Duke and Duchess of Windsor (1894-1972) and (1895-1986)


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
Courtesy of Pope-Hennessy, this admonishment of the eighteen year old David by his father George V.".....it is most necessary that you should develop properly both in mind and body. It all depends.....whether you develop into a strong, healthy man or remain a sort of puny, halfgrown boy"!!!!!!!! Probably just the words of a father very concerned by his sons' punishing exercise regime and birdlike appetite (might David have been anorexic) but I'm willing to bet that to D it sounded like yet another critism. To me, the word "remain" tells how D was viewed as being by GV.
 
:previous:
Via letter. George was good at that. So was May. . .
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I was just wondering who is selling the Duchesses items? and who the #$%^% is interested in them?:ROFLMAO:
 
Auntie, if by "items" you mean jewellery, I was lucky enough to see Sothebys' display of pieces which were to be re-auctioned just before Christmas. To find myself standing with just a pane of glass between me and pieces which had adorned her wrist and neck was VERY powerful. I can only say IMO they were Magnificent!!! That's not to say I'd want to wear much of it because other than some superlative pearls most of it is not to my taste- I don't like her curious, but very brave way of combining colours. However, I can recognize superb craftmanship when I see it and would have graciously accepted any piece as a gift!!!! As to who would actually buy them, they all went for prices way above estimate.
 
I am not talking about her jewells, they are mind boggeling,
I mean her lingerie and handbags, which are being sold now:p
 
I'd be interested in Wallis' handbag. Any handbag sheowned, the woman had style after all. AS for the bits of fluff, Russo will pass on that. . . .:whistling:
 
VM, to my knowledge, she was an only child whose father died of TB soon after her birth. Her only close relative seems to have been her aunt Bessie, and unless it was a family name, for whom she may have originally been named, Bessiewallis being the name on her birth certificate. Sorry, I can give you no info about wider family.
 
Tsaritsa,

Thank you for the reply.:flowers: It has been some time since I read the biography on Wallis and I could not recall a sister but I did remember her Aunt Bessie, of whom Wallis was very fond. I asked this question because I am reading Shawcross's bio on the Queen Mother and when the King and Queen visited the States in 1939, they made a quick stop in Baltimore of all places on their way to Washington. According to Joseph Kennedy, who was Ambassador to Great Britain at the time, Queen Elizabeth said a woman who looked just like Wallis approached her and offered her a bouquet of flowers. She initially thought it was Wallis but then realized that could not be true but was nonetheless nonplussed about what she should do.

Do you think it was some woman dressed and styled to resemble Wallis in order to play a prank on the King and Queen? Perhaps a Wallis sympathizer who set out to avenge a native daughter? This is the first time I have read of this incident.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Confession time VM! I've not read Shawcross' bio on the QM. Am rereading Zieglers' Edward V111 which was bought for me within weeks of its' release in 1990 so many years have passed since I last read it. Having read so much of the derogatory about EV111 it seems odd to be reading something about him which has no hint of condemnation.
 
Hello,
I am a new subscriber to this site, and I love it ! I have long been a fan of Princess Diana, and read virtually every book written about her to date. I have also always had an interest in the Duke and Duchess of Windsor, and in the last six months, have read approx 12 books on them. I guess one of my questions has been one of so many others: Did Wallis ever have a child ? I've read where she became pregnant by an Italian man while she was still Mrs. Simpson, but aborted the baby. I read that she did run into him a few times in travels with the Duke, purely accidental. I've read where her first husband, Win Spencer, was physically abusive in his drunken rages, and once kicked Wallis so hard in the stomach, that it left her unable to have children. I also read where she and then Prince of Wales had a daughter in 1934, and the baby was "taken away" immediately. I've seen the photos the the girl-now grown woman with 4 sons-named Elizabeth, and the comparisons are quite uncanny ! I am curious why, if this woman is/believes she is the Windsors daughter, why a simple DNA test was never administered. I would think someone who was told that her birth parents were the Duke and Duchess would want to know, but perhaps, not. I always thought the Windsors would have made good parents, given their love for each other. They could have offered a child/children everything possible.
I was just curious if anyone had any different information. I don't know if it's just me, but this couple fascinate me; perhaps it's because my late husband and I had a beautiful love story, as well. Although we didn't have many years together before he died, I always knew I was blessed to have been able to marry my " prince charming" . We weren't a duke and duchess, but a teacher and a principal with our own love story. :flowers:
Thank you to everyone for riveting information on Wallis and David--they can become addictive !
 
I know I just posted a question regarding if the Duke and Duchess of Windsor had any children. I did just read the 3D.org story that their "daughter" Elizabeth has posted to attempt to get her story out. The photos are extremely similar. What I don't understand, is how Wallis could be pregnant-especially in the 3rd trimester--and not be noticed by anyone. It was in June 3, 1934 that the child was born, and the Wallis and the Prince of Wales were told the baby had been born dead. I would think somewhere, in all that has been written of the Windsors, that a notice or mention, of Wallis being pregnant--especially in the last month or two--would go unnoticed ! I know she was a very slim lady, and often pregnancies in thin women are easy to conceal. This is quite a fascinating story !:flowers:
 
Teacher35 said:
What I don't understand, is how Wallis could be pregnant-especially in the 3rd trimester--and not be noticed by anyone. It was in June 3, 1934 that the child was born, and the Wallis and the Prince of Wales were told the baby had been born dead. I would think somewhere, in all that has been written of the Windsors, that a notice or mention, of Wallis being pregnant--especially in the last month or two--would go unnoticed ! I know she was a very slim lady, and often pregnancies in thin women are easy to conceal. This is quite a fascinating story !:flowers:
Click to expand...
Wasn't there an opera with the same sort of story going on?
If Miss Elizabeth thinks she is the Windsor's love child, she ought to get a DNA test and have done with it. (Wouldn't THAT flip the Windsor's cookies VM if she WERE?:D)
 
One reason the photos are similar is that pictures are shown with people in similar poses. One of the sons even grew his facial hair to resemble Prince Albert's! Elizabeth has been discussed in this thread: http://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f96/exposing-imposters-10518-3.html

When I read the website, what struck me was the "clues" in the jewellery and so on. That's the thing about conspiracy theories--which this lady's story is: a person has a preformed conclusion, and then finds the evidence they want. So she finds all these threes, which seems to back up the theory that there was a child. Then she finds underlines which spell out "mom" in Morse Code. Actually, being British, I think that David (as the Duke of Windsor was known to his family), would have spelled out "Mummy" or "Mum."


Teacher35 said:
The photos are extremely similar. What I don't understand, is how Wallis could be pregnant-especially in the 3rd trimester--and not be noticed by anyone.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Russophile said:
Wasn't there an opera with the same sort of story going on?
If Miss Elizabeth thinks she is the Windsor's love child, she ought to get a DNA test and have done with it. (Wouldn't THAT flip the Windsor's cookies VM if she WERE?:D)
Click to expand...

Russo my dear,

That would cause some consternation:lol: but since Edward VIIi renounced the throne for himself and his descendants, the poor lady will just be kissin' cousin to the Royal Family.
 
Russophile said:
If Miss Elizabeth thinks she is the Windsor's love child, she ought to get a DNA test and have done with it. (Wouldn't THAT flip the Windsor's cookies VM if she WERE?:D)
Click to expand...

Not to indulge that theory, but it's impossible for her to get a DNA test without a confirmed relative giving a sample for hers to be compared to, and there aren't all that many people out there who would be able to give such a sample (and I doubt any of them would). (It would have to be someone with a supposed common ancestor who is within four or five generations of both of them; or more narrowly it could be anyone with a direct matrilineal line to any of Wallis's matrilineal ancestors.)
 
Hello Teacher 35, and welcome. The Windsors certainly are addictive. In response to your question about a possible child, firstly I can think of no reason why a couple who are madly in love would wish to permanently offload the product of their love, nannies being more readily available then than now, although of course, we must remember we are speaking of two supremely self obsessed people.......however I consider this to be hyperthetical because there is reason to believe that after suffering mumps in his teens, further complicated by orchitis, the Duke was sterile. Bloch tells us that Wallis' birth was left unregistered for the longest possible time because there was some confusion about her gender. It is possible that she was an hermaphrodite. I believe ASI is the most recent theory. Maybe the term "intersex" is applied to these conditions. Either way conception is unlikely to be possible- given that she had a fertile partner. We also have her own assertation, given on the morning of her marriage with David, that she had not had sexual intercourse with either of her two previous husbands - a sudden thought! Might this have been the reason/excuse for Spencers' drinking and his physical abuse of her? She also reportedly said that "no one touched her below the Maginot line" Was it possible that she deliberately withheld certain truths from these men? History tells us little of any of her then living family, save Aunt Bessie of whom she was fond, but this doesn't rule out wider family and likenesses will throw up down the generations. My feeling is that we have here a very sad, psychologically complicated couple who were wholly unsuited for anybody save each other. It seems to have been a relationship of such high dependency as to be stiffling, but being needed can be a powerful and heady experience and nobody could need her as much as David.
 
Russophile said:
Check this out. Now tell me you don't want that handbag and those shoes! :D

As the Duchess of Windsor's fabulous outfits go under the hammer, we reveal the secrets of Wallis's wardrobe | Mail Online
Click to expand...

She wasn't what I would call an attractive woman by an stretch of the imagination (IMO)... and I am not one of her admirers at all (other than the fact she saved England from a horse's behind of a monarch), but she did have a certain air of style... and it fit her perfectly. She always chose flattering outfits of the best quality! She wasn't, in my opinion, classy or refined... like her sister-in-law, Princess Marina - the epitome of class..... but Wallis definitely knew how to dress!
 
This year is 25 years since the death of the Duchess of Windsor,Wallis Simpson.With this sad occasion,some events are supposed to be organized.
First of all,Madonna's movie on Wallis is on the way to appear.
The 2 new biographies will appear soon as well:
"Behind closed doors,the tragic untold story of the Duchess of Windsor"(Hugo Vickers)
"That woman,the life of Wallis Simpson ,duchess of Windsor"(Anne Sebba)
25ème année de la disparition de la duchesse de Windsor | Noblesse & Royautés
 
Last edited:
auntie said:
I am not talking about her jewells, they are mind boggeling,
I mean her lingerie and handbags, which are being sold now:p
Click to expand...
Auntie, I remember when they auctioned Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis' things after her death and some of the most trivial things made HUGE amounts. Everything from salt shakers to her riding boots and cigaret cases. Same general idea, I think.
 
So very sad, but other than in realms of fairy tales and "happy ever after" land I find it hardly possible, given the characters of the two main players,for the story to have ended much differently. From the beginning and to the exclusion of all else, sweeping aside anything or anybody who stood in his way, David was committed heart and mind to this relationship - her mind, if not her heart, was equally so. They created a world for themselves which negated the need for friends and family. They probably would have been quite unconscious of this while they were both youthful enough to enjoy the delights of hedonistic life, their wealth and status ensuring their place at the centre of their chosen world. However, wealth and status alone only buys "things" and duty, which as a member of the BRF it would have been unnecessary for him to know and Wallis, I believe, didn't feel the need to know.
I find it hard to imagine that they experienced friendships in the way of lesser mortals. I feel it more likely that they had acquaintants, that there remained a respectful line that outsiders crossed at their peril, which would have been fine had there been even one or two insiders, but I suspect that other than WE, there weren't. In fact, their servants probably knew them more intimately than anybody and I believe some of them remained, maybe without wages? almost to the end.
The Bible warns us that "as ye sow, so shall ye reap" - the secular version telling us "what goes around, comes around" but I really don't believe that she deserved to die in those circumstances. We would face imprisonment for keeping an animal alive in those conditions, but the sad truth is, that after David died and she aged, she mattered less to more people and in the end she mattered to nobody, but at least some of the responsibility for this rests with her.
 
I'm not sure that would have been in the best interests of the child, though. The Duke of Windsor didn't understand putting others' needs before his own, and I think that the Duchess would have been more interested in being a socialite than in spending much time with a child. They didn't show much interest in children as far as I can see.


Lenora said:
If she only had a child or had adopted one...
Click to expand...
 
Lenora said:
If she only had a child or had adopted one...
Click to expand...


Plenty of elderly people with children are also abused and neglected!
Having a child is no guarantee. Look at Brooke Astor.

(There's also no guarantee that the parent will outlive the child).
 
Last edited:
It is too sad that the Duchess had no friends to come to her aid. This abuse happens on all levels, unfortunately, but when it happens to the famous, it seems somehow more tragic, as though they were paying a price for past behavior. How did no one tumble to this Blum's abuse of the Duchess?
 
Well you have to remember that David and Wallis were people who had friends and associates but really only needed (in David's case) and depended on each other.

Long time workers were let go for a variety of reasons, David was estranged from his family, Wallis was far away from hers and really she was only close to a cousin or two and Aunt Bea. Than David died, and Wallis didn't trust Mountbatten (which probably wasn't a bad idea) who might have been strong enough to prohibit the abuse, and get rid of Blum. Any friends like Diana Mitford and Diana Cooper were either ill, dead or two far away to stop it. But people who take advantage of things like that, often separate friends from their intended victims.

That's how something like that could happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Blog Real
Prince Edward, Duke of Kent & Strathearn & Princess Victoria of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeld
Replies
7
Views
1K
Prinsara
Prinsara
Blog Real
King Edward III 'The Confessor' (1003/5-1066) and Queen Edith of Wessex
Replies
3
Views
844
CyrilVladisla
CyrilVladisla
Blog Real
King Vittorio Emanuele I (1759-1824) and Queen Maria Teresa of Austria-Este
Replies
2
Views
498
Blog Real
Blog Real
Blog Real
King Edward I (1239-1307) and Wives (Eleanor of Castile & Margaret of France)
Replies
17
Views
1K
LauraS3514
LauraS3514
Blog Real
King Carlo Alberto (1798-1849) and Queen Maria Theresa of Austria
Replies
2
Views
552
Blog Real
Blog Real

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom