Funny, I always went through life believing he abdicated in favor of Elizabeth.
No, you’re both wrong: It was his brother, then known as Prince Albert, the Duke of York. Who would become George VI. (BTW, I believe there’s some speculation that Charles may take the name George when he ascends the throne, as it is one of his middle names)
:smack: Yes. George VI, Elizabeth’s dad.
Sorry.
Yes, and especially as George III is one of Charles’ heroes. God knows why he should respect the inane bumbler who lost us the best part of our North American colonies by his intransigence and who would later be described by the poet Shelley as this “old, mad, blind, despised and dying King”, but there you go, Charles has always possessed the Hanoverian family trait of being a little lacking in the upstairs department.
Speaking as an Englishman I say we should pack the whole bunch of freeloading leeches back to Hanover.
And replace them with Bavarians!
That and George III was a devoted and faithful husband and familyman. 
(Although Camilla looks like Grace Kelly compared to Queen Charlotte)
Whwn I said that Edward abdicated in favour of Wallis I meant he gave up the throne in favour of her.
But you knew that anyway
Mrs. Simpson’s two divorces, the then-scandalous circumstances under which the King was dating her, his unsuitability on the throne as a man of evident Nazi sympathies (even if he was not a Nazi himself) as war clouds were gathering on the horizon, and his stubborn insistence that any marriage decision was his own and had no political dimension such that he was not bound to accept the advice (i.e. orders) of the elected government of the day, all combined to ultimately force him to choose his sweetheart or his crown. It did not help him when, with the assistance of Winston Churchill, he tried to drum up support in Parliament in direct contradiction to the Baldwin Government’s policy, which stepped well over the line of what was permitted for a constitutional monarch: Stanley Baldwin - Wikipedia
I think Edward VIII made the right call, both for himself and for the kingdom.
Edward wanted to be involved in the gov’t, and he wasn’t any too bright. (Chowder, Edward did horribly in school and was generally as thick as two planks; the poor man was totally unsuited to the job he was born to.) I read recently in a very interesting book about royal mistresses that Wallis Simpson was very interested indeed in becoming Queen, or at least a morganatic consort. Just think of the influence she would have had over Edward, a king who didn’t know he was supposed to be more symbolic than literal and who would be dealing with some very scary world leaders. I think it’s only natural (and, in the end, a good thing) that the British gov’t felt it necessary to get rid of them.
Apparently she wasn’t any too thrilled when Edward abdicated for her (the book compared her reaction to when your cat gives you a lovely dead mouse as a symbol of regard). But once Edward had made the ultimate gesture and renounced the world’s biggest empire–and the world’s regard–for love, there wasn’t much left to do but stay together forever. I don’t know whether they stayed in love (from the book’s description I doubt it), but they were pretty well chained to each other regardless.
I don’t approve of monarchy at all, but given the circumstances I think the Brits were correct in what they did. (Not that anyone cares what a housewife in California thinks! ;))
Huh, I’ve read other accounts that she didn’t want to be a Queen at all, AND that she was thinking of calling it quits. THEN he abdicated for her, and well, she kind of had to stay with him. Hmmmmm…
Even if it hadn’t been Wallis, it’s a damned good thing he did abdicate – George VI was a much, much better king.