtesy of Mr A.J. Camp, MBE see "Archives") is the 1881 Census, and that the "1884 Directories (not quite clear which directories) show No 103 occupied by Alfred Savill" - the founder of Savills, one of the United Kingdom's largest estate agents. An estate agent!? Hm. That's interesting (...)

The other is if you assume that Lillie was too much of an aristocrat, too posh, to rent a room in a plebeian's house (and the same would apply to Mrs LeBreton and Lillie's baby Jeanne-Marie) you could be wrong. I will tell you why. Later.

  • Further references: "Hampstead News" 2 September 1948, 7 March 1935, 26 November 1914 and 11 July 1901.






Inspector Colombo (talk) 18:54, 29 November 2023 (UTC) --Inspector Colombo (talk) 16:50, 30 November 2023 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Lillie_Langtry/Archive_1

"When to archive, and what may be the optimal length for a talk page, are subjective decisions that should be adapted to each case. For example, ongoing discussions and nearby sections they reference should generally be kept intact."' ('Wikipedia)


Inspector Colombo (talk) 16:40, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

The assertion that Electra Yaras invented the legend of Lillie Langtry's association with Leighton House (103, Alexandra Road) “to suggest a historical importance for the house and support its preservation" is at odds with the facts...

Here is an article written by Sydney Catley and published by the "Hampstead News" on the 25 May 1950 - page 3. A game-changer. Let me share some of its bytes:

"Alexandra Road (...) at one time the street could boast that it housed no less a personage than Lillie Langtry (...) she lived at Leighton House, which has a covered canopy leading from the gate above the marble steps to the front door" (...) "Another and perhaps more intimate personality in Hampstead, who lived in this road was Mr Frederick Scarsbrook co-founder of the "Hampstead News" who died in 1948 at the age of 93 years. A previous occupier of his house, incidentally, was Miss L. Streetly-Smith, a former editor of this newspaper".

What the “Hampstead News” tells us here, invalidates assumptions made on Lillie Langtry's main page.

Assumptions made from an “Evening Standard” article (2 April 1965), published one and a half decades after the “Hampstead News” feature quoted here (25 May 1950) which oddly enough, was overlooked (...)

This piece of the Evening Standard was used "to prove" (as if it were) that Electra Yaras - a prominent member of the Greek community in London - had (in 1965) invented the association of Lillie Langtry's with Leighton House (103 Alexandra Road) during a campaign to save the house from demolition – or, as a curator of this page diplomatically put it:

"These claims (were) made to suggest a historical importance for the house and support its preservation" (verbatim).

This assumption was first articulated by two local historians - Dick Weindling and Marianne Colloms (with the help of Anthony J. Camp, MBE) in their blog “ History of Kilburn and West Hampstead” on May 27, 2021.

The story goes that in the following month (sales oblige, I guess) their "findings" were treated as a scoop by the local and mainstream Media (e.g. Camden New Journal, The Times and The Daily Telegraph) - and the defamation of Electra Yaras spread accordingly.

What's more, Adrienne Corri's name (then a well-known actress) was "dropped" in connection with Electra Yaras. Electra was described as an "actress" - "a former actress” (sic).

Electra Yaras was not an actress! I suspect she was called an actress with a denotation-and-connotation effect in mind - to make the argument more convincing; two "actresses" conspired to create a myth on the stage of ongoing events - do you follow?

Incidentally, the "Evening Standard" correctly reported Mrs Yaras's profession as a "tour director" - not as an "actress" (...)

Adrienne Corri was, for a while, a member of the Society of Genealogists - make of it what you wish - but the fact that the St. Johns Wood and Hampstead Preservation Societies, Henry Brooke (MP), Sir John Betjeman (a founder of the Victorian Society) and Sir Hugh Casson (ex-president of the Royal Academy) were all involved in the campaign to preserve most of the street and the house itself, that was blissfully ignored - as if they ALL had been fooled by Electra Yaras’ imagination. Really?

I have already addressed this blunder in the "archived" Talk Page (link at the top) but was ignored. Maybe the evidence was not convincing enough. I thought.

In the first interview, I had with the Yaras family, it transpired that Lillie Langtry's connection with Leighton House was well known in the area - even before Romuald and Electra Yaras moved into Leighton House on 13 February 1946 - that is, decades before the area was earmarked for demolition!

Was it possible that the facts did not fit the "official narrative" of a laureate Wikipedia editor or two? I wondered.

Looks like I was right. My contributions were subsequently archived as "offensive rubbish" - or words to that effect - and to this day, the same false assumptions remain in place to misinform Wikipedia users.

I suppose the rationale might have been - since my information was coming from Electra Yaras' family and someone had already assumed (without proof) that Electra was an "actress" - a professional pretender - whatever her family might have to say, was besides. The truth is that the Yaras family was not lying and the evidence (Hampstead News 1950) proves it beyond a shadow of a doubt.

IN SUM:

What the "Hampstead News" published way back in 1950, contradicts the assumptions expressed on Lillie Langtry's main page (2021) based on an article published by the “Evening Standard” one and half decades later (2 April 1965) AND an imaginative scoop written by Dick Weindling and Marianne Colloms with the help of Anthony J. Camp, MBE (27 May 2021).

Did Electra Yaras lie about her house's connections with Lillie Langtry?

The answer is: No! She did not! To assume otherwise is tantamount to defamation.

She told the "Evening Standard" what she knew - or was told - when she bought the lease of the house in 1946 - plus what transpired from some of her, much older neighbours, afterwards. As simple as that.

The fact is, the Lillie Langtry legend may have been in place decades before the Yaras arrived on the scene in 1946 - and for all we now know, possibly as far back as 1914 or even 1901 - as the new data is suggesting.

The immortal words of Max Arthur, OBE come to mind:

  • "There is often no stronger proof than rumour concerning historical anecdotes and speculation – and often no stronger proof is needed.” (in "Lost Voices of the Edwardians").

The investigation goes on. Stand by for further announcements.

  • “The truth is rarely pure and never simple …” (Oscar Wilde in “The Importance of Being Earnest”)
  • "To make an honest mistake is not the end of the world, but to have lost the wish to find the truth, or to deny it because it is not your truth, is bigotry." (Adrienne Corri in "The Search for Gainsborough")

References:

  • Relevant microfilmed copies of the “Evening Standard”, “The Times”, “The Daily Telegraph” and others, are available at the British Library (London/St. Pancras).

Addenda:

It seems that the "Hampstead News" was first published in November 1882 as the "South Hampstead Advertiser".

We know, from the article quoted above (1950) and the references indicated here (1914, 1933, 1948) that Frederick Scarsbrook (co-owner of the "Hampstead News") lived at 81 Alexandra Road - just a few numbers away from 103 (...)

We also know (same source) that Frederick passed away in 1948 and that "a previous occupier of his house was Miss L. Streetly-Smith, a former editor of the Hampstead News"!

It is also known that Miss Streetly-Smith was already living at 81 Alexandra Road in 1914 (possibly as far back as 1901) and that she died there on 26 October 1933 which was when, presumably, Frederick Scarsbrook moved in. According to the "Hampstead News" he lived there until 1948.

The years 1914 and 1933 (not to mention 1948) were both well before 1965 - or 1946 for that matter - the question here is; did these two know Lillie Langtry was supposed to have lived, or stayed, just a few houses away from them? Chances are, they did. They were, after all, journalists.

Now, a couple of things we may have missed:

One is if Lillie Langtry had lived or stayed at 103 Alexandra Rd. before 1883 say, you would not find her name on a lease. Why? Because married women could not own property, not until the Married Women's Property Act of 1882 came into effect on 1 January 1883. As for Census records, forget them.

All we have to go by (courtesy of Mr A.J. Camp, MBE see "Archives") is the 1881 Census, and that the "1884 Directories (not quite clear which directories) show No 103 occupied by Alfred Savill" - the founder of Savills, one of the United Kingdom's largest estate agents. An estate agent!? Hm. That's interesting (...)

The other is if you assume that Lillie was too much of an aristocrat, too posh, to rent a room in a plebeian's house (and the same would apply to Mrs LeBreton and Lillie's baby Jeanne-Marie) you could be wrong. I will tell you why. Later.

  • Further references: "Hampstead News" 2 September 1948, 7 March 1935, 26 November 1914 and 11 July 1901.

Inspector Colombo (talk) 16:51, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

A word or two about "spurious associations" and the risks of over-referencing or not referencing at all...

A loaded adjective such as "spurious" in a heading (main page) may suggest an ex-cathedra opinion not a statement of fact. A more neutral term should be used.

Also, the overuse of references to "sell a point" should be avoided as they risk bringing Wikipedia into disrepute.

I couldn't help noticing that in just a few lines of text, four references (some misplaced) are repeated more than 15 times on the main page (article).

This is just an excerpt of the passage I am referring to. The over-referencing goes on (...)

"On 11 April 1971 [124][125] The Hampstead News said that the house had been built for Langtry by Lord Leighton.[126] These claims by Yaras and later by The Hampstead News were made to suggest historical importance for the house and support its preservation from the demolition which had been originally ordered in 1965 and revived in 1971.[126][124][125] The claims were supported in 1971 by actress Adrienne Corri, who lived nearby[125] and signed a petition,[127] and were publicised in The Times on 8 October 1971[125][126] and The Daily Telegraph on 9 October 1971.[125][127] They were given further publicity by Anita Leslie in 1973 in a book on the Marlborough House set.[128]. The house was nevertheless demolished in 1971 to make way for the Alexandra Road Estate.[127][125][126]

Statistics:

(124) Holzer, Hans (1975) The Great British Ghost Hunt, Bobs-Merrill Company, is repeated 3 times unnecessarily:

(125) Weindling, Dick; Colloms, Marianne. "Looking for Lillie Langtry". History of Kilburn and West Hampstead is repeated 6 times, unnecessarily.

(126) Bridge, Mark (2 June 2021). "Lillie Langtry and Edward VII's Hampstead love nest 'a myth', is repeated 3 times unnecessarily.

(127) Foot, Tom (27 May 2021). "Historians say there's no evidence for Lillie Langtry's link to Camden". "Camden New Journal". Is repeated three times, unnecessarily.

Observations: I am not clear about the relevance of quoting Hans Holzer's book here except perhaps to outline the "ghost" story and to try and discredit it (?). A truly objective entry would perhaps benefit from quoting an author such as Alan Sanderson, MD (consultant) or perhaps adding a link to the "Society for Psychical Research". Think about it.

Mark Bridge's ("The Times") article referenced here is merely a rehash of the Dick Weindling and Marianne Colloms scoop written with the help of Anthony J. Camp, MBE. Irrelevant. Why quote "The Times"? Because of its patina as a newspaper of reference? To help to prove a point? Add a number? I am confused.

References:

  • Alan Sanderson, MD "Psychiatry and the Spirit World - True Stories on the Survival of Consciousness after Death" - Park Street Press, Rochester, Vermont, 2022.
  • https://www.spr.ac.uk/about/whos-who-spr


By contrast, some assertions lack a reference (...).

Take this passage in the fifth paragraph: "The persistence of the myth, propounded in a time when stories about the royal family were easy to publicise and received no critical or substantiating research,[126] resulted in Langtry's name still being in use in some place names and locales in the South Hampstead area..."

(126) refers to Bridge, Mark (2 June 2021). "Lillie Langtry and Edward VII's Hampstead love nest 'a myth'".

Now, if you happen to have a copy of this particular issue of "The Times" (I do) nowhere is it written - or indeed suggested - that "The persistence of the myth, propounded in a time when stories about the royal family were easy to publicise and received no critical or substantiating research".

Looks like the editor here tried to associate his own biased opinion with "The Times" without substantiating it further. Again, this risks bringing Wikipedia into disrepute (...)


Inspector Colombo (talk) 19:37, 22 December 2023 (UTC) Inspector Colombo (talk) 00:41, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Lillie_Langtry/Archive_1&oldid=1191383488"