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

[Denville]

wel yes they do because that's what socialites do. They are wealthy, have servants and mix in Society, and organise social functions. not all in te UK would have access to royal cirlces but some would. When Wallis was just a rich woman who enjoyed a comfortably wealthy social life, I think that most people considered her plain. When she met the Prince and became his mistress she began to be admired as more attractive, smart looking etc.

[Andy T]

Thought: As we know, on his accession, George VI's first act was to confer the title of Duke of Windsor on his brother, and to confirm his retention of the HRH.


"He will henceforth be known as His Royal Highness The Duke of Windsor."

Wallis Simpson became Duchess of Windsor on her marriage the following year but was stuck, much to their displeasure, so we're told, with "Her Grace" because George VI refused to make her an HRH.

Theoretically, could Edward VIII, anticipating his abdication and marriage, have conferred the title of Duke of Windsor upon himself while he was still King and stipulated that his future wife would be styled as HRH the Duchess of Windsor in the way that the Queen has declared that all William's future children will enjoy the style of HRH?

Would he, in his abdication, have been obliged to renounce all styles and titles anyway?

I assume nothing would have prevented George VI from reversing the decision on his accession but it would have been even more delicate to remove something that had already been given than to refuse something that had not been given before.

[Tsaritsa]

Originally Posted by Andy T

Thought: As we know, on his accession, George VI's first act was to confer the title of Duke of Windsor on his brother, and to confirm his retention of the HRH.


"He will henceforth be known as His Royal Highness The Duke of Windsor."

Wallis Simpson became Duchess of Windsor on her marriage the following year but was stuck, much to their displeasure, so we're told, with "Her Grace" because George VI refused to make her an HRH.

Theoretically, could Edward VIII, anticipating his abdication and marriage, have conferred the title of Duke of Windsor upon himself while he was still King and stipulated that his future wife would be styled as HRH the Duchess of Windsor in the way that the Queen has declared that all William's future children will enjoy the style of HRH?

Would he, in his abdication, have been obliged to renounce all styles and titles anyway?

I assume nothing would have prevented George VI from reversing the decision on his accession but it would have been even more delicate to remove something that had already been given than to refuse something that had not been given before.

I can't imagine that he'd have thought that far ahead. His only concern was his obsession with her and how he could best and soonest bring about the conclusion to it which satisfied him. I don't believe he gave a thought to what she may have wanted. His own needs appear to have been paramount.

[Denville]

Idont know if he could have done such a thing, as if he was giving up the throne, and all Royal honours, how could he say "except for being HRH the DOW nad my wife being HRH as well??
He would have to renounce it all.
And I think that George VI was so hot against the idea of "that woman" being a royal duchess that he would have if necessary gone to Parliament or whatever he had to do to remove it. David was only given the royal dukedom to prevent him from standing for parliament as he could have done had he become a commoner.

[Andy T]

Originally Posted by Denville

Idont know if he could have done such a thing, as if he was giving up the throne, and all Royal honours, how could he say "except for being HRH the DOW nad my wife being HRH as well??
He would have to renounce it all.
And I think that George VI was so hot against the idea of "that woman" being a royal duchess that he would have if necessary gone to Parliament or whatever he had to do to remove it. David was only given the royal dukedom to prevent him from standing for parliament as he could have done had he become a commoner.

Re George VI's reaction (with his wife firmly behind him), I think you're right, Denville. My question is really a theoretical one, though. Clearly, Edward's abdication had to include/cover all styles and titles pertaining to his constitutional role/position as head of state, so not just the crown (and style of His Majesty) but also the Duchy of Lancaster, Duke of Normandy Lord of Man, Emperor of India, and so on.

However, could he have granted himself a "normal" title/Dukedom, separate from the role of Sovereign, which he could have kept in the same way that he retained various other honours (Knight of the Garter, for example) after his abdication? Similarly, his rank as a Prince, and the style of HRH, came from his birthright as the son of a monarch, and was independent of his position as Head of State.

Maybe this is one of those scenarios in which the question would never normally arise, so there is no real precedent and no clear answer.

[Queen Claude]

I don't think that Edward anticipated that Wallis would not get the HRH styling. There were other things he did not anticipate like, after a brief exile, he expected to be a working prince / active member of the BRF and that did not happen either.

[Gaudete]

The reason the Duke probably never anticipated Wallis being denied the HRH style was because it gave the couple what they had asked for and had been denied - a morganatic marriage. Of sorts. It was a shabby thing to do but we know where that particular demand came from and why it was so readily given. I think David was foolish to think he would ever be allowed to live in the UK or carry out royal duties but not to allow his wife her proper style was very mean spirited and more than a little hypocritical.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Queen Claude

I don't think that Edward anticipated that Wallis would not get the HRH styling. There were other things he did not anticipate like, after a brief exile, he expected to be a working prince / active member of the BRF and that did not happen either.

I think that's probably true, Q Claude. I think that he wanted out but iddn't really really realise the implications. That there could only be ONE king and that the new King wasn't likely to want him hanging around giving advice or deciding that in a few months- he, David, would do the odd engagement when he felt like it and still be a prince if not a king. So he didn't really think far enough ahead. As I recall, he had to be dissuaded by George VI from ringing him up every week and giving him advice and so on.
he just didn't see that the whole British establishment and his family felt that he had let them down and they didn't want him coming back when it pleased him..
ANd to the other poster Andy? He could have granted himself an ordinary dukedom - but that would only leave him and Wallis as "your Grace".
What really seems to have happened was that George VI said that "as the son of a Duke, which he was, even after he'd given up his royal honours, he could stand for Parliament and that he might be mischieveous enough to do that..to embarrass the Royals.
so he made him the Royal Duek of Windsor..but he said that his wife would only be Your Grace.. which was a bit iffy, but in the RF's defence, they were appalled and angry,
they also felt that this marriage might not last and then Wallis might go around still calling herself "Your Royal Highness the Duchess of Wndsor" marrying some lounge lizard and expecting to be treated as semi royal in café society.

[Spheno]

Originally Posted by Denville

ANd to the other poster Andy? He could have granted himself an ordinary dukedom - but that would only leave him and Wallis as "your Grace".

Obviously, he could not grant himself a peerage/title. Any peerage merges in the Crown when it's holder is a king.

[Denville]

well it would not solve the problem anyway because clearly what buged David was - when he did get the title that his wife wasn't sharing his HRH.

[Furienna]

I believe that Wallis should have gotten an HRH, as long as it was clear that she would lose it if she divorced David.

[Denville]

They weren't going to give it to her, because there was no way they could enforce it, if the marriage ended. She might not have been as crass as they feared, but they did clearly feel "If she and D split up, and she marries some fake count, she'll be parading around Monte Carlo and what not, callng herself a Royal Duchess and acting like she's still a member of the R Family..."

[Osipi]

Actually, as things stand, should Wallis have divorced and remarried, she would have lost the right to any form of David's title. The same with Diana, Princess of Wales and Sarah, Duchess of York. Should either of those women have married again, their association with the title of their ex-husbands (who are the title holders) would have disappeared into dust.

David was granted the title Duke of Windsor at the prerogative of the King. The King also has the right and the prerogative to implement conditions on the title he is granting.

At least this is how I see it. Another point is that still, to this day, Sarah is mistakenly still referred to those that aren't literate in how things work as "The Duchess of York".

[Denville]

actually people did think at the time that it was a bit dubious legally for Wallis not to be allowed to share her husban'ds rank as other wives did.
So it was always slghly iffy.
But the thing is that they could not IMPOSE it on Wallis that she stopped "being HRH" if divorced. She was living abroad, if she wanted to still call herself HRH and Duchess, what could they have realy done to stop her?

It was different with Sarah and Diana, they were both Enlgish, living in the UK and had children of the RF so they weren't likely to continue to use the HRH and rock the boat.

[Queen Claude]

What If Edward VIII hadn't abdicated? (1993)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gJ3uz5lXBXI

[CyrilVladisla]

Did some of the newspapers refer to Wallis as Princess Wallis?

[Denville]

Why would they do that? She never held the title Princess

[Osipi]

In fact, today is the very first time *ever* I've ever seen the words Princess and Wallis together. I can't, for the life of me, think of anyone ever thinking of referring to Wallis that way.

[Gaudete]

The closest she ever got I should think was their personal servants, who all called the Duchess “Her Royal Highness” and curtsied to her which Wallis disliked but which the Duke insisted upon. If anybody outside of their household called her “Your Royal Highness”, Wallis would correct them kindly and give them permission to call her by her first name so that they didn’t feel embarrassed about making the slip.

[Denville]

well she was never a princess, as such was she? She married Edward after he had left the throne but he was not known then as a Prince.. and she was not allowed to share his style of HRH.. so it mystifies me why anyone would think of her as "Princess Wallis".