I've searched this thread and can't seem to find what I'm looking for, but apologies if I've missed it. Regarding the 28-year relationship between Prince Edward, Duke of Strathearn (Queen Victoria's father), and his French mistress Madame Julie de Saint-Laurent in Canada, biographer Mollie Gillen reportedly gained access to the Royal Archives before she died in 2009. The RA does not list any children of the union between Edward and Julie, and everything I can find online says this effectively closes the case - that rumours of living descendants from the union are simply fantasy.
My questions are thus:
Would the RA categorically, unquestionably, have recorded these descendants despite the fact that they all would have been older than Victoria?
In theory, would the RA not simply omit information it did not think was of benefit to the royal bloodline?
After all, Victoria's legitimacy has already come into question over the spread of haemophilia among her descendants (I am NOT claiming she isn't Edward's daughter, nor am I claiming the royal line, even if it was illegitimate, should have anyone else on the throne but QEII, only referencing the controversy).
Basically, for the sake of genealogy research, I'm curious, how much can we trust the accuracy of Royal Archive information, if that information might be detrimental to the sanctity of the royal line or Royal Family itself?
If you've researched the claims of illegitimate children born of Prince Edward and Saint-Laurent's union in Canada and have anything else to offer, my curious mind would be grateful for your insight.