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

[Lady Meg]

Plantagenet Ancestry?

Descendant of Edward III and Philippa of Hainault through her father Wallis Warfield, son of Henry Mactier Warfield, son of Daniel Warfield, son of Ariana Dorsey, daughter of Henry Dorsey, son of Captain Joshua Dorsey, son of Sarah Wyatt b. 1657, daughter of Nicholas Wyatt, son of Hawte Wyatt, son of Sir George Wyatt, son of Sir Thomas Wyatt 'the younger', son of Lady Elizabeth Brooke, daughter of Thomas 3rd Baron of Cobham Brooke, son of Baroness Margaret of Cobham Neville, daughter of Edward of Abergavenny Neville, son of Joan Countess of Westmoreland Beaufort, daughter of Prince John of Gaunt Plantagenet, son of King Edward III of England Plantagenet and Queen Consort Philippa of Hainault.

Can anyone confirm this or did I get it all wrong?

 

[Westminster]

I can't confirm this but I am very curious if that is true. Very interesting!!

 

[Warren]

An old report from 2003 with some interesting detail.

Car dealer was Wallis Simpson's secret lover | UK news | The Guardian

Intro:

Wallis Simpson kept a secret lover - a Ford car salesman - while conducting a passionate affair with the future King Edward VIII, according to special branch files that reveal she was under close surveillance. Long before the abdication crisis broke in 1936, detectives were trailing Mrs Simpson through London high society in an attempt to discover more about the American woman who had captured the Prince of Wales's affections.

The revelation is buried in 100 files about the abdication of Edward VIII and the government's subsequent relations with him. The papers are released today following the death last year of the saga's last big player, the Queen Mother.

Although the papers will not radically alter historical accounts of the abdication they certainly add colour and background detail. They do not substantiate long-held rumours that the government compiled the so-called China dossier on Mrs Simpson's sex life in the 1920s, or that she and the duke were substantial Nazi sympathisers. Nor do they confirm that the Queen Mother was instrumental in forcing the couple out of the country.

 

[Wisteria]

Descendant of Edward III and Philippa of Hainault through her father Wallis Warfield...

I think you should go to www.geneall.net you will find under the Duke of Windsor that Bessiewallis was descended from William the Conqueror but through her mother´s Montague side of the family, nothing about any illustrious descendance through the Warfields.

 

[Lady Meg]

So there is no connection to Sarah Wyatt? Perhaps it was never documented? There are many ways people can be connected to Edward III. I will check this site out - but can anyone else confirm Sarah Wyatt's ancestors?

Also, does this site have the Montague line? I have tried to find her connection to the Montague's, but there is no site that goes back that far. Also, I have to sign up to access this....

 

[Warren]

Posts discussing claims made by 'Elizabeth Windsor Cragg' have been moved to the Exposing Imposters thread in Royal Genealogy.

 

[Wisteria]

I have looked carefully through Bessiewallis´s Montague ancestors and I find no connection. In 1750´s a Montague married a Jane Daniel, and it was she who had royal descendance but in a very roundabout way. I could find no Wyatt, but I can keep looking.

 

[Vasillisos Markos]

Did the Duke of Windsor start a nudist trend?

I am currently reading my Sunday Chicago Tribune and Rick Steves' column in the Travel section today is about Europe's attitude towards public nudity as shown by advertising billboards, saunas, Turkish baths and beaches. Steves writes that Edward VIII visited what is now Croatia in 1936 and wanted an all over tan, so the King followed the proper channels to have a beach on the island of Rab designated for nudists. Does anyone know more about this?

 

[Westminster]

Yes, I have read about that in a few books. Why not? I think such things were trendy in the upper class which wanted to be a bit bohemian. The thirties were much more open minded in Europe than we would imagine today.

 

[Lord Campbell]

Theoretical question about the late Duke of Windsor

Or more specifically..any offspring of the late Duke.

Lets say for example a young man were to exist today who could prove he was the legitimate grandson of the Duke. Would he be entitled to the same rights and priviliges as other male line grandsons of a sovereign? Would he be considered part of the Royal Family? I understand he would not be eligible to succeed to the throne but would he be an HRH?

I am researching for a paper I'm writing...thanks

 

[Lumutqueen]

Letters patent dated 27 May 1937, which re-conferred upon the Duke of Windsor the "title, style, or attribute of Royal Highness", specifically stated that "his wife and descendants, if any, shall not hold said title or attribute".
I'm not sure how the royal family would react if they found out a boy like this existed. They might accept his existence, but him personally.

 

[Zonk]

Well the only way he could be legitimate was if he was the result of a legitimate marriage. And while his marriage to the Duchess was legit, as provided above, he would not be in the line of succession as the Duke abdicated his succession rights for himself and his heirs.

Since King George V died in 1936 and the Queen Mary in 1953?, the King might have had a provision in his will for any future grandchildren...since Alexandra was born after he died and the Gloucester children (Wililam and Richard) as well as Michael of Kent hadn't even been born yet. So if Edward and Wallis did have a legtimate child he/she might have received a little bit of money.

Most likely by the time Queen Mary died she might have recognized that Edward wasn't going to have any more children and probably didn't make any provisions for them.

And I don't think this was just limited to the King George V and Queen Mary. I think HH Princess Marie Louise left something to Richard of Gloucester when she died. So I think other members would have taken care of him.

 

[Lumutqueen]

the Queen Mary in 1953?

24th March 1953.

 

[Lord Campbell]

Thanks for the response ...here's another one.

Would he be the 3rd Duke of Windsor? Was the Duchy of Windsor hereditary or was it created solely for Edward?

 

[Zonk]

In the past, and really there are better people who can answer this....the Duke of Windsor or Earl of Windsor was a title that had been around for other aristocrats and/or royals.

This recent creation was just for the Duke. I don't imagine the current Royal Family will create another Duke of Windsor just for their bad memories (for lack of a better word) of what happened. Certainly the Queen wouldnt have done it while her mother was alive, Charles won't do it because of his affection for his grandmother and mother. Charles will most likely create Wililam and/or Harry Duke of something when he comes King but I doubt it will be Windsor. What William will do is anyone's guess!

 

[Lumutqueen]

I was just wondering as to your question, if a grandson existed, a son of Edward would have to exist, and depending on when he was born, he could be around to age of Elizabeth II. How does his dad fit in?

The title Duke of Windsor was created for Edward when he abdicated, George VI suggested using the family name in a title. So seeing as we would have known if he had a son when he died, then I presume he would have inherited his fathers title when he died.

More info about the line of succesion
Queen Victoria's Letters Patent, however, made reference to birth in the "lineal succession to the Crown", and the Duke of Windsor, although born in the line of succession, had succeeded to the Crown and then relinquished it. Furthermore, the Act that gave effect to the abdication excluded the Duke's potential descendants from the line of succession established by the Act of Settlement. George VI's Letters Patent interpretively declared that the intention of Queen Victoria's Letters Patent was only to grant the style of Royal Highness to children and grandchildren of the monarch who were in lineal succession to the Crown, in which the Duke wasn't any more.

 

[Zonk]

Whose question Lumutqueen?

Also, I am going to merge this thread with the existing Duke and Duchess of Windsor thread. So when it disappears that is what happened.

 

[Lord Campbell]

I was just wondering as to your question, if a grandson existed, a son of Edward would have to exist, and depending on when he was born, he could be around to age of Elizabeth II. How does his dad fit in?

The title Duke of Windsor was created for Edward when he abdicated, George VI suggested using the family name in a title.

For the purposes of my paper ( and since Edward was married 1937) I am thinking perhaps that Edward's son could have been born around 1940. That would give me a dashing young grandson to write about..born somewhere in the 70's perhaps

 

[Lumutqueen]

But that would still only make his father 70, this year.
With royal longeivity blood in his veins he would more than likely still be alive.
So are you not going to factor in the fact that the royal court missed the birth of Edwards son, his marriage, and the birth of a grandson etc?

 

[Lord Campbell]

I have found some info here which seems to indicate that while Edward's descendants would not be entitled to style themselves HRH the Duke of Windsor title was certainly hereditary

The drafting of the letters patent of 1937

 

[Zonk]

And that is beyond my realm.....pardon the pun.

I don't know when your paper is due but you might want to wait for input for other TRF members suchs as branchg, Iluvbertie and MaFAn to name just a few regarding the the title being hereditary. I didn't think it was and they might have a better idea.

 

[Lord Campbell]

But that would still only make his father 70, this year.
With royal longeivity blood in his veins he would more than likely still be alive.
So are you not going to factor in the fact that the royal court missed the birth of Edwards son, his marriage, and the birth of a grandson etc?

I'm killing the father off shortly after the Duchess of Windsor's own death in 1986. This would then throw open the question of how the Royal Family repond towards their young orphaned relative. He would after all be the Queen's first cousin once removed.

 

[Zonk]

Killing off the Duke?! Is this a book or a term paper?

Are you writing all of this with the knowledge that the Windsor didn't live in Britian and therefore the son and grandson were brought up abroad?

 

[Lumutqueen]

I'm killing the father off shortly after the Duchess of Windsor's own death in 1986. This would then throw open the question of how the Royal Family repond towards their young orphaned relative. He would after all be the Queen's first cousin once removed.

Does he not have a mother?
Well if he chose to reveal himself, then IMO The Queen would not except and I think the rest of the family would follow.

Killing off the Duke?! Is this a book or a term paper?

Are you writing all of this with the knowledge that the Windsor didn't live in Britian and therefore the son and grandson were brought up abroad?

Killing off the Duke's son, the father of this grandson.

 

[Lord Campbell]

Not a matter of whether he CHOOSES to reveal himself. Lets say his father (2nd Duke) was born in France but chose to come and live in Britain shortly before the birth of the 3rd Duke. Lets say the 2nd Duke meets his demise in a tragic road accident leaving 3rd Duke to be raised by his mother (not an orphan then I grant you ), well my original question was what would be his position with regards to the royal family. Would he be considered a member of the Royal Family? Is it up to the Queen to decide?

Zonk I am researching possible scenarios for a book

 

[Lumutqueen]

Okay
1. I presume the 2nd Duke moved to Britain after his father died.
2. Both of them would be known to the royal family, if they moved over here because they would have titles and surely the RF are not going to ignore a person with the title Duke of Windsor.
3. So The RF would be accepting A Duke and Duchess of Windsor, and a son into their mits, before the 2nd Duke dies.

Everything depends on the time of which your planning anything, but IMO they would never be considered members of the royal family, certainly not when The Queen is still alive.

 

[Lord Campbell]

This is what I'm thinking and yet you cannot escape the fact that he would be a great grandson of George V the same as the Dukes of Gloucester and Kent. Am I right in thinking that they are members of the Royal Family?

Editing my own mistake here....the afore-mentioned Dukes are grandsons not great grandsons of the late George V. Confusing myself now

 

[Lumutqueen]

Extended members of the royal family yes, but disgraced ones IMO.

Well the 2nd Duke would be the grandson of George V, 3rd Duke would be the great-grandson.

 

[Duchessmary]

I don't know. The Duchess herself said her husband wasn't
"heir conditioned"

 

[branchg]

And that is beyond my realm.....pardon the pun.

I don't know when your paper is due but you might want to wait for input for other TRF members suchs as branchg, Iluvbertie and MaFAn to name just a few regarding the the title being hereditary. I didn't think it was and they might have a better idea.

The Dukedom was created by George VI in March 1937 to pass to male heirs of the body, the same as any royal dukedom. The King then issued letters patent in May 1937 clarifying the Duke would retain his royal rank and style as HRH, but such attribute was limited to him alone and not his wife and any descendants. As a result, any son would have been limited to the style of His Grace, rather than HRH as a male-line grandson of George V.

The Duke also was required to guarantee in his 1937 financial agreement with his brother that his lawful descendants would have no further claim to the royal estates or monies of the family. So, there was no possibility of his children inheriting from the royal family.

It is widely acknowledged The Duke was believed to be sterile due to mumps as a child. In addition, The Duchess had long-standing gynecological problems that prevented her from having children.