The Royal Forums Coat of Arms

Go Back   The Royal Forums > Reigning Houses > British Royals

Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #921  
Old 08-28-2011, 04:27 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,260
Not questioning the morality of it at all. Many men through history have layed down their wife for their King. The difference of course would be those men and women knew the rules of the game. Where Wallis played with fire was being believing Edward could make her Queen or allowing Edward to believe he could make her Queen. I would bet an English woman would not have allowed it to get that far because they would have known the rules and understood Church and Government stood in the way and let him know it. There were worse roles in life than being the acknowledged mistress of the British monarch (Mrs Keppel being an example).
I suspect Edward was happy and Wallis likely was quite content over 35 years of marriage. She at least took pleasure in the gowns, the jewels, appearing on best dressed lists, being hosted by cafe society in France and the US, and being part of the great love story of the 20th century. Not bad for a poor relation, less than beautiful, twice divorced woman from Baltimore.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #922  
Old 08-28-2011, 09:40 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,358
Galitzine Wallis never wanted to be queen and she tried to prevent David from abdicating. This idea that she wanted to be Queen is a falsehood spread by people who believe she is the boogeyman who "stole their precious king".
Wallis was content in being the king's mistress and had no will to be his wife.
Plus there have been a few mistresses throughout history who were English and didn't play by the rules; perhaps you have forgotten about Anne Boleyn, Jane Seymour, and Elizabeth Woodville.
__________________

__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #923  
Old 08-28-2011, 11:44 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
Galitzine Wallis never wanted to be queen and she tried to prevent David from abdicating.
Perhaps but she waited too long, and I am not entirely sure she did not believe the fairy tale that she could marry and be Queen. It was a pretty dazling prize to dangle in front of any woman, especially one of her background. A well brought up English woman in 1935/1936 would have stopped Edward as soon as the topic was first discussed and if he persisted have broken off the relationship and returned to her husband.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #924  
Old 08-29-2011, 03:39 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: colchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 194
Perhaps the point is being missed here that it was precisely because Wallis was unaware/unheeding of a code of behaviour which, as an American, would not have applied to her, anyway, that the affair was able to gather momentum. David was able to "bend" the truth with Wallis in a way that would have been impossible with an English woman who would have had an innate understanding of rules concerning "games" that involved royalty. What would have been the point of anybody telling her about these rules? She only had to check the information with David who, undoubtedly, would have dismissed it. I believe it would have been easy for him to convince her that as PoW/King he was ALLpowerful-who was there to tell her otherwise? There were no books on the subject. These unspoken, unwritten rules are passed silently down through generations of those it concerns-Wallis was not of their number.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #925  
Old 08-29-2011, 04:15 AM
Daisiesforever's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 609
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
I also find it laughable that Wallis and Ernest are badmouthed in here for doing what the British upper class does as a whole; lays down their wives for their King. The entire society has this idea that throwing your morals out the window for the pleasure of the king is a good thing; its been around for centuries. But Wallis and Ernest do it and somehow it is a sleazy immoral thing.
I do tend to agree here. Kings and Princes have always had mistresses and everyone knew this. Yet it has always been accepted because they are royalty. People like Lilly langtry and Wallis Simpson were famous for being a "good lay". Now in this day and age everyone wants to be shocked about the way Wallis behaved.

The Wallis and Ernest story was sleaze however, royalty does seem to accept sleaze when it really suits them.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #926  
Old 08-29-2011, 06:46 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: colchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 194
I feel that the major difference here is that-with the exclusion of Wallis-the afore mentioned women, and with them can be included ALL Edward VIIs mistresses as well as Camilla's great grandma, all knew the rule. I feel certain that a possible marriage with the king was A, on their part, never thought and B, on Edward's part, never mentioned. Thus, the game was played out, as it always had been, with the players understanding where they fitted. It was David who broke this rule by making Wallis believe it was possible for him to make her a queen. I still believe it to have been coersion on his part because even if she was not in love with him, it must surely have been a huge temptation, Cinderella in real life.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #927  
Old 08-29-2011, 07:43 AM
Commoner
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Brisbane, Australia
Posts: 28
I have come to believe that the situation for both Wallis Simpson and Edward got out of hand.

When the relationship started he was the POW and was involved and had been involved with safe married women, they didn't put any demands on him but satisfied his needs. Met Wallis, she didn't understand the British upper class and she got caught up in the pomp and ceremony. Suddenly though, he becomes King and everything changes, he doesn't have the freedom he had before and their would have been some pressure to provide an heir. Wallis in the meantime stills thinks this fun and believes that her marriage to Ernest Simpson will protect her from any unwanted demands by Edward, then it all just unravels before them - divorce, talk of marriage, constitutional crisis, American press following the story, so Wallis runs to France, then Edward abdicates and follows her.

I think that if he Edward hadn't had to assume the throne, that the relationship would have run its natural course, but in the end all they had was each other and they made the most of it
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #928  
Old 08-29-2011, 10:57 AM
Warren's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,427
The introduction of irrelevant comments re Charles and Camilla into the Edward and Wallis relationship discussion - including a quote by Adolf Hitler now somewhat unsubtly referenced to the Duchess of Cornwall (!!) - have been and will continue to be removed.

Warren
British Forums moderator
__________________
Seeking information? Check out the extensive Royal A-Z
Reply With Quote
  #929  
Old 08-29-2011, 05:15 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,358
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
Perhaps but she waited too long, and I am not entirely sure she did not believe the fairy tale that she could marry and be Queen. It was a pretty dazling prize to dangle in front of any woman, especially one of her background. A well brought up English woman in 1935/1936 would have stopped Edward as soon as the topic was first discussed and if he persisted have broken off the relationship and returned to her husband.

This is one of the reasons I hate having to debate this event; the non-stop Wallis was American so she is too blame for everything and a "proper English girl" would have known better and not been so uppity.
Wallis could not return to her husband because he wanted to marry another woman. According to some it was Ernest who knew that David wanted to marry Wallis and not Wallis herself. As I have stated numerous times she tried to talk him out of abdicating and even worked with government officials to try and prevent it. Wallis did not want to be queen nor did she think she ever could be. But I suppose that the truth gets lost in the "blame the American" rant.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #930  
Old 08-29-2011, 05:24 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,358
Spartamum you bring up some good points. I tend to think it had to have spiraled out of control for Wallis more than the two men. David seemed to be the driving force who wanted what he wanted and was going to get it no matter what. Ernest wanted out of the marriage so he could marry someone else which probably blind sided Wallis because she thought everyone was content in the situation. Unfortunately for all of Wallis' sophistication and worldliness, it appears her future was decided men and not her.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #931  
Old 08-29-2011, 05:51 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,260
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
But I suppose that the truth gets lost in the "blame the American" rant.
Its not a case of blaming the American because she was an American, but a case of being an American (or a Dane or a Brazilian) she would not have had the same knowledge of British social rules, or the role and powers (or lack there of) of the British monarch or of the role Church of England as a British lady of that time.
Even today I hear American news commentators talking about Elizabeth II ruling as opposed to reigning and probably not understanding the difference.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #932  
Old 08-29-2011, 07:01 PM
Grandduchess24's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Cambridge, United States
Posts: 1,318
I know that Edward 7 gave up the throne for his love of wallis but. Really. Did he even think about what he was destined to be. I just know that king George V must have gave a good talk to his son on such a major decision.
__________________
" An ugly baby is a very nasty object, and the prettiest is frightful when undressed."
- Queen Victoria
Reply With Quote
  #933  
Old 08-29-2011, 07:05 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,367
I think you meant Edward VIII. Edward VII ruled with his wife,the former Princess Alexandra of Denmark. Further more, George V was already dead but prior to his death, he did not have a deep conversation with Edward regarding his plans to marry Wallis and/or abdicate the throne.
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #934  
Old 08-31-2011, 06:20 PM
Vasillisos Markos's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Crete, United States
Posts: 1,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
This is one of the reasons I hate having to debate this event; the non-stop Wallis was American so she is too blame for everything and a "proper English girl" would have known better and not been so uppity.
Wallis could not return to her husband because he wanted to marry another woman. According to some it was Ernest who knew that David wanted to marry Wallis and not Wallis herself. As I have stated numerous times she tried to talk him out of abdicating and even worked with government officials to try and prevent it. Wallis did not want to be queen nor did she think she ever could be. But I suppose that the truth gets lost in the "blame the American" rant.
My dear XeniaCasaraghi,

I think you are being too sensitive about Wallis being an American. We tend to see this story in the light of a great romance, i.e., a man gives up the throne for the woman he loves. Whereas Europeans, having lived under monarchies, would view it as a man who abandoned his duty to marry a woman who probably did not understand that she could never be Queen. It is a matter of one's world view perhaps. However, I don't think Wallis thought about marriage but events seemed to have swallowed her up.

HEY, my 1000 post!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #935  
Old 08-31-2011, 09:08 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,270
Perhaps he was convinced of that himself, as when he told the Welsh miners "something must be done." I find it hard somehow to imagine Edward paying close attention to lessons about the the constitution or him and his father having cozy chats about the latter's work.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Tsaritsa View Post
I believe it would have been easy for him to convince her that as PoW/King he was ALLpowerful-who was there to tell her otherwise?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #936  
Old 08-31-2011, 09:15 PM
XeniaCasaraghi's Avatar
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: 1729 Noneofyourbusiness Drive, United States
Posts: 2,358
Is it really logical to think that Edward did not know how little power a constitutional monarch had? I don't mean to speculate that either Tsaritsa or Mermaid is illogical; but although Edward was known for being spoiled and selfish, did he really not know that he had little to no power? He lived under Victoria, Edward VII and his father, so I tend to think someone at least had to take him aside one day and explain the difference between reigning and ruling.
As for Wallis not understanding "the rules" wasn't her husband English? He wasn't upper class but I don't think he was ignorant to these supposed "rules" of extra-maritial affairs with a royal.
__________________
Princess Grace, April 19, 1956
Princess Margaret Rose, May 6, 1960
Crown Princess Mette-Marit, August 25, 2001
Jaqueline Bouvier Kennedy, September 12, 1953
Countess Stephanie of Belgium October 20, 2012
Reply With Quote
  #937  
Old 08-31-2011, 09:53 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,367
In all actuality Edward really was ignorant of English constitutional law. Edward opened the whole can of worms when he asked the Prime Minister (Baldwin I believe) to check with the Dominions to see if they would approve of him marrying Wallis. Once he asked for their advice, he was bound by law to take it. Its up for us go guess how it could have situation could have ended without the government's role. Either way, the Cabinet threatened to resign if he married her so most likely he would have gone anyway.

In regard to what is and what is not acceptable. I have always had the opinion that Wallis gets an unfair amount of blame in regards to the Abdication. Edward was English and he knew the deal. He should have had an inkling that Wallis's divorced status would have made her unacceptable. But like most things, he couldn't see past his own opinions.
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #938  
Old 09-01-2011, 01:32 AM
Jacknch's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Suffolk, United Kingdom
Posts: 2,063
I agree with Zonk on this. For years we are led to believe that Wallis was some dreadful woman who somehow stole the King from his throne and his people, yet in truth Edward steered everything towards his own personal desires. His choice at the end of the day was either his throne and his obligations to his people or his girlfriend. He chose his girlfriend despite her protestations and one can hardly blame her for being the type of woman a man would give up a throne for. Yes, she could have broken ot all off and moved back to the US, but why should she do all the work? He could have broken it off and gone back to his job!
__________________
JACK
Reply With Quote
  #939  
Old 09-01-2011, 02:13 AM
Aristocracy
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: colchester, United Kingdom
Posts: 194
Quote:
Originally Posted by XeniaCasaraghi View Post
..... someone at least had to take him aside one day and explain the difference between reigning and ruling.
As for Wallis not understanding "the rules" wasn't her husband English? He wasn't upper class but I don't think he was ignorant to these supposed "rules" of extra-maritial affairs with a royal.
I don't think it would have been deemed necessary to discuss the difference between reigning and ruling, he only had to follow the examples set out by his forbears, but he was determined in many things to flout the rules. As to knowing the "rules" concerning exta-maritals with royals, whilst I promise you I have no personal experience, I imagine it to be a bit like being elected into parliament-before one is elected, one knows the rules, after election the same rules no longer seem to apply!!!
May I concur here with something VM said regarding your sensitivity about Wallis' nationality. The only point I've made regarding it is to say that because she was OTHER than English she couldn't be expected to understand the "rules" which have always been attached to commoners' relationships with royalty. I stand by my belief that she was never in love with him-fond of, probably-but she never IMO, set out to make a love match, only a conquest and subsequently lost control of the situation and became swept along with it. I also stand by my belief that there were numerous occasions when she longed to be back with solid, dependable Ernest. I may have no liking for Wallis as a personality-albeit she was a woman of her time-but because she never stood a chance against this selfish man who was determined, no matter who was hurt by it, to get what he wanted-she has my sympathy.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #940  
Old 09-01-2011, 02:55 AM
Osipi's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 4,158
I think in the long run, leading up to the abdication, that Edward probably figured he couldn't lose. After a lifetime of a "What David wants... David gets", it was probably unfathomable to him that he'd not get everything exactly as he wanted them. When things didn't go according to his wishes, he was the proverbial petulant child and whined ever after. Even the supposition that he would kill himself if Wallis ever left him proves this. "I'm going to hold my breath and turn blue till you do what I want" kind of thing.

All other aspects of Edward VIII aside, I really don't think the man was emotionally mature enough to be a worthwhile monarch even in the best of times let alone during WWII.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
abdication, britain, duchess of windsor, duke of windsor, edward viii, king edward viii, wallis simpson


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Prince Richard, Duke of Gloucester and Miss Birgitte van Deurs: 8 July 1972 Scott Royal Weddings 15 11-20-2014 11:41 AM
Duchess Of Windsor Jewellery micas Royal Jewels 200 12-12-2013 11:34 PM
The Duke and Duchess of Windsor Duchess Royal Library 106 07-15-2013 11:49 AM
The Duke of Windsor & Wallis Simpson - 3 June 1937 aussiechick12 Historical Royal Weddings 25 06-26-2013 04:27 PM
The Duke And Duchess Of Gloucester: Oct 03-Jan 06 A.C.C. Current Events Archive 132 01-13-2006 10:37 PM




Popular Tags
belgium birth brussels carl philip charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria current events engagement fashion germany grand duke henri hohenzollern infanta sofia jordan king carl xvi gustav king felipe king felipe vi king harald king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander letizia luxembourg nobility official visit olympics ottoman pieter van vollenhoven poland pregnancy president hollande president komorowski prince albert prince albert ii prince carl philip prince floris prince pieter-christiaan princess aimee princess anita princess beatrix princess charlene princess laurentien princess madeleine princess margriet princess marilene princess mary princess mary fashion queen letizia queen mathilde queen maxima queen paola queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal royal fashion russia sofia hellqvist spain state visit sweden the hague wedding william winter olympics 2014



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:43 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]