Talk:Anna Leonowens

Contents
I moved the following statement here from the article space. - Montr&eacute;alais 22:59, 8 Jun 2004 (UTC)

"In case of doubt, the bulk of this article is taken from a never-to-be-published book of which I am sole author. user:Deb"


 * Firstly, well done Deb. :) Secondly, have you seen this page: "The Truth About Anna Leonowens"? It says that she was really born as Anna Edwards in India, possibly of mixed race (well, she did look it, don't you think?), that her husband was really named Thomas Leon Owens (not "Leonowens"), and so on and so forth. Oh yes, and she was apparently a grandaunt of Boris Karloff. :) It looks like the information comes from scholarly research (by a certain Dr. W. S. Bristowe), but I haven't looked into it properly. I've been meaning to for years, since the subject came up on a mailing list I used to belong to, about genealogy in India, and it sounded interesting, but I've never got round to it... -- Oliver P. 17:10 26 May 2003 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the link. It's interesting as much for what it doesn't say as for what it does.  Sounds like Dr Bristowe is not a historian -- but then, neither am I.  I know that it was a shock to the Caernarfon town council when they discovered, round about the time of the film remake, that she hadn't really been born there.  However, some of the other stuff mentioned is not really all that startling.  "Romance of the Harem" was fiction, so it's pointless to criticise it for lack of authenticity.  When did a little thing like that ever bother a Victorian author?


 * I don't want anyone to think of this as my article. I added that bit at the bottom just in case anyone thought I had copied it from somewhere.  It was originally written specifically with reference to Anna's Welsh roots -- now discovered to be very questionable.  However, I hope it will get changed, updated and corrected as further facts become known.


 * And no, Oliver, of course I didn't mean you. Deb 17:06 27 May 2003 (UTC)


 * Okay, cool. :) I'll try to read up about her a bit more, and then I might feel daring enough to edit the article... -- Oliver P. 11:31 28 May 2003 (UTC)

Anna a Complusive Liar
Anna, of course, claimed that he husband, Mr Leon Owen, was an officer in the Welsh Guards. However, research has shown that there was no officer of that name in this or in any other regiment of the British army. It seems clear too that she was of mixed race and certainly no gentlewoman. Research has shown also that her husband was an inn keeper in India and that he sister married a common soldier in the British army in India.

Her role at court was not at all what she claimed. She ran one of several schools within the palace where children of courtiers and others could receive education (such schools still exist in the palace). She was never a tutor to the Prince Chulalongkorn, who, as heir to the throne, was tutored by leading aristocrats of great learning. She may, however, have practiced English with him.


 * Then why did he thank her years later? 64.132.218.4 (talk) 20:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

She certainly never had the role of royal adviser that she claimed and, indeed, court records of the time indicate that she met the king only once.


 * Er--then why was she in his will? 64.132.218.4 (talk) 20:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

It is clear that much of what she recorded in her books about Siam and King Mongut was complete fantasy. Very little of what she recorded stands up to historic scrutiny. She was, it appears, a compulsive liar.

In America she she needed to make money and she produced the books and gave lectures that aimed to provide what her audiences wanted to hear. The more sensational and self serving the better.

You may not think her fantastic and libellous ravings are important but, here in Thailand King Mongut is revered and great offence is felt by the people at the way Hollywood and others continue to promote her false claims as though they were historic truths.


 * We "westerners" don't take an enjoyable musical or movie as fact, and we don't have any concept of "lese majesty." No one here promotes those stories as historic truths; Mrs. Leonowens's story is not nearly as well-known here as it apparently is over there.  If you have citations for all your claims, you should edit the article.64.132.218.4 (talk) 20:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

She was the first in a long line of westerners of somewhat shady background who have come to Bangkok to re-invent themselves.

Kevin O’Sheehan. Kevinbangkok@hotmail.com

Deceased husband
Re your article on Anna Leonowens. Her husband died and is buried in the Christian cemetery of Georgetown, Penang, Malaysia not Singapore as you stated. I saw it last week whilst on holiday there.

New Link
Added "Truth about Anna Leonowens" link to the page. I thought it is very informative, although heavily bias. However, it is rather hard to find an article supporting Anna that actually studied her life thoroughly. Greatly appreciated if anyone will add a link that will support Anna's claim.

Heavy duty editing pending
I've tagged this article for POV and references. This thing is filled with opinion, extraneous references, conjecture, weasel words, etc. It will soon be seriously redacted unless some large-scale sourcing is undertaken. It is also claimed to be an unpublished opus, a personal essay, which is not permitted by Wikipedia. &mdash;J M Rice 03:25, 21 April 2006 (UTC)


 * I strongly agree. The article, as it stands right now, simply does not belong in Wikipedia.  I understand the need for some Thai royalists to fight for their monarchy, but libel like this is disgraceful.  The current King himself has noted "An encyclopedia should be accurate and informative, without the need for biased judgments". Patiwat 07:06, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Weasely language
Some weasel words make there way into the "Her role in the royal court" section, distorting NPOV.

It has been said that Anna Leonowens, in her memoirs of 1870, exaggerated the importance of her role in the King's court and suggested that she had a greater degree of influence than she could possibly have had in reality.
 * This is a straight-forward accusation that should be clearly referenced. "It has been said" leaves the reader a bit confused... who said it?  where?  under what circumstances?  Without a clear citation, this sentence should be deleted. Patiwat 06:01, 26 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Offending paragraph removed for reasons stated above. Patiwat 17:32, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

It is debatable whether the true story of her time in Siam, which lasted only five years, would have become the subject of a film, a musical, and even a television series, if it had been told with literal truthfulness either by Anna herself or by those who re-told it later.
 * This wording seems overly speculative for an encyclopedia biographical article. Also, the truthfulness of those who retold her story isn't really relevant to an article on Anna Leonowens.  Why should the "truthfullness" of a screenplay writer have any bearing on the truthfulness of Leonowens?  If someone reputable has clearly questioned her truthfulness (and I understand there are quite a few), then a citation should be given. Patiwat 06:01, 26 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Offending paragraph removed. Popularity of story irrelevent to the topic at hand. Patiwat 17:32, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

Race
Pardon me for what may be cultural ignorance, but the article seems to be making some implicit racial arguments about that I'm not sure are relevant. The article states up front that she is partly Welsh, English, and Indian. It then ends by saying that those who have portrayed her on stage "have never given a hint of Anna's alleged Welsh origins -- let alone her actual mixed-race background." This leaves me a bit confused. I had never realized that 1) Welsh people looked any different from caucasian anglo-saxon people, and that 2) casting decisions made over a hundred years after Leonowens died had any relevance to Leonowens, the individual. Surely the fact that Yul Brynner and Chow-Yen Fat didn't look anything like a Thai should not be mentioned in the article on King Mongkut? Or should it? "Revived many times on stage, the musical has remained a favourite of the theatre-going public, and the acters who have played the part have never given a hint of Mongkut's Thai origins." It seems a bit silly to me, and I have no idea why it is mentioned at all here. Patiwat 06:20, 26 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Nobody has countered this, so I have made the changes. Patiwat 20:41, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Female Private Teacher = Governess?
Dictionary.com defines "governess" as "a woman employed to educate and train the children of a private household." Basically, a private tutor. The article clearly says that she taught English in the royal household. Doesn't that make her a governess? So why is the article making such a fuss about the fact that she "claimed" she was a governess when she was only a teacher. Regarding this specific point, I don't see why the article trying to question her truthfulness, when I as a reasonable reader and dictionary user can't seem to see how she is being untruthful. Patiwat 06:38, 26 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Nobody has countered this, so I have made the changes. Patiwat 20:34, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

Sorry to dredge up an old matter -- a governess is distinct from a 'teacher', in that the duties of a governess focus primarily on lessons in etiquette and proper, dignified behavior (conduct befitting attendance at a formal dinner, for example). They taught the proverbial 'Three Rs' to the children of a household, as well -- though while the governess taught children how to read, write, and do basic mathematics, they weren't expected to provide an academic education; that was up to a proper 'teacher', usually after the governess' period of service had ended. Anna Leonowens may have simply been attempting to 'pad the resume' (a 'governess' was *quite* a step up from a mere 'English teacher, after all!). 64.180.205.246 (talk) 08:57, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

Making a fuss about the movie
One out of three paragraphs in the "Governess" section is devoted to analyzing a scene from movies filmed a long time after she died. This is an article about Leonowens, not about movies. Factual criticism of the movies should occur in the articles on the movies, not here. Furthermore, the scene in question (Leonowens coming to Siam for the first time) has nothing to do with her functions as a governess/teacher. If someone really wants to write about Leonowens' first impressions of Thailand, then that should occur in a "First impressions of Thailand" section, not the "Governess" section. Patiwat 06:43, 26 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Nobody has countered this, so I have made the changes. Patiwat 20:37, 1 May 2006 (UTC)

The article notes "The King himself was a complex character. Educated and intelligent, he was nevertheless constrained by his own upbringing and traditions. He may have felt a certain degree of respect for the European woman -- indeed, must have done, otherwise he would not have entrusted the education of his children to her; but it would be wrong to imply, as do the various dramatisations of the story, that he treated her as an equal." I don't see why the relationship, as portrayed in some musical or hollywood film is that relevant to the topic at hand. This is an article about Anna Leonowens, not about the movies and musicals. Patiwat 17:43, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

The article notes "Leonowens wrote of his torture and execution of a girl, Tuptim, in her memoirs and shown in a sanitised form in the musical The King and I." The film reference is not relevant. Plus, it makes the sentence grammatically incorrect. Patiwat 17:47, 3 May 2006 (UTC)

S.S.P.P Maha Mongkut
I can't seem to find what "S.S.P.P." stands for. It isn't mentioned in the article on King Mongkut. Can anybody explain? My suspicion is that it is similar in meaning to "R[ex]", the way King Bhumibol signs his name Bhumibol Adulyadej P.R. If this were so, it woulnd't be appropriate to refer to him as "S.S.P.P. Maha Mongkut", but rather as simply "King Mongkut". Patiwat 07:04, 26 April 2006 (UTC)

Restored Edits
I have restored my edits. The article as it stands is not a stump, as claimed by the reverter. Apparently, there are factions who have embraced the Anna Leonowens "cause," pro and con. Wikipedia is not the place for this. &mdash; J M Rice 12:55, 27 April 2006 (UTC)

Letters from King Mongkut to Anna Leonowens
In 2003, the Art & Culture Magazine (a respected Thai publication) discovered 8 letters written by King Mongkut addressed to Anna Leonowens gathering dust in the National Archives. These letters make it very clear that Leonowens was no mere English teacher, but was effectively a political negotiator for King Mongkut. I will incorporate content from these letters in a rewrite of several sections of the article. Read the letters and commentary in Thai in articles entitled "Anna Leonowens: Who says she's a compulsive liar?" (http://www.matichon.co.th/art/art.php?srctag=0604010147&srcday=2005%2F09%2F01&search=no) and "King Mongkut’s letters to Anna: When Madame Teacher plays political negotiator" (http://www.matichon.co.th/art/art.php?srctag=0652010447&srcday=2005%2F09%2F01&search=no). Read further commentary at http://sanpaworn.vissaventure.com/?id=188. My favorite words: "Nothing’s more gratifying to debunk than a false debunking." Patiwat 04:25, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Just a note for user Patiwat-the links provided are not working properly-of course when I tried to search the website, I was unable to because I do not read/speak Thai. Is it possible you can find an English version for this article? I do not mean to be presumptious about English-only, I would just like to be able to read the letters or an article on the letters. Possibly you may know of another website that has the letters available in English? Brattysoul (talk) 03:20, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

DATE of Anna's birth
According to biographer Susan J. Morgan Ph.D., Anna was born on November 26, 1831 NOT November 6th. Dr. Morgan's book, "Bombay Anna" was reviewed in The New York Times on October 12, 2008. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Starfish1014 (talk • contribs) 02:37, 25 October 2008 (UTC)


 * Elizabeth Baigent and Lois K. Yorke in the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, online edition, January 2008, give her date of birth as 6 November 1831, apparently citing Bombay ecclesiastical records, BL OIOC. I don't know which date is correct.  I suppose we could try emailing the British Library at apac-enquiries@bl.uk for clarification. They'd probably be happy to check.  Lachrie (talk) 08:51, 12 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Britannica online says Nov. 6, 1831, so I'm changing all of them to Nov. 6. --108.45.72.196 (talk) 00:24, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikidata says the 6th November. https://m.wikidata.org/wiki/Q234244 Avestaboy (talk) 15:26, 19 July 2019 (UTC)

Caernarfon?
Re: ...and took pains to disguise her humble origins by writing that she had been born a Crawford in Caernarfon. There is no Crawford in Caernarfon. Can this statement be verified? Citation needed.

Secondly: any further info on her father? Thanks. 195.62.202.141 (talk) 06:21, 26 November 2008 (UTC)


 * In her memoirs she says she was born Anna Harriette Crawford in Caernarvon, the daughter of Thomas M. Crawford, a British Army captain, who was killed by the Sikhs at Lahore. Her date of birth in older secondary sources is usually given as 5 November 1834. I'll see if I can locate the precise reference in the text, and get back to you.  Lachrie (talk) 09:03, 12 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Britannica online also shows place of birth as Ahmadnagar, India.  --108.45.72.196 (talk) 00:27, 16 January 2013 (UTC)

The Patrick Donohoe mentioned is not correct
Patrick Donohoe was born 1820 married Mary in 1832 (soon after Anna was born) thus marrying at 12.

The correct Patrick Donohoe can be found in the biography Bombay Anna (can be seen in google books starting page 34). He never received a VC, was born in a different part of Ireland and died in India. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.64.46.8 (talk) 20:31, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Her memoirs
There ought to be a wiki page on The English Governess at the Siamese Court. It would be of the highest interest, even though its claims are disputed. Valetude (talk) 16:38, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 one external links on Anna Leonowens. 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:
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://pheeds.com/Caernarfon.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070319033129/http://www.matichon.co.th/art/art.php?srctag=0602010247&srcday=2005%2F09%2F01&search=no to http://www.sro.wa.gov.au/sites/default/files/occasionalpaper1-leonowensinwesternaustralia.pdf#overlay-context=archive-collection/family-history
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070314043541/http://www.matichon.co.th:80/art/art.php?srctag=0607010347&srcday=2005%2F09%2F01&search=no to http://www.matichon.co.th/art/art.php?srctag=0607010347&srcday=2005%2F09%2F01&search=no
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070312213716/http://www.matichon.co.th:80/art/art.php?srctag=0652010447&srcday=2005%2F09%2F01&search=no to http://www.matichon.co.th/art/art.php?srctag=0652010447&srcday=2005%2F09%2F01&search=no

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 16:24, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Anna Leonowens. 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:
 * Added archive http://www.webcitation.org/6FAzLJFiw?url=http://www.loc.gov/rr/asian/guide/guide-southeast.html to http://www.loc.gov/rr/asian/guide/guide-southeast.html
 * Added tag to http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0WDP/is_2000_Jan_3/ai_58532685
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.matichon.co.th/art/art.php?srctag=0607010347&srcday=2005%2F09%2F01&search=no
 * Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.matichon.co.th/art/art.php?srctag=0652010447&srcday=2005%2F09%2F01&search=no

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 07:21, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Anna Leonowens. 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:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070314043532/http://www.matichon.co.th/art/art.php?srctag=0604010147&srcday=2005%2F09%2F01&search=no to http://www.matichon.co.th/art/art.php?srctag=0604010147&srcday=2005%2F09%2F01&search=no

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

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 01:39, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

context is all
I added a parenthetical mention of zenana missions, next to the statement about the deficiencies of the education provided by European Christian women; it was swiftly reverted. I think readers interested in understanding the context of why the King chose to hire a secular outsider, rather than one of the trained US/UK teachers already in Bangkok, would be best served by having access to this article. If they've never heard of zenana missions, they cannot search for the term. I don't mind if it's moved to a better section (even see also), but it has a place in the article somewhere. --Carbon Caryatid (talk) 22:02, 21 January 2019 (UTC)


 * Good to see you here! I am the evil "reverter" of course although I did not revert without reading the "zenana" article - and I could see your point. Context is indeed all, nonetheless. The King's objection to "missionary education" (as it functioned in India, Thailand, and for that matter in many other countries) was that it centred on making its pupils good Christians (which he wouldn't have wanted in the least), and at the same time neglected secular aspects of Western learning (which he was keen for his children to acquire). This is itself a little aside really, in an article about Anna herself - so that in this context in particular the "zenana" bit would need to be very well (and specifically) "connected" and tied to known fact. The zenana missionaries seem indeed to have been frankly concerned with proselytising rather than "education" (true to a greater or lesser extent of all Christian missionaries of course) and the King himself was quite shrewd enough to realise this - but we are getting into the realm of barely relevant conjecture in raising a link to zenana missionaries as such. Perhaps as a "see also" link? --Soundofmusicals (talk) 22:39, 21 January 2019 (UTC)


 * I'm happy for zenana mission to go in a See Also section. --Carbon Caryatid (talk) 23:48, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

Photograph
Louis was born in c. 1855, and Avis in 1854; the photograph to the right of the paragraph detailing these births is titled "Anna with her young children Louis (left) and Avis (right)". The boy is perhaps 3 and the girl 4 years of age, so the photo could date to c. 1858- given their mother was apparently born in 1831, the elderly-looking (white-haired!) woman in this photo is supposed to be in her late twenties? The photograph below, dated c. 1862, shows a much younger woman, with dark hair, and the portrait at the top of the article depicts her looking very similar in age, and that was apparently produced "c. 1905"- what is the provenance of the photograph, and is there any possibility the children are grandchildren? Her son's article indicates there were some. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.24.232.92 (talk) 03:08, 9 November 2023 (UTC)


 * Indeed. The photo is with her grandchildren, taken in 1911. It appears User:Arthur Taksin, who added the image, got the file and the erroneous description from a self-published personal website. Please consider replacing it with the better version from the McCord Stewart Museum, and correcting the caption and file description. --Paul_012 (talk) 15:00, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I got the photo from the French website and the page is here: ANNA HARRIETTE LEONOWENS-MARGARET LANDON - Site de maguy tran - pinterville. The caption saids in French "ANNA and her 2 children AVIS and LOUIS LEONOWENS".
 * Looking at it, it doesn't match with other photos of her at that time like the one you mentioned from around 1862 and matches the around 1905 one more. This does make this seem that the children are her grandchildren, but I doubt they are both of Louis Leonowen's children. Louis had a son and a daughter, but his son Thomas "George" Leonowens was born in 1888 while daughter Anna Leonowens was born in 1890, which doesn't really match with the persumed ages from the photo. Anna Leonowens' only other surviving child was Avis, who did have children. According to Ancestry.com, her children were: James (b.1879), Anna (b.1881), Thomas (b.1883), Avis (b.1886), Kathleen (b.1892), and Francis (b.1894.
 * They one could be Louis' child and the other could be Avis' child. In 1893, Louis left his children with his mother who took them to be with Avis'. I believe they are both Avis' children. If the boy is around 2 and the girl around 4, then it could be Anna and Thomas, or Kathleen and Francis. But yeah, the chance that the children are Louis and Avis is low, I was just going by the caption which is probably innacurate. Arthur Taksin (talk) 07:58, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
 * Alternatively if its a combination of Louis' and Avis' children, it could then be Avis and Thomas if there is a two year age gap. Arthur Taksin (talk) 14:21, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
 * I've uploaded the better version at File:Mrs. Anna H. Leonowens and grandchildren, Montreal, QC, 1911.jpg. The museum page gives 1911 as the photograph's date, so those IDs don't seem to match. The year could be wrong, or maybe they could be some other relatives. We should probably just hold off trying to ID the children. The photo could be placed in the Canada section if it'd be an improvement. There are also other photos of her from the studio on the museum's website --Paul_012 (talk) 02:42, 14 November 2023 (UTC)