Should Edward VIII been ostricized the way he was following the abdication?.

cinrit · October 22, 2011, 02:14:14 PM

Quote from: Harryforlife25 on October 22, 2011, 02:05:10 PM
I don't recall any report of him being "banished" from the UK I don't think ANYONE tolled him where to live but he made his choices he had to live with them...I do think the choice to leave the UK was the only choice he made for his family he would have created huge problems for his brother had he stayed but again I don't think he was "banished" he just left...

Not so ... he didn't just leave of his own volition:

QuoteThe Duke had assumed that he would settle in Britain after a year or two of exile in France. However, King George VI (with the support of their mother Queen Mary and his wife Queen Elizabeth) threatened to cut off Edward's allowance if he returned to Britain without an invitation.[61]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_VIII_of_the_United_Kingdom

[61]^ a b Ziegler, pp. 376–378

Cindy

Harryforlife25 · October 22, 2011, 03:18:28 PM

Quote from: cinrit on October 22, 2011, 02:14:14 PM
Quote from: Harryforlife25 on October 22, 2011, 02:05:10 PM
I don't recall any report of him being "banished" from the UK I don't think ANYONE tolled him where to live but he made his choices he had to live with them...I do think the choice to leave the UK was the only choice he made for his family he would have created huge problems for his brother had he stayed but again I don't think he was "banished" he just left...

Not so ... he didn't just leave of his own volition:

QuoteThe Duke had assumed that he would settle in Britain after a year or two of exile in France. However, King George VI (with the support of their mother Queen Mary and his wife Queen Elizabeth) threatened to cut off Edward's allowance if he returned to Britain without an invitation.[61]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_VIII_of_the_United_Kingdom

[61]^ a b Ziegler, pp. 376–378

Cindy

I was saying that no one tolled him to leave he left to marry Wallis because obviously he couldn't marry her in the UK I don't know what happened after his abdication but I was talking of the time immediately after that I doubt anyone tolled him where to go live .

cinrit · October 22, 2011, 03:45:37 PM

Quote from: Harryforlife25 on October 22, 2011, 03:18:28 PM
I was saying that no one tolled him to leave he left to marry Wallis because obviously he couldn't marry her in the UK I don't know what happened after his abdication but I was talking of the time immediately after that I doubt anyone tolled him where to go live .

I don't know if he was formally told to leave or not. But if he didn't, he would have been ... by his standard ... broke. If the the lifestyle of the Windsors is any indication, that would have been a major blow to him, indeed.

Cindy

lilibet80 · October 22, 2011, 04:16:37 PM

Queen Mary was the one who ascertained both from the QM as well as her other daughters-in-law, Princess Alice and Princess Marina, as well as the Princess Royal that they would not be "friends" with David and his wife. As far as the DOW visiting his mother, it was not until nine years after the abdication that they saw each other again.

I do not understand all this blaming of the Queen Mother. These people wrecked her life. It is because of them that they could not bring up their children in private and Bertie could not live a calm life. Why would any woman whose sister-in-law publicly calls her "Cookie" and refers to her as being overweight want to have anything to do with her? The QM never said anything in public against Wallis Simpson and all she ever said about David was that he used to be such fun. This blaming and name calling of the QM on this board is as obnoxious as the Diana-obsessed blaming Camilla for every choice Charles made. The King of England, George VI was hoodwinked financially by his brother and out of the goodness of his heart gave this brother half of his own inheritance. After he and his wife found out that David had over a million dollars and a ranch in Canada and had only cried poverty why would they want to know him? Face it folks, they were not very nice people. King George V knew what he was talking about when he said that David would ruin himself in 12 months and that Bertie had the most character of all his children.

amabel · October 22, 2011, 04:55:39 PM

Quote from: cinrit on October 22, 2011, 03:45:37 PM
Quote from: Harryforlife25 on October 22, 2011, 03:18:28 PM
I was saying that no one tolled him to leave he left to marry Wallis because obviously he couldn't .

I don't know if he was formally told to leave or not. But if he didn't, he would have been ... by his standard ... broke. If the the lifestyle of the Windsors is any indication, that would have been a major blow to him, indeed.

Cindy

Broke? he had finagled money out of George VI over and above the arrangements that had been made for him financially.. He must have realised that he could not live in the UK after his abdication, it would be ridiculous to say that he felt he could not be King of England and then continue to live there, getting in the way of the new king...

amabel · October 22, 2011, 04:58:29 PM

Quote from: lilibet80 on October 22, 2011, 04:16:37 PM
I do not understand all this blaming of the Queen Mother. These people wrecked her life. It is because of them that they could not bring up their children in private and Bertie could not live a calm life.

I agree that the QM had reason for grievance.. albeit I'd hardly say her life was wrecked. But I think that Geo VI's life was certainly diminished by the strain of being king when he had not expected to be, iand staying with his people through the war and the difficult post war years. And she was angry at this burden being placed on her husband...

cinrit · October 22, 2011, 05:23:15 PM

Quote from: amabel on October 22, 2011, 04:55:39 PM
Quote from: cinrit on October 22, 2011, 03:45:37 PM

I don't know if he was formally told to leave or not. But if he didn't, he would have been ... by his standard ... broke. If the the lifestyle of the Windsors is any indication, that would have been a major blow to him, indeed.

Cindy

Broke? he had finagled money out of George VI over and above the arrangements that had been made for him financially.. He must have realised that he could not live in the UK after his abdication, it would be ridiculous to say that he felt he could not be King of England and then continue to live there, getting in the way of the new king...

I did say "by his standard".

Cindy

lilibet80 · October 22, 2011, 05:26:29 PM

When she agreed to marry Bertie she was led to believe that she and her family could lead a pretty much private life. Except for a royal engagement here and there such as those performed by the Gloucesters and the Kents she, her husband and children would be out of the limelight As Duchess of York she had the freedom to go over to her sister's house and her mother's house in London, out with friends to lunch or dinner and to the theater without much fuss. The only thing she was not allowed to do was to take public transportation. She was told that if David did not have any heirs once he married her child would be king or queen but probably not for many years. She had a beautiful home filled with friends and went on country house weekends as Bertie loved to shoot. She made mistakes as do we all, but she comported herself with great distinction as Queen as well as trying to take care of her overworked nervous wreck of a husband who was going through a war and doing a job for which he had no formal training.

cinrit · October 22, 2011, 05:32:02 PM

^^ Surely she knew that there was always the possibility that something could happen to David? He could have died, or become insane, or he could abdicate. And while her life certainly changed, I could be wrong, but I think she enjoyed her position as queen consort. I'm not sure if these were his exact words, but George V had this to say about the future Edward VIII, "After I am dead, the boy will ruin himself in twelve months." So there was every kind of possibility ...

Cindy

sandy · October 22, 2011, 06:26:07 PM

The Duchess of York's life was not entirely her "own." She was expected to work to the extent of having to go on a long tour with her husband while Elizabeth was still a baby. She didn't have the option or freedom to stay home with the baby. She was a working royal and wasn't just flitting about visiting relatives though of course she had free time but she was "on call" to duty. Bertie her husband was not entirely "untrained" for duty he was a working royal and knew the ropes of being a senior royal..

sandy · October 22, 2011, 06:28:35 PM

Quote from: Harryforlife25 on October 22, 2011, 02:05:10 PM
I don't recall any report of him being "banished" from the UK I don't think ANYONE tolled him where to live but he made his choices he had to live with them...I do think the choice to leave the UK was the only choice he made for his family he would have created huge problems for his brother had he stayed but again I don't think he was "banished" he just left...

He DID get assigned to be Governor General of Nassau for a time. So he did work for the Crown but out of the country

cinrit · October 22, 2011, 07:29:18 PM

It's said that neither the Duke nor the Duchess liked being in Nassau ...

QuoteThe Duke of Windsor was installed as Governor of the Bahamas. He did not enjoy the position, and referred to the islands as "a third-class British colony".[73] The British Foreign Office strenuously objected when the pair planned to tour aboard a yacht belonging to a Swedish magnate, Axel Wenner-Gren, whom American intelligence wrongly believed to be a close friend of Luftwaffe commander Hermann Göring.[74] However, the Duke was praised for his efforts to combat poverty on the islands, although he was as contemptuous of the Bahamians as he was of most non-white peoples of the Empire. He said of Étienne Dupuch, the editor of the Nassau Daily Tribune: "It must be remembered that Dupuch is more than half Negro, and due to the peculiar mentality of this Race, they seem unable to rise to prominence without losing their equilibrium."[20]

73. Bloch, p. 364
20. ^ a b Ziegler, p. 448

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_VIII_of_the_United_Kingdom#Later_life

There are some good pictures of the couple in Nassau here (but not a very complimentary article):

http://theselvedgeyard.wordpress.com/2011/03/13/the-duke-and-duchess-of-windsor-the-heart-has-its-reasons-she-said/

Cindy

sandy · October 22, 2011, 08:07:42 PM

It did give him something to do.

lilibet80 · October 22, 2011, 11:21:53 PM

So he had something to do while his brother had the entire burden on his shoulders. So what? He was the one who was always complaining that he had nothing to do He was sent to the Bahamas to get him as far away as possible. He and his wife disliked being in the Bahamas, it was not lively and social enough for them. Wallis once said that her husband should have been a salesman for Rolls Royce, but he was not allowed to take such a position because of his royal status. The government did not want him to have any job within the palace structure. They did not trust him due to his Nazi sympathizing and they did not want him reading state papers, considering his carelessness with secret documents and his penchant for telling his wife everything. There was also the threat that he might be kidnapped by the Nazis and held for ransom.

amabel · October 23, 2011, 06:51:56 AM

Quote from: cinrit on October 22, 2011, 05:23:15 PM
Quote from: amabel on October 22, 2011, 04:55:39 PM
Quote from: cinrit on October 22, 2011, 03:45:37 PM

I .

Cindy

Broke? he had finagled money out of George VI over and above the arrangements that had been made for him financially.. He must have realised that he could not live in the UK after his abdication, it would be ridiculous to say that he felt he could not be King of England and then continue to live there, getting in the way of the new king...

I did say "by his standard".

Cindy

But he was very rich indeed. But he cried poverty to the new King - in essence lying to him, and persuaded him to help him out with a share of his own private wealth. and he and Wallis lived an extremely lavish lifestyle. I don't know by what standard he could be considered badly off or even think of himself as badly off. I dotn see any of his actions as anythig other than the behaviour of a very spoiled selfish and wrong minded man.

memememe · October 23, 2011, 06:58:21 AM

My understanding is that part of why he was able to cry poor was that unlike his brothers and sister his father basically left him nothing in his will but...he did get the Kingdom, Sandringham and Balmoral and then made Bertie buy the latter two from him. He lied big time but why would anyone be surprised that that waste of space would do that. The best thing he ever did in his life was leave the throne to his brother, who proved himself a fantastic king - like his own grandfather somewhat underated at the time of his accession but in the end the two Berties proved that they were great kings for their times.

amabel · October 23, 2011, 07:07:03 AM

I cant' remember the details but he did lie to George VI and in spite of already having a handsome private fortune he got more money out of his borhter, whom he was already landing with all he stress and burdens of being king.
As you say, he was pretty mcuh a waste of space. Had he eve done anythign iwth his post abdication life, he might have redeemed himself a bit in peopel's eyes but he didn't.

amabel · October 23, 2011, 08:46:06 AM

Quote from: cinrit on October 22, 2011, 05:32:02 PM
^^ Surely she knew that there was always the possibility that something could happen to David? He could have died, or become insane, or he could abdicate. And while her life certainly changed, I could be wrong, but I think she enjoyed her position as queen consort.
Cindy

Yes she would have known there was a possibility, but I don't think she foresaw abdication within a year of David becoming King. As the Wife of the D of York, when the POW wasn't married, it was very possible that she would become queen one day.. but I'm sure she did not think it would be for many years. Had David stayed King and unmarried, Q Eliz the QM would have expected that he'd live to be say 70 or so, (as he did) and if she became queen, she too would be 70-ish.
I think that she did enjoy being queen but what upset and angered her was the strain on her husband who did not want to be king and who was so shy and nervy and unable to speak in public. I think she felt that Dav's desertion of his duty led to her husband being put through the strain of being king, during the war, and the hard years that followed, and that it helped to kill him prematurely. so she never really forgave the Windsors.
As for G V's remarks, I don't think he really saw David abdicating willingly. I think he felt that his lack of dutifulness might have led to his being FORCED to leave or to the end of the monarchy...

memememe · October 23, 2011, 09:57:19 AM

Did he really go willingly though or was he really forced out with Wallis as a convenient excuse that saved the government from a total constitutional crisis which could have brought down the monarchy?

I suspect that if Wallis hadn't been around the government would still have found a way to get rid of David but would it have still maintained a monarchy?

amabel · October 23, 2011, 10:08:31 AM

Quote from: memememe on October 23, 2011, 09:57:19 AM
Did he really go willingly though or was he really forced out with Wallis as a convenient excuse that saved the government from a total constitutional crisis which could have brought down the monarchy?
?

I can't see why they would have gotten rid of him. Unless he was EXTREEMELY lax in doing his duty or very indiscreet in his actions. There were signs that he was getting pretty lazy, and careless (the confidentail papers being left out and returned ot the Govt offices with the marks of drink glasses) but probably he was not so bad that the Government would actually wish to push him out. It might have been time for a few stern warnings but hardly the extremity of pushing him to abdicate. However its hard to tell what was "the Wallis factor" and what was just David being lazy and undutifiul.. sicne he was involved iwht her before becoming king...
But I think that for David WALLIS was an excuse. I think that he didn't want to be king, at least not if it meant he could not lead a life of pleasure seeking, and he chanced to fall in love with a woman who was not suitable to be queen, so he was probably unconsciously using her and his Love for her as the "deal breaker" card. And perhaps the Govt DID see it as a relief that he was doing something like wanting to marry a divorcee, which would allow him way out without their worrying that he might be up to something worse like interfering in foregin affairs to the extent of being too close to Nazi Germany... or letting some state secrets out...

sandy · October 23, 2011, 10:25:17 AM

David never really got interested in anyone "suitable" since he took up with married Freda Dudley Ward. After that he got involved with married women. I do think he really was besotted with Wallis and felt she was "the one". I do't think he felt he was using her to get out of kingship. He thought she could be Queen.

George VI smoked heavily. This I think more than any stress caused the cancer and health issues.

cinrit · October 23, 2011, 12:22:16 PM

Quote from: amabel on October 23, 2011, 06:51:56 AM
Quote from: cinrit on October 22, 2011, 05:23:15 PM
I did say "by his standard".

Cindy

But he was very rich indeed. But he cried poverty to the new King - in essence lying to him, and persuaded him to help him out with a share of his own private wealth. and he and Wallis lived an extremely lavish lifestyle. I don't know by what standard he could be considered badly off or even think of himself as badly off. I dotn see any of his actions as anythig other than the behaviour of a very spoiled selfish and wrong minded man.

Obviously, anything less than what he had, he would consider poor ... by his standards. You realize that being broke, by the standards of someone who is, by our standards, unreasonably wealthy (and that could be anything from the wealth of the Windsors to the wealth of the owner of the company we work for) are two different things. Being broke, by our standards, means not being able to buy a new car ... or even have a car. Being broke, by their standards, means having to buy a Bentley instead of a Bugatti. :laugh:

Quote from: amabel on Today at 02:07:03 AMI cant' remember the details but he did lie to George VI and in spite of already having a handsome private fortune he got more money out of his borhter, whom he was already landing with all he stress and burdens of being king.

Didn't he downplay his wealth when he sold Sandringham (I think it was Sandringham) to George VI, and therefore got more for it? Or maybe I'm confusing my stories.

Quote from: amabel on Today at 03:46:06 AMAs for G V's remarks, I don't think he really saw David abdicating willingly. I think he felt that his lack of dutifulness might have led to his being FORCED to leave or to the end of the monarchy...

Yeah, he obviously couldn't foretell the future, but as a father, he sensed that all would not go well.

Quote from: memememe on Today at 04:57:19 AMI suspect that if Wallis hadn't been around the government would still have found a way to get rid of David but would it have still maintained a monarchy?

If he was indeed as careless with official papers as is rumored, they'd probably have wanted to get rid of him. But could they have?

Cindy

amabel · October 23, 2011, 04:32:10 PM

It would not have been easy to get rid of him, if he didn't want to go, but it could have been done if he was seen to be in conflict with the Govt or acting unconstitutionally. But at first they might have just stopped at a stern wanring or just not showing him any delicate papers...

However perhaps Wallis was a godsend, since it was a way of encouraging him to go( and I think he DID want to go) witout bringing up his laziness, carelessness and the possibility of a conflict if say he wanted to interfere in foreign affairs as in wanting to fight Russia Rather t han Germany.... that would have been bit more more "hairy" a subject to make public. But I think that Edw DID want to get out of being King. I think he was willing to stay in he could keep Wallis as his queen or morganatic wife, but there was an element of just wanting out. He had just given up any desire to be a real king and he let himself rush along the crisis towards abdication and marrying her. Afterwards I think that perhaps he DID think he could come back in a few years and be a sort of "extra prince" and do whatever royal duties suited him, and enjoy the privileges, but pass the main burden onto George Vi...(in short have the pleasant part without the "paying for it" part..)... and when that didn't happen, I think it shook him up and he realised that he was not going ot be forgiven.. Perhaps he did toy with the idea of being Hitler's Puppet king, if that was perhaps offered to him..
But while I take your point about HIS standards of "broke" being differnet to yours or mine, I still can't believe that he really thought he was "broke". He just wanted as much money as he could get, and was willing to lie to get it....

missing diana · October 23, 2011, 04:53:29 PM

To answer the question yes he NEEDED to be ostracized and shelved because he would have created dueling courts and untold conflict. He was also a well know Nazi sympathizer and while George VI may have harborred similar opinions in private he did not publicize them and sided with Churchill eventually.

W&E glamorous, yet troublesome pair.

lilibet80 · October 24, 2011, 02:19:16 PM

The difference between King George and Edward Viii's feelings about Hitler were quite different. Edward thought Hitler was a great man and agreed with his ideas concerning the Jews. King George agreed with Chamberlain's policy of appeasement but thought Hitler was a terrible man. Both he and Chamberlain had keeping Britain out of war with Hitler as their focus. It had nothing to do with their opinion of Hitler as a man. Edward agreed with Hitler's policies and probably would have been in agreement with Hitler if he invaded Britain. That way Hitler could have deposed King George and reinstated Edward on the throne with Queen Bessiewallis. To the end of his life when asked about Hitler Edward always said that he "didn't think Hitler was such a bad chap."