You did a great job explaining a complicated situation. I think Edward used Wallis to hide from the responsibility of the monarchy, and later the British establishment politely used Wallis to distance themselves from the former king, who was a Nazi German sympathizer intent of getting them on the "wrong" side of the war.
I so enjoyed this video. I am a 72 year old female from the us who has followed the British Monarchy for years. Please do more historical videos like this, it was truly wonderful! Thanks, a fan
Great summary, Pluto. Actually, Wallis was an heiress who was disinherited by her uncle (I think) when she refused to give up her first husband, who was deemed inappropriate. Another big difference between TW and Wallis was that Wallis was a fashion icon and always immaculately turned out, unlike the ever disheveled Z list actress.
Wallace didn’t want to marry Edward. She actually liked being married to her second husband. It was her social climbing inclinations and ambitious personality that lead her to pursue the future king. Wallace basically saw Edward as a means to and end. She expected to be remunerated and socially rewarded by her temporary association with Edward.
The Games some people play … starts off as fun , ends in sadness . Fortunately for Great Britain the outcome of this gave us our amazing Queen Elizabeth the second. RIP your majesty 😢 God save our king 👑
I’m from the Uk & sixty years old so I grew up knowing a lot about this & read extensively about it . I remember when she died in the 80s they had an auction of her fabulous jewellery, and we went around for a year wearing copies of her panther and peacock broaches, which were all the rage along with our shoulder pads! I commented because I want to tell you what a fabulous job you did presenting all this so well. You are a remarkable young woman and am sure you have a very bright future ❤️
A very good analogy. I am 76 and although i was not alive at the time of the abdication, it was still a ''hot' topic' and Wallace was reviled and hated throughout the UK and beyond. We were taught about this 'treachery' in school and had to write compositions about traitors to The Crown,....in pen and ink ! However, at least Wallace had the good sense to keep her mouth shut. They went quietly, sunk into oblivion and by comparison to Markle, Wallace was a saint.. I suspect that Harry is feeling the effects of his particular exile...Edward, it is reported, kept a replica of The Crown and wore it on occasions when he entertained his guests, alhough I doubt if any reference to the RF is allowed in the Markle household..
Harry is as dumb and as easily influenced as was Edward. Amazing how history repeats itself.
I also watched the ‘letters’ documentary some years ago and also saw Wallis in an entirely different light. I agree with you entirely, basically Wallis was a social climber and enjoyed having her cake and eating it. The most obvious difference being … Wallis never (publicly at least) and frequently trashed the RF!
Another major way these 2 American divorcees differed was in their style. Wallis had impeccable taste and an eye for detail that led to her always choosing fashions wisely, based on her figure and making sure everything she wore was tailored to perfection. Her hair and makeup were also always on point. Meghan on the other hand, as a working royal, always appeared as though she got dressed out of hamper, no matter how eye wateringly expensive her wardrobe was, she managed to look cheap in everything. Everything was either wrinkled or not sized correctly, being too big or too small. When she would wear something that looked great, she would either not be wearing the right underwear/bra or her hair would like crap. Her signature hairstyle seemed to be a messy bun.
I understand from various biographies that the Queen Mother did a lot of manipulation behind the scenes at this time. Like Wallis, she was a steely social climber, and once she got wind of the fact that Edward might actually abdicate pushed events that would encourage him to do so. (Probably along the lines of ensuring Wallis and Edward's affair was publicised, and forcing Edward to choose whether to give her up or not.)
The story that the Queen Mother never wanted her husband to be king is part of the 'fairytale' we've been sold. She certainly did. She had a huge influence over her husband, but more than that she knew the monarchy could not survive Edward's reign once his political leanings became more well known.
I find the parallels between Wallis and Camilla just as interesting. By all accounts, Camilla adored her first husband, Andrew Parker Bowles, and was content to remain Charles' mistress. And like his uncle, Charles insisted on marrying his mistress too.
One thing we know for sure. Wallis did the monarchy and all of Britain a favor getting weak minded, selfish David to abdicate in favor of George VI, who was of much higher character and in turn put Elizabeth II on the throne.
I have always felt that Wallace wanted to be queen, and when Edward abdicated, she freaked and wanted away from him, but she had already gotten herself in too deep, and her exhusband had moved on. She was stuck. I think she had zero respect for Edward, and abused him. And for whatever sick reason, he ate up the abuse. Edward never wanted to be king in the first place, and was very Ill equipped for the position, so Wallace was his escape hatch to get out of it.