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

[Alison H]

I'm sure you're right about that.

It does raise the intriguing question of what would happen if some monarch ever did refuse to go but I don't want to go off topic.

Well, there was Charles I ... although I suppose he wasn't really offered the option of just leaving the country! Or Richard II and Edward II, who were both locked up in castles where they conveniently "died". Probably best not to go there! There are a load of "social contract" theories, from the time of James II, about whether or not it's OK to depose a monarch who's deemed to have behaved in a way that breaches the "contract" between them and their subjects, but whether they'd be dragged up over 300 years on is another story.

 

[Prinsara]

The problem with the "establishment wanted to get rid of David-the-threat and were looking for any excuse" theory is that would have required one member of said Establishment to express glee when David wanted to marry Wallis -- because it would get him out (so, no, Churchill doesn't count and was debatably Est. at the time, anyway).

That didn't happen. It was all more continued shock, horror, and dismay.

[He was most probably a threat. He was certainly sloppy and poorly committed to anything other than himself, as King. The ones who had to deal with him may well have wanted him gone. And yet, when he served up his Crown on a silver platter... no one was happy.]

 

[Betsypaige]

I watched the CNN Windsor show last night, the one that focused on George VI (my favorite Royal).......and they talked about how David constantly phoned his brother, offering advice, and generally just becoming so much of a pest that the King had orders that his brother's calls shouldn't be put through. David and Bertie had been close as boys, and Bertie worshipped his older brother. Through their adulthood, David was still used to being the fair haired child, the older brother, the leader......and while he never wanted to be king, he couldn't handle the fact that he wasn't king, that his brother now had all the attention, the "power" as it were (not really power, but you know what I mean). When it came time to his trip to Germany and appearance with Hitler, the guests/historians/talking heads talked about how David was less of a Nazi sympathizer than an attention hound; he just needed to be the center of attention.

 

[Denville]

I watched the CNN Windsor show last night, the one that focused on George VI (my favorite Royal).......and they talked about how David constantly phoned his brother, offering advice, and generally just becoming so much of a pest that the King had orders that his brother's calls shouldn't be put through. attention.

Yes David wanted to get out of the responsibilities of being King but he thoguht he could still act like one when it suited him. He annoyed and upset his brother by the phone calls to the point where Bertie had to refuse to take them. and yes he didn't IMO have any real interest in fascism.. just wanted to take Wallis to germany and show off.. but he did continue to think that Hitler wasn't such a bad chap and that Britian should be fighting against Communism rather than Nazism

 

[Prinsara]

According to either Tommy Lascelles or one of his other aides, back when David was PoW they'd frequently say "Sir, you're never going to get away with that..." and David's response (not at all concerned) was "But don't you see? I can..."

David and probity. Very much two trains on a collision course.

 

[Betsypaige]

Yes David wanted to get out of the responsibilities of being King but he thoguht he could still act like one when it suited him. He annoyed and upset his brother by the phone calls to the point where Bertie had to refuse to take them. and yes he didn't IMO have any real interest in fascism.. just wanted to take Wallis to germany and show off.. but he did continue to think that Hitler wasn't such a bad chap and that Britian should be fighting against Communism rather than Nazism

He wanted all the perks of being King, but none of the responsibility; he was style over substance, the complete opposite of his brother.

 

[Osipi]

David was the classic narcissist. He was the center of his world and everyone around him served their purpose. One only has to get a glimpse of some of his letters to Freda Dudley Ward to get the impression that when David held something dear to him (as Freda was at the time), he held on very tightly and spun his world around them.

When you apply this to the position of being PoW and then, King, Its easy to see the same pattern of behavior here. All the perks and the kudos and the glory were due to him yet the duty and responsibility of the position deterred David from more pleasurable pursuits.

I think we can safely say that to David, a world without sycophants was not a world David wanted to be part of.

 

[Prinsara]

David was the classic narcissist. He was the center of his world and everyone around him served their purpose. One only has to get a glimpse of some of his letters to Freda Dudley Ward to get the impression that when David held something dear to him (as Freda was at the time), he held on very tightly and spun his world around them.

When you apply this to the position of being PoW and then, King, Its easy to see the same pattern of behavior here. All the perks and the kudos and the glory were due to him yet the duty and responsibility of the position deterred David from more pleasurable pursuits.

I think we can safely say that to David, a world without sycophants was not a world David wanted to be part of.

It's impossible to quote David to Freda properly since it involves a four-letter word that starts with "F". Repeatedly.

I don't like him much, and "we always have such a good time, don't we, angel? And ? the rest of the world" is not a great sign for someone who's getting a nation down the road, but his F-bombs amuse me.

It was post-WWI, so I suppose the entire world was messed up and angry, but he certainly was...

 

[Betsypaige]

David was the classic narcissist. He was the center of his world and everyone around him served their purpose. One only has to get a glimpse of some of his letters to Freda Dudley Ward to get the impression that when David held something dear to him (as Freda was at the time), he held on very tightly and spun his world around them.

When you apply this to the position of being PoW and then, King, Its easy to see the same pattern of behavior here. All the perks and the kudos and the glory were due to him yet the duty and responsibility of the position deterred David from more pleasurable pursuits.

I think we can safely say that to David, a world without sycophants was not a world David wanted to be part of.

David was the golden child, the sun to which everyone in his orbit revolved. His father said that, after his death, he'd ruin himself........and he did. Even with all of his wealth, he ended up pathetic and sad.....and lonely. I'll be honest, whatever I think of him (and a part of me resents him for how he treated Bertie..... I understand why Queen Mother detested him), I'm glad that the Queen and Prince Charles visited him when he was dying. I don't know much about his last years, but I wonder if he regretted anything. He'd lost his family, his home....I doubt he and the Duchess had any true friends (I'm guessing just hangers on, but I could be wrong)....

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

David was the golden child, the sun to which everyone in his orbit revolved. His father said that, after his death, he'd ruin himself........and he did. Even with all of his wealth, he ended up pathetic and sad.....and lonely. I'll be honest, whatever I think of him (and a part of me resents him for how he treated Bertie..... I understand why Queen Mother detested him), I'm glad that the Queen and Prince Charles visited him when he was dying. I don't know much about his last years, but I wonder if he regretted anything. He'd lost his family, his home....I doubt he and the Duchess had any true friends (I'm guessing just hangers on, but I could be wrong)....

In reply to your last sentence: Queen Sofía of Spain once remarked: "Royals have no friends". Her only friend is her own sister Princess Irene, who is still living with her in Madrid. Of course Doña Sofía's worldview is largely upset by the exile of the Greek monarchy and the return of the Spanish monarchy, seeing once trusted "friends" swapping loyalties. That was a lifelong lesson for her. It will not have been different for the Duke of Windsor. I also think that the only real friend, no holds barred and 100% confidential, to the Queen was her late sister Princess Margaret. Again a sibling and no "friend" in the traditional meaning.

 

[Betsypaige]

Here’s some more into that is fascinating and extremely sad...at least to me (read the rest of the article for context). I know the Queen always had affection for her uncle David, so there’s a poignancy there that while he’d fallen out long ago with his once beloved younger brother, at least he did have a relationship to some degree with his daughter.

In fact, she says the Queen, the Duke of Edinburgh and Prince Charles came together, after a day racing at Longchamps, because they knew that the Duke was dying, and to thank him for recently establishing a Prince of Wales Foundation. No official records are believed to exist of a Prince of Wales Foundation that has any link to the Duke of Windsor, nor of the Queen’s meeting with her uncle in Paris shortly before his death.

“That visit was historic and healing,” she insists. “It was very important because the Duke always said that he loved the Queen.”

Indeed, Schutz, says the Duke had bequeathed everything, once the Duchess died, back to the Royal family. “I had a copy of the will. The Windsors wanted all their money, jewellery, paintings, artefacts to be returned to Britain.”

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/life-wallis-simpson-saw-pain-sacrifice-every-day/

 

[Denville]

Here’s some more into that is fascinating and extremely sad...at least to me (read the rest of the article for context). I know the Queen always had affection for her uncle David, so there’s a poignancy there that while he’d fallen out long ago with his once beloved younger brother, at least he did have a relationship to some degree with his daughter.



https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/life-wallis-simpson-saw-pain-sacrifice-every-day/

I dont think that was the case though? I understood that Wallis received everything and it was her own property absolutely.. Because Im sure I've read that Mountbatten tried to persuade her to leave her property back to the RF or in some way, but it was her property and she could choose to do what she liked with it..

 

[Durham]

Well, there was Charles I ... although I suppose he wasn't really offered the option of just leaving the country! Or Richard II and Edward II, who were both locked up in castles where they conveniently "died". Probably best not to go there! There are a load of "social contract" theories, from the time of James II, about whether or not it's OK to depose a monarch who's deemed to have behaved in a way that breaches the "contract" between them and their subjects, but whether they'd be dragged up over 300 years on is another story.

I was thinking more of a hypothetical constitutional impasse that would arise in the modern age although I take your point about previous precedence with, how would we put it, awkward kings.

Some of these themes are dealt with in the play King Charles III by Mike Bartlett. How would a dispute between the executive & a modern constitutional monarch play out?

It's interesting that you raise the issue over the social contract as these themes have been discussed since at least the time of Thomas Hobbes's Leviathan & the upheavals at the time of the civil war. They also had echoes in the American Declaration of Independence. An interesting topic!

 

[Denville]

Here’s some more into that is fascinating and extremely sad...at least to me (read the rest of the article for context). I know the Queen always had affection for her uncle David, so there’s a poignancy there that while he’d fallen out long ago with his once beloved younger brother, at least he did have a relationship to some degree with his daughter.



https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/life/life-wallis-simpson-saw-pain-sacrifice-every-day/

I don't think the affection lasted all that long. The queen went to see him out of kindness and to show that there was no ill feeling when eh was dying...but I don't think they ever had much of a relationship. Wallis said nasty things about the queen's mother, and was never welcome...

 

[Durham]

I don't think the affection lasted all that long. The queen went to see him out of kindness and to show that there was no ill feeling when eh was dying...but I don't think they ever had much of a relationship. Wallis said nasty things about the queen's mother, and was never welcome...

They didn't see much of each other at all after the abdication. It might even be possible to count up the occasions when they did meet on the fingers of one hand. Sad to think when it seems that they had once been close. Fort Belvedere & Royal Lodge are so near each other of course.

 

[Denville]

They didn't see much of each other at all after the abdication. It might even be possible to count up the occasions when they did meet on the fingers of one hand. Sad to think when it seems that they had once been close. Fort Belvedere & Royal Lodge are so near each other of course.

Of course not. David was pretty much persona non grata - only invited to England and family occasionally and Walis was not accepted at all. I don't think that the siblings were that taken with him once he had left... some brotherly affection remained but overall he was seen as someone who had deserted the ship...And Im sure if the queen was aware of how nastily David and Wallis spoke about her mother she would not retain much of the old affection.

 

[Betsypaige]

They didn't see much of each other at all after the abdication. It might even be possible to count up the occasions when they did meet on the fingers of one hand. Sad to think when it seems that they had once been close. Fort Belvedere & Royal Lodge are so near each other of course.

Yes, I was referring to when she was a little girl.....princess Elizabeth adored her uncle. The whole abdication was a tragedy, such family relationships torn apart forever. I'm glad that David was allowed to return for his brother's funeral and that, ultimately, he and Wallis were both buried on his home soil.

I dont think that was the case though? I understood that Wallis received everything and it was her own property absolutely.. Because Im sure I've read that Mountbatten tried to persuade her to leave her property back to the RF or in some way, but it was her property and she could choose to do what she liked with it..

Denville:

I didn't read this book, but Hugo Vickers, a very well respected Royal historian, essentially confirmed that Wallis was held a prisoner by this attorney, who he called "evil". This French woman (an attorney; her late husband had been the Windsor's attorney) pretty much seemed to do as she liked.

With no family to advise her, the Duchess relied heavily on Blum. She was also terrified of the lawyer. However, on this occasion, as Blum demanded she look through some papers, the Duchess fought back. Without warning, the frail 81-year-old summoned up an extraordinary burst of energy, turned to her and shouted: 'I HATE YOU!'

Blum never dared enter the Duchess's presence again - at least not until the Duchess could no longer speak. But the Duchess would pay heavily for her scorn. After that day, Blum did exactly as she pleased. She sold jewellery from the Duchess's multimillion-pound collection without her permission, set about publishing love letters between the Duchess and the Duke and appointed herself keeper of the Windsor flame.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/...pson-Robbed-abused-Duchess-Windsors-days.html

 

[Denville]

Yes I've read that Suzanne Blum took over and was not very nice to Wallis who became demented and helpless in her last years... but the point was that Wallis inherited all of David's property. If he had wanted his money etc to go back to the UK, he could have left the estate to Wallis for her lifetime and then the jewels etc mgitht have been left back to the queen and some to charity. Im not sure where the Windsor fortune went after W's death but I don't think ti went back to Britain.

I doubt if the queen continued to adore David as a grown woman, esp when her mother was very hostile to him and Wallis...

 

[Betsypaige]

Yes I've read that Suzanne Blum took over and was not very nice to Wallis who became demented and helpless in her last years... but the point was that Wallis inherited all of David's property. If he had wanted his money etc to go back to the UK, he could have left the estate to Wallis for her lifetime and then the jewels etc mgitht have been left back to the queen and some to charity. Im not sure where the Windsor fortune went after W's death but I don't think ti went back to Britain.

I doubt if the queen continued to adore David as a grown woman, esp when her mother was very hostile to him and Wallis...

It was supposed to go to Britain, that's the point.......and the Queen was an adult; she could have her own opinions about her uncle that her mother may not have shared. I didn't say she adored him as a grown woman - she didn't know him at that point. I'm sure she still had some affection for him - she didn't have to go visit him as was dying, but she did.

Here's something I find rather moving:

"With great difficulty [the Duke] rose from his bed to give his bow because, of course, she was his Queen now, as well as his niece, and it meant a great deal to him that she paid him this final courtesy," [Hugo] Vickers said in the TV documentary Elizabeth: Our Queen.

 

[Denville]

of course she had to make a gesture when he was dying... She was in Paris, it would look very bad if she didn't go and see her dying uncle....and he was buried in the UK for the same reason.. together with Wallis....
And the Windsor fortune, it appear went to the Pasteur institute in France mainly, but David could have made arrangements for it to go to Brtiain, had he really wanted to.

 

[Betsypaige]

of course she had to make a gesture when he was dying... She was in Paris, it would look very bad if she didn't go and see her dying uncle....and he was buried in the UK for the same reason.. together with Wallis....
And the Windsor fortune, it appear went to the Pasteur institute in France mainly, but David could have made arrangements for it to go to Brtiain, had he really wanted to.

I really don't want to argue about this, but the man was dead - he couldn't do anything about it. Let's just agree to disagree.

 

[Durham]

It was supposed to go to Britain, that's the point.......and the Queen was an adult; she could have her own opinions about her uncle that her mother may not have shared. I didn't say she adored him as a grown woman - she didn't know him at that point. I'm sure she still had some affection for him - she didn't have to go visit him as was dying, but she did.

Here's something I find rather moving:

"With great difficulty [the Duke] rose from his bed to give his bow because, of course, she was his Queen now, as well as his niece, and it meant a great deal to him that she paid him this final courtesy," [Hugo] Vickers said in the TV documentary Elizabeth: Our Queen.


I find that moving as well. Despite everything he revered the institution. Who knows what thoughts or regrets he may have had at the end.

 

[Betsypaige]

"With great difficulty [the Duke] rose from his bed to give his bow because, of course, she was his Queen now, as well as his niece, and it meant a great deal to him that she paid him this final courtesy," [Hugo] Vickers said in the TV documentary Elizabeth: Our Queen.


I find that moving as well. Despite everything he revered the institution. Who knows what thoughts or regrets he may have had at the end.

In a way, bowing to “his Queen” was kind of like bowing to his brother, who he never gave the proper respect to when he was on the throne.

He always did look so sad to me as an old man...he may have seemed to have it all, but he really lost everything. I’ve spent a lot of time being angry at him (I used to love him as a kid, when I thought that he was involved in the Greatest Romance) but right now, I mostly feel pity for him, sadness...and some relief that he did come home again.

 

[Durham]

In a way, bowing to “his Queen” was kind of like bowing to his brother, who he never gave the proper respect to when he was on the throne.

He always did look so sad to me as an old man...he may have seemed to have it all, but he really lost everything. I’ve spent a lot of time being angry at him (I used to love him as a kid, when I thought that he was involved in the Greatest Romance) but right now, I mostly feel pity for him, sadness...and some relief that he did come home again.

There is a lot of regret about the Duke of Windsor for all sorts of reasons. So much thrown away. So many hurt by his actions. And yet, and yet, maybe in the end it was for the best. Best for him & best for us.

I think a lot of people felt real grief over the abdication & didn't want to think about it anymore once the duke had left. Just too raw.

He became a melancholy figure in old age. Echoes of the great (first) Duke of Marlborough in old age looking at a portrait of himself painted in his youth & lamenting that this "was once a man". David was once a king. What a doleful fate. Made all the worse by being self inflicted.

 

[Curryong]

That seems so to outsiders. However, friends, acquaintances and others have said again and again that David had no regrets about the abdication so long as he had Wallis by his side. She was his obsession to the end.

Quite frankly, although these were two essentially selfish and self-centred people and Britain and the Empire missed a bullet in not having Edward as King, I don't think that regrets about the abdication occupied the ex King's thoughts as an old man, satisfactory though it may be to think so. It was Wallis, Wallis, Wallis to the end.

Her love (obsession) for him wasn't the same at all but she was fond of him and made him happy, and that's what counted with David, empty and vacuous though their lives were most of the time, (after 1936.)

 

[Denville]

That seems so to outsiders. However, friends, acquaintances and others have said again and again that David had no regrets about the abdication so long as he had Wallis by his side. She was his obsession to the end.

Quite frankly, although these were two essentially selfish and self-centred people and Britain and the Empire missed a bullet in not having Edward as King, I don't think that regrets about the abdication occupied the ex King's thoughts as an old man, satisfactory though it may be to think so. It was Wallis, Wallis, Wallis to the end.

Her love (obsession) for him wasn't the same at all but she was fond of him and made him happy, and that's what counted with David, empty and vacuous though their lives were most of the time, (after 1936.)

I think she grew dependent on him, as they grew older.. and he was there and still in love with her, but I agree that he didn't really regret what he'd done. Mabybe he wished he could have had both the throne and Wallis but didn't care what trouble he had put others to with his abdication... He didn't care about George VI or the QM who had had to take on his work, and he and Wallis sneered at the QM. And he didn't care enough about his family, or England, enough to try to restore his money to them when he and Wallis were both gone... so the fortune went to the French Govt and the Pasteur institute. So I think that the queen's visit to him at the end of his life was mainly a courtesy because they were family and Royal....

 

[Durham]

There were regrets over the abdication by all sorts of people who didn't want it to happen. Not because of the individual concerned but because of the trauma that an abdication inevitably brings. There was a sense of loss that a king had departed in such a way. How could there not be. People moved on of course & fortunately his brother proved to be just what was needed in the dark days of war that followed.

As to the duke himself towards the end, who knows what he thought & whether he shared these thoughts with anyone else. History needs sources of course & there are none that tell us he admitted his own personal regrets. It would not be surprising though if he did sometimes feel sadness, at least for the vacuity of his later life. Too late now to know for sure.

 

[Denville]

There were re

As to the duke himself towards the end, who knows what he thought & whether he shared these thoughts with anyone else. History needs sources of course & there are none that tell us he admitted his own personal regrets. It would not be surprising though if he did sometimes feel sadness, at least for the vacuity of his later life. Too late now to know for sure.

I think he was bored and lonely but I don't think he regretted what he had done. He had Wallis and she was his passion. He had managed to shake off the weight of duty and responsibility, and I think all he regretted was that he had nto been able to hold onto enough royal status to get back to the UK now and again and probably do the odd engagement when it suited him.
I don't think he liked living in France all that much but he knew he could not live full time in England..

 

[Prinsara]

He's a cautionary lesson in "careful what you wish for".

Ziegler's biography of him is also good/interesting.

 

[Denville]

He's a cautionary lesson in "careful what you wish for".

Ziegler's biography of him is also good/interesting.

I don't think it quite turned out as he hoped but overall I don't think he had real regrets. He had Wallis, he had great wealth and stil retained high rank and a social position. He had shaken off the "heavy burden" of duty. If he had to do it all again Im sure he would.