Queen Mother Biography/Wallis Simpson, etc.

[sandy]

She was presented at court. However, it was after she got involved with David. George V was reported to have said to Queen Mary, "Imagine that woman in our home!"

[drezzle]

Wallis was presented at court while Lady Thelma Furness was still mistress to the Prince of Wales.  So it's doubtful she and David had crossed the line between friendship and more yet at that time.  So I'm still curious, who sponsored her for presentation at court?

[Lucy]

Hiya Drezzle....Will check Greg King's book for her sponsor later but for now I found this basic info:

Who could be presented? Wives and daughters of peers, members of Parliament, officers in the armed services, wives and daughters of the gentry, barristers (but not solicitors), and a few other select groups could be presented. Actresses were barred, wives of men who were in trade could not be presented (although that prohibition was loosened over the years), and no one who been divorced could be presented. Later on, the innocent party in a divorce was allowed to be presented which allowed Wallis Simpson, the future Duchess of Windsor, that privilege (she was still married to Ernest Simpson at the time of her presentation). The young woman being presented had to be sponsored by a woman who had herself been presented. Theoretically, that would be her mother, mother-in-law, or another relative but some women of noble birth, but slim pockets would for a fee, bring out a young woman who had no relatives at Court.

http://www.likesbooks.com/court.html

[drezzle]

Thank You Lucy..... :thumbsup:.......it sounds like it was a practice good to be dropped. 

[sandy]

Wallis was presented at court while Lady Thelma Furness was still mistress to the Prince of Wales.  So it's doubtful she and David had crossed the line between friendship and more yet at that time.  So I'm still curious, who sponsored her for presentation at court?

I'll have to look that up. But unless there were two court presentations, there was reported antipathy by King George V. There is a lovely portrait of Wallis in her court presentation dress.

[sandy]

It actually may have been a second time she and Mr Simpson went to the court that George V made the comments. It was known than that she and Edward were involved. I have to check a book I have on this.

[amabel]

Dominatrix, and I won't go into her documented politics.

My mother always told me, "If you can't say anything nice, say nothing at all."

That was the hold Wallis had over David, she treated him like dirt and he loved it.

Ribbentrop the German Ambassador to England.  He used to send her 17 Carnations every day.  Seventeen, signifying how many times they had slept with one another.

How does a woman of little income and a broken marriage survive in China?

why would he send 17 carnations?  surely if they were having an affair the number of sexual encounters would go Up and he'd have ot up the number of Flowers???

[Hale]

When the US entered the war in 1942, they set about gathering their own intelligence.  At that time, Ribbentrops cousin, a Catholic priest had fled Germany and was residing in the States.  It was he who told the FBI that Ribbentrop had an affair with Wallis, and that the Carnations represented the amount of times they slept together.  As for Trundle, as far as I am aware that too is part of the 227 page dossier the FBI compiled about the Duke & Duchess of Windsor.

IF Wallis and Edward were cooperative, there would be no need to kidnap them.

Perhaps in time we shall learn what Churchill said to David.  Personally, I suspect he threatened to cut him off any monies he was in receipt of.

If I correctly recall it was while David was in Wales visiting the mines and the conditions the miners worked in He said "Something must be done" It was then that Baldwin forced the issue

David met with his brother on the 17th November, 1936 and told him then of his resolve to abdicate.  It was afterwards that David's last official engagement was a tour of the depressed areas of South Wales.  "The something must be done" remark was cruel and shallow.  He officially abdicated in December of that same year.

http://www.etoile.co.uk/Columns/RoyalScribe/041122.html

The above link is not the truth, the above piece is an article drawn from just two books, one of them being Greg King.  The FACT of the matter is no one really knows the truth because all the documents of that era have not been made public.  I wasn't aware until several months ago that there are still documents which shan't be made public until 2020-2032.  These documents relate to Britains Fascists.  Many of whom were aristocrats.  Why wait that long?  I don't know.  Therefore don't assume everything we need to know has been made public about this.  It hasn't.

The people would have cheered him on because his popularity was immense!

Yes, his popularity was immense.  The public were privvy to very little.

Wallis was presented at court while Lady Thelma Furness was still mistress to the Prince of Wales.  So it's doubtful she and David had crossed the line between friendship and more yet at that time.  So I'm still curious, who sponsored her for presentation at court?

Wallis was sponsered by her friend Mildred Anderson in June 1931.  The Lord Chamberlain's office cleared it because Wallis was the innocent party in her first marriage. 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/personal-view/3586984/Trundles-tale-it-isnt-true.html

Mr Trundle seems to have admitted the affair, but then anyone who "boasts that every woman falls for me" is perfectly capable of having delusions of sexual grandeur about the Prince of Wales's mistress. The phenomenon of celebrity-stalker and sexual fantasist are not new.

Some men boast, but their boasts are empty.  Other men boast, but that doesn't mean their boasts are untrue.

She was presented at court. However, it was after she got involved with David. George V was reported to have said to Queen Mary, "Imagine that woman in our home!"

That is what I have since read also.

[drezzle]

Thanks Hale for the name Wallis Mildred Anderson in June 1931 as sponsor.  I suppose no one has proof she was working for George V?   

She was presented at court. However, it was after she got involved with David. George V was reported to have said to Queen Mary, "Imagine that woman in our home!"

That is what I have since read also.

George and Mary weren't all that grand they could so worry about Wallis being in their sacred home.  George was an uneducated bully and Mary was a well-known kleptomaniac who let her darling husband abuse their children.  One look at Edward VIII is enough to know that his father was one nasty piece of work.

[Hale]

 :lmao3:

[drezzle]

Ya ya!   Look at this photo and tell me you don't see a little hell raiser for life:

http://tinyurl.com/2ednokz

And here the martinet:

http://tinyurl.com/26slken

This is the background which generated one of the bloodiest royal feuds of all time that was actually bloodless and the cringe worthy bickering between in-laws.  This would not have been allowed to happen with QV, Edward VII, George VI or the current Queen. 

[Hale]

drezzle, just to let you know it was this line I found funny in your posts:  

I suppose no one has proof she was working for George V?     :P

[amabel]

When the US entered the war in 1942, they set about gathering their own intelligence.  At that time, Ribbentrop's cousin, a Catholic priest had fled Germany and was residing in the States.  It was he who told the FBI that Ribbentrop had an affair with Wallis, and that the Carnations represented the amount of times they slept together.  As for Trundle, as far as I am aware that too is part of the 227 page dossier the FBI compiled about the Duke & Duchess of Windsor.

[

Mr Trundle seems to have admitted the affair, but then anyone who "boasts that every woman falls for me" is perfectly capable of having delusions of sexual grandeur about the Prince of Wales's mistress. The phenomenon of celebrity-stalker and sexual fantasist are not new.

Some men boast, but their boasts are empty.  Other men boast, but that doesn't mean their boasts are untrue.

She was presented at court. However, it was after she got involved with David. George V was reported to have said to Queen Mary, "Imagine that woman in our home!"

That is what I have since read also.

Hale, honestly, I'm not saying Wallis DID have an affair with Ribbentrop but it sounds a bit like the sort of stuff of romance!  Why would R's cousin know who he was sleeping with?  Esp if he was a Catholic Priest. Might he not want to thrill the FBI and make the most of his 15 mins of fame when he got a chance to talk to them?
I think that Trundle or whatever he's called is a better bet.

[Hale]

amabel, all of this only came out a couple of years ago via the papers from the FBI.  I am aware of rumours beforehand, but I didn't pay much attention to those.  However, this.  Why should the FBI be involved in propogating lies against the Duke and Duchess of Windsor after the abdication?

I would love to read those FBI reports.  As I said there are 227 pages of them, but I can't access them via the net.  I don't know if our American cousins can.

[LadyL]

amabel, all of this only came out a couple of years ago via the papers from the FBI.  I am aware of rumours beforehand, but I didn't pay much attention to those.  However, this.  Why should the FBI be involved in propogating lies against the Duke and Duchess of Windsor after the abdication?

I would love to read those FBI reports.  As I said there are 227 pages of them, but I can't access them via the net.  I don't know if our American cousins can.

The FBI reported all kinds of rumors in their archives. Particularly lurid ones. They wanted to know what was being said and who it was being said about.

Check out what they said about the Kennedys:
http://gawker.com/5563070/fbis-kennedy-sex-party-memo-did-jfk-teddy-and-marilyn-monroe-have-an-orgy

[amabel]

amabel, all of this only came out a couple of years ago via the papers from the FBI.  I am aware of rumours beforehand, but I didn't pay much attention to those.  However, this.  Why should the FBI be involved in propogating lies against the Duke and Duchess of Windsor after the abdication?

I would love to read those FBI reports.  As I said there are 227 pages of them, but I can't access them via the net.  I don't know if our American cousins can.

I still wouldn 't take it TOO  seriously.  Most intelligence gathering involves taking note of a lot of wild and improbable stuff which is almost certainly not true but one has to gather all the stuff to find what might be important.  I don't say that the FBI were lying, only that Von R's cousin might have exaggerated or lied ot them, possibly he wanted asylum in the US and thought that this would help?  or possbily he just wanted to make himself important.  I don't say that its NOT true, it might be but I think it was part of the "Wallis is a Nazi" stuff... I don't think that she or David were, neither of them were intelligent enough to have any real interst in politics, and almost certainly in both cases they were simply flattered by Hitler's attentions and in David's case I think he DID have a genuine and sincere desire to avoid another war.... for good reasons, as he thought of himself as an ex serviceman... and had seen the damage that the Great War had done....
I'd say that Trundle is a better bet for a possible lover... and what about that Jimmy DOnahue!!  That is a weird relationship.....

[drezzle]

Why should the FBI be involved in propogating lies against the Duke and Duchess of Windsor after the abdication?

Is it possible that it is a small world at the top?   The British gov often uses foreign govs to do their dirty work when it would be too politically sensitive to do it themselves -- and vice versa. 

The problem with the Duke and Duchess of Windsor was probably not that they were Nazis or that Wallis was some sort of unprincipled sex machine, but that they talked too much, and against the royal family.  In addition they had an audience who was willing to listen.   This set of circumstances is understandably dangerous to the image of the sitting royal family, so someone had to do something to neutralize it.

[Hale]

amabel, I do believe Frank Giles of the Sunday Times who had dinner with the Windsor's in France back in the 50's.  In an interview which I watched he blamed the loss of the war on "Roosevelt and the Jews". Not my words, but supposedly the Duke of Windsors.

The historian Steven Runciman who knew the Windsors said in an interview, that Baldwin became extremely frustrated by the new King because he would relay things to him in their private meetings, David would then tell Wallis and Wallis would then tell Ribbentrop.  Baldwin discovered this through Ribbentrop because Ribbentrop always knew what he and the King had discussed.  I should add, Runciman's father was a member of the government at the time.

Oh drezzle......I do agree.  There is a lot of prid quo pro between foreign governments, but what purpose would it have served the USA?  Usually, these 'dirty' going on's are a result of common interests.  I don't honestly see the common interest here.  Also, you have to remember this didn't come out at the time.  Rumours did circulate about Wallis, but the whole Nazi thing and the fuller extent of it has only began to come to light after bother the Windsor's death.  Therefore, what purpose does this so called propaganda serve today?

[amabel]

amabel, I do believe Frank Giles of the Sunday Times who had dinner with the Windsor's in France back in the 50's.  In an interview which I watched he blamed the loss of the war on "Roosevelt and the Jews". Not my words, but supposedly the Duke of Windsors.

Hmm, I still don't know if you could say he was a Nazi...I just don think he Had the brains to consider any political system in depth. 
Certainly he was anti Semitic but so were a lot of upper class people in the US and Europe.
I agree that it is unnerving that he didn't have the sense at least to disguise his prejudices after the War Had revealed where anti semitism could lead but then I never thought he was very bright.  I think he was pro German, back in the 30s, after all there were the family connections, and the feeling that he didn't want to see another war...
Wallis was probably right wing, in the same unthinking way.  and if she was friendly with Ribbentrop, she may well have been indiscreet.   like many others, she may have vaguely felt, if she thoguth about politics really, that Germany and Britain were natural allies and should work together against Communism, and she probably felt that being friends with the German ambassador might be a good thing for her.  A foreign ally is better than no ally at all.
When the war happened, I suspect that both were tempted (I hope it was no more than tempted) to collude with or talk to the Nazis in hopes that it might restore Edward to the throne and her as his Queen, even if it was as as puppets of the Germans.

As for the "black propaganda" well it seems to me that if (as was true) Edward had been very much of a hindrance to the war effort  and  if after the war he was still wishing that the Nazis had not been defeated and bad mouthing Roosevelt, the Americans had as great an interest as the British in making sure that this was not forgotten and that he was seen in a negative light. (besides they are supposed to be allies! )
I think that Edward's political views were vague, shallow and not thought out.  He was right wing, racist etc but probably not much worse than a lot of upper class people... and I think that his cosying up to the Nazis was mostly in hopes of being treated as a King again and having Wallis treated as a queen, and in hopes that if they did win the war, he might be restored ot the thorne, with Wallis. (rather than out of any kind of serious wish to see a Nazi victory)  I mean that he wanted a Nazi victory probably because of what it might do for him personally....

[Trudie]

I pretty much agree with your assessment Amabel I think he was hoping that he would get his throne back. The biggest problem I have with this is Roosevelt was not too keen on going into the war in the first place and we only entered it after Pearl Harbor and the Jews were the victims of a totally twisted mind that was Hitler. There was no reason for Edward to blame either.  Even if David regained his throne I sincerely doubt the people would have tolerated him or Wallis for long with their views.

[amabel]

I pretty much agree with your assessment Amabel I think he was hoping that he would get his throne back. The biggest problem I have with this is Roosevelt was not too keen on going into the war in the first place and we only entered it after Pearl Harbor and the Jews were the victims of a totally twisted mind that was Hitler. There was no reason for Edward to blame either.  Even if David regained his throne I sincerely doubt the people would have tolerated him or Wallis for long with their views.

Roosevelt wanted to go to war, it as the American people who did not

However David was a stupid shallow minded and very selfish man and probably was far too dim to make any worthwhile statements about the war, or politics in general.  His politics were simply a fear of Bolshevism and a "what's in it for me" attitude in that he was probably not capable of thinking very much about Hitler or Nazism and was only interested in whether it might birng him some kudos.  I Hope that he was not willing to become a puppet king for the Nazis but I'm not sure....

[amabel]

amabel, I do believe Frank Giles of the Sunday Times who had dinner with the Windsor's in France back in the 50's.  In an interview which I watched he blamed the loss of the war on "Roosevelt and the Jews". Not my words, but supposedly the Duke of Windsors.

hale on re reading this, I am not sure if I understand?  Did David blame the loss of the war (ie by Germany) on R and the Jews?  I presume that's what he meant?  Is Giles saying that David wanted the Germans to win?  I Don't think that would have gone down well in France where he was living Tax free for most of his later life...  and in any case surely Even David could see it was as much to do with his native England that Germany lost the war...

[LadyL]

I pretty much agree with your assessment Amabel I think he was hoping that he would get his throne back. The biggest problem I have with this is Roosevelt was not too keen on going into the war in the first place and we only entered it after Pearl Harbor and the Jews were the victims of a totally twisted mind that was Hitler. There was no reason for Edward to blame either.  Even if David regained his throne I sincerely doubt the people would have tolerated him or Wallis for long with their views.

Roosevelt wanted to go to war, it as the American people who did not

However David was a stupid shallow minded and very selfish man and probably was far too dim to make any worthwhile statements about the war, or politics in general.  His politics were simply a fear of Bolshevism and a "what's in it for me" attitude in that he was probably not capable of thinking very much about Hitler or Nazism and was only interested in whether it might birng him some kudos.  I Hope that he was not willing to become a puppet king for the Nazis but I'm not sure....

I really don't think so. The Nazis were going to kidnap him; why would they do that if he was in on it?

Also, if you've seen the documentary Edward on Edward they interviewed a Spanish spy who had been working for the Nazis and was asked to try and talk him into getting involved with him. According to the spy he adamantly refused and wouldn't even take the offer seriously.

[Trudie]

I didn't say he was a Nazi I think at some point he was hoping if there was a defeat he would possibly have regained his throne. His remarks regarding Roosevelt and the Jews would not be tolerated now as they were then. I have always found it Ironic that people are so anti Semitic when one stops to think that Christianity was founded on the teachings of the bible and the son of god was a Jew born in Bethlehem.

[Hale]

amabel, I do believe Frank Giles of the Sunday Times who had dinner with the Windsor's in France back in the 50's.  In an interview which I watched he blamed the loss of the war on "Roosevelt and the Jews". Not my words, but supposedly the Duke of Windsors.

 
hale on re reading this, I am not sure if I understand?  Did David blame the loss of the war (ie by Germany) on R and the Jews?  I presume that's what he meant?  Is Giles saying that David wanted the Germans to win?  I Don't think that would have gone down well in France where he was living Tax free for most of his later life...  and in any case surely Even David could see it was as much to do with his native England that Germany lost the war...

Yes amabel, I was horrified.  The impression was that David hoped that the German view would prevail.

There are many who believe that the QM carried on a vendetta against David and Wallis till the end of their lives, but I don't believe that.  Neither do I believe the romantic view that David was the good King we never had.  Just look at what they did with their lives.  Nothing.  They just fluttered from one party to another some of which they got paid for.  They led a jet set life without once contributing to their fellow man.  The Duke of Windsor founded the Feathers Club Association whilst Prince of Wales.  When he abdicated he did nothing for it or any other charity, but Freda Dudley Ward his former mistress continued to work for this organisation until the day she died.