Jump to content
IGNORED

Charles and Camilla


QuiverFullofBooks

Recommended Posts

I hope she goes outside to smoke, otherwise the second hand smoke might get him.

  • I Agree 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, AmazonGrace said:

I never thought he would abdicate but then he might have died before mom did.

I had always wondered about this as well. It could have easily happened. People pass away in their 70's all the time. I'm guessing William is pretty damn grateful it didn't happen and is crossing his fingers his father lives as long as possible. Based off comments he's made, he doesn't strike me as someone who is eager for the job. 

45 minutes ago, Coconut Flan said:

I hope she goes outside to smoke, otherwise the second hand smoke might get him.

Isn't second hand smoke almost worse for you? I feel like I read that once upon a time. 

  • Upvote 1
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, I have always read that second hand smoke is worse.  But I smoked for 30 years and nobody in my family ever came down with lung diseases.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/16/2022 at 1:30 PM, viii said:

The whole family disapproved of Edward abdicating in order to marry Wallis, it was an unforgiveable blight in some of their eyes. No matter how unpopular Charles was, abdicating was never really an option. He was always due to become king. 

Many historians believe Edward was forced to abdicate because of his ties with the Nazis. The thing with Wallis was the excuse given to the public, since "The kind is a Nazi sympathizer" wouldn't read well in the papers.

  • Downvote 1
  • Bless Your Heart 1
  • Eyeroll 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Jackie3 said:

Many historians believe Edward was forced to abdicate because of his ties with the Nazis. The thing with Wallis was the excuse given to the public, since "The kind is a Nazi sympathizer" wouldn't read well in the papers.

I don't personally believe that's true. I believe that his Nazi ties came in once he was with Wallis. She was the catalyst for that. 

  • Upvote 4
  • I Agree 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He was not forced. He could have stayed King and had a Morganatic marriage but he would not accept that. But of course it would have been catastrophic for Britain to have them on the throne.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, tabitha2 said:

He was not forced. He could have stayed King and had a Morganatic marriage but he would not accept that. But of course it would have been catastrophic for Britain to have them on the throne.

A morganatic marriage was suggested by Edward (some historians think the idea was thought up by Winston Churchill; he certainly supported it), but was ultimately rejected by the Cabinet and the Dominions in the British Empire.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, viii said:

I don't personally believe that's true. I believe that his Nazi ties came in once he was with Wallis. She was the catalyst for that. 

It's not Wallis' fault he became a Nazi sympathizer. 

It's interesting. Many of the things that are said about Meghan Markle were once said about Wallis.

"It is known she has limitless ambition. . ."

She  {and her husband] wanted to "get all they could out of HRH"

"It must not be assumed that she has abandoned hope of being Queen of England"

Edited by Jackie3
  • Move Along 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tabitha2 said:

He was not forced. He could have stayed King and had a Morganatic marriage but he would not accept that. But of course it would have been catastrophic for Britain to have them on the throne.

Of course. Because he was colluding with the Germans.

  • Move Along 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, viii said:

I don't personally believe that's true. I believe that his Nazi ties came in once he was with Wallis. She was the catalyst for that. 

Society's opinion of divorce has changed so much in the last 80-odd years that we forget that at the time it was a truly shocking thing. A lot of people think that "there must be more to it than the divorce, surely?"

However, the Matrimonial Causes Act was passed less than 80 years before Edward abdicated, and prior to that each individual divorce either needed an lengthy annulment process or its own Act of Parliament, so it was restricted to the very wealthy. The Church forbade the remarriage of divorced people in church, and didn't recognise a civil remarriage. Senior clergy objected strenuously to the nominal head of the Church of England marrying a divorced woman. He could not have been married in church. He would have been regarded as an adulterer. The church didn't allow divorced people to remarry in church until 2002.

After the abdication, the church banned any Church of England clergy from conducting their marriage ceremony. The vicar who ignored the ban and travelled to France to conduct it was forced to resign his appointment when he returned home, and never worked as a vicar in the church of England again.

  • Upvote 5
  • Thank You 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, rosamundi said:

The Church forbade the remarriage of divorced people in church

This just makes me laugh considering the whole reason the Church of England was formed was so that Henry could declare himself divorced and re-marry. You'd think the CoE would have been a lot more cool with adultery considering their roots. 

  • Upvote 11
  • I Agree 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, viii said:

This just makes me laugh considering the whole reason the Church of England was formed was so that Henry could declare himself divorced and re-marry. You'd think the CoE would have been a lot more cool with adultery considering their roots. 

Henry wanted an annulment, not a divorce. A declaration that the marriage was never valid and never took place.

  • Upvote 3
  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, viii said:

True, but my point still stands. The CoE should have been a lot more chill with certain things, considering their origins. 

If I go any further into the weeds of the Reformation,  the mods are going to kill me for thread drift 😉

  • Haha 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, rosamundi said:

If I go any further into the weeds of the Reformation,  the mods are going to kill me for thread drift 😉

<insert obligatory thread drift is part of FJ culture speech here>

Also, please feel free. It sounds interesting. :)

  • Upvote 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[Warning - long post!]

Currently working my way through the Queen Motherʻs official biography. Shawcross had unfettered access to BRF letters, diaries, and other papers as well many other memoirs, news accounts, and similar documents. He identified these key points in the abdication saga:

  • By 1934, E8's relationship with Wallis Simpson was an all-consuming passion. She could do no wrong and over the next two years she successfully reduced his connections with his family, in particular. He had always had his own set of friends but until this time he was also very close to some family members, especially G6 & Elizabeth -- Shawcross quotes many, many loving & affectionate letters between them all until this time.
  • People close to the BRF and in the BRF (like G6) at this time later said that by 1935-36, after G5's serious illnesses, E8 was already talking about renouncing the throne whenever his father died.
  • Small but telling point: just before G5 actually died, E8 flew into hysterics, crying & frantically hugging his mother. He was never that close to his father so it suggests that he was panicking over what was to come.
  • Churchill & the foreign office were not that concerned about E8 & Nazi Germany after his succession although post-WW II records show that the Nazis were interested in exploiting E8's apparent sympathy, which manifested itself as anti-war pacifism. They were much more concerned about Wallis because she was well known to be close to the German consular staff in Britain. 
  • Although there had been a press embargo in Britain on publishing stories about E8 & Wallis, by October 1936 many knew and the PM, Stanley Baldwin, met with E8 to tell him that the public was upset about his affair with Wallis & Baldwin recommended more discretion. E8 became enraged and said it was no oneʻs business but his. This is when it became clear that E8 would sacrifice everything, including the throne, to be with Wallis.
  • By November, E8ʻs Private Secretary warned him that the press was about be unleashed and that the weight of public disapproval could be enough to bring down the government, meaning E8 would need to find another PM. On 16 Nov, E8 summoned PM Baldwin and told him that he intended to marry Wallis as soon as she was free -- heʻd rather do this as King but if he couldn't, he would abdicate.
  • By the end of November 1936, the King had settled on a morganatic marriage but the PM and major political parties said NO. At this time, Baldwin also surveyed opinion among the Dominions by telegram and they all rejected the idea.
  • By early December, pretty much all was revealed publicly, with many critics *and* supporters of E8. The BRF, society people, church, and government leaders were mostly against it. Queen Mary as well as Elizabeth were adamantly opposed to a morganatic marriage or indeed to having Wallis Simpson anywhere near the throne. 
  • E8 abdicated, of course, but not without creating even more bitterness when it was discovered much later that he had lied through his teeth about his finances during the negotiations to make a settlement upon him: he claimed to have assets of about 90,000 pounds when it was really almost 1 million pounds.

 

 

Edited by hoipolloi
Fixed typo
  • Upvote 4
  • Thank You 17
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Jackie3 said:

Many historians believe Edward was forced to abdicate because of his ties with the Nazis. The thing with Wallis was the excuse given to the public, since "The kind is a Nazi sympathizer" wouldn't read well in the papers.

The Nazis where seen quiet different in 1936 than they where after they declared war and started bombing Great Britain. Great Britain during that time had a fascit movement themselfes and many people looked favorable on Germany before the WWII. You should look up Sr Oswald Mosley, that should be enlightening enough. Wallis Simpsons friendship with Joachim von Ribbentop was problematic because he was a foreign diplomat and nobody knew how much access she had to the informations Edward got and if or how much of that she send to Ribbentrop. And on another note, Wallis and Edward visited Hitler on the Obersalzberg, his famous country mansion in 1938, 2 years after his abdication.

Edited by klein_roeschen
  • Upvote 4
  • I Agree 1
  • Thank You 3
  • Love 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think part of the problem is that there had never been a morganatic marriage in British monarchical history. Three of Henry VIII’s six wives were technically commoners. Elizabeth Woodville was a commoner. Anne Hyde was a commoner. But all of them were accepted as queen consorts, and their children were part of the succession. George IV’s relationship with Maria Fitzherbert comes the closest, but unlike, say, Franz Ferdinand and Sophie Chotek, whose marriage was considered lawful but not dynastic, George’s marriage to Maria was never considered legal. So proposing a morganatic marriage meant introducing a completely new concept to English law. 

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/17/2022 at 2:30 AM, prayawaythefundie said:

I think Charles has been living a rather healthy lifestyle and it seems those  Windsors tend to get old as long as they don‘t do one thing: smoke. Can anyone confirm that he doesn‘t? I know Camilla is a heavy smoker.

There are multiple reports from the time that Camilla quite smoking in 2001. Including on the BRF official site. 

  • Upvote 1
  • I Agree 1
  • Thank You 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The only way for an abdication by Charles in Wiliams favour would have been if the institution was truly convinced people would go into the street and abolish the monarchy all together. Dynasties are all about continuing. I think there was only ever a short moment in time when this was a real option and that was the years around his divorce and Diana’s death.

  • Upvote 3
  • I Agree 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/18/2022 at 12:36 PM, klein_roeschen said:

The Nazis where seen quiet different in 1936 than they where after they declared war and started bombing Great Britain. Great Britain during that time had a fascit movement themselfes and many people looked favorable on Germany before the WWII. 

His infatuation with the Nazis extended well beyond the 1930s, into the 40s, 50s, and 60s.

Edward didn't drop the Nazis once their evil regime because apparent. He continued his association with them, even passing information to Nazi sympathizers.

He wrote a cable which said that, "continued severe bombing would make England ready for peace." Many believe he was hoping the Germans would win and install him as a puppet king.

When France was occupied by the Nazis, Edward asked the Germans to place guards in front of his french home, and they did so.

In the 60's, he said that he never thought Hitler was such a bad chap. The Duke was also known to be anti-semetic and racist. 

  • Upvote 1
  • Move Along 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/18/2022 at 10:52 PM, Anna Bolinas said:

I think part of the problem is that there had never been a morganatic marriage in British monarchical history. Three of Henry VIII’s six wives were technically commoners. Elizabeth Woodville was a commoner. Anne Hyde was a commoner. But all of them were accepted as queen consorts, and their children were part of the succession. George IV’s relationship with Maria Fitzherbert comes the closest, but unlike, say, Franz Ferdinand and Sophie Chotek, whose marriage was considered lawful but not dynastic, George’s marriage to Maria was never considered legal. So proposing a morganatic marriage meant introducing a completely new concept to English law. 

 4 ..Anne Boleyn, Jane Seymour, Kathryn Howard and Katherine Parr. 

On 11/18/2022 at 1:06 PM, Destiny said:

TIL the word morganatic. This discussion is fascinating, and why I love FJ. ❤️

I came across the meaning due to my love of The Prisoner of Zenda and its sequel Rupert of Hentzau. 

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • samurai_sarah locked, unlocked and locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.