I was educated in the GSCE system in Zimbabwe… I know what the Boston Tea Party was all about, despite its comparitive irrelevance to my life.
Does the UK not follow GCSE any more?
(For those not familiar, GCSE is the General Certificate of Secondary Education, there are two “levels”, “O”, taken at age 15/16 - normally 7-8 subjects, and “A”, normally 2 subjects)
“O” level invariably includes “modern history”.
At the time, the main question was, WTF are we doing fighting a war at the other end of the known universe?
It’s such a long time ago that I can’t remember whether I learned about the American war of independence at school or from reading since. Hardly *modern *history though. When I was at school, Zimbabwe was Rhodesia and the sun never set on the pink bits of the globe.
Wallis Simpson also had a lot of affairs that were well known among the upper class folks and the press. Divorced, American, questionable morals, what else you got?
Note that Edward also messed around a lot. Which is why the two of them were pretty much bound to meet. But, of course, his affairs weren’t considered as bad as hers since … since …, um, … “reasons”.
Hey, I even put in a smiley.
‘O’ Levels were phased out in 1989. I’m barely old enough to have done ‘O’ Level History - The American War of Independence was covered in the context of the lead up to the French Revolution (which was covered in Great Length). I’m not sure it really registered in our 14 year old minds that we were even involved!
Because he didn’t want to marry the ladies in question, who remained out of sight to anyone outside his immediate circle. They and their husbands knew the rules (no divorce, no scandal). (To be fair, I think there’s a school of thought that believes Mrs S thought she was in the same position, but was thrown off course by the strength of his infatuation and her husband’s involvement with someone she had considered her BFF).
Nerd that I am, I have just dug out my O-level question paper (from mumblety-odd years ago). From the ticks I put on it we must have done the option “British and European History 1688-1920” - the range of questions was pretty wide, with one (out of dozens on many different topics) on the factors in British policy leading to the American War of Independence. (But it looks as though I chose to answer on the development of iron and steel in Britain, the French revolution of 1848, and Bismarck’s foreign policy post 1871).
IIRC, the Boston Tea Party was noted for the fact that it’s participants violated good taste by doing cultural appropriation.
Much of what I’ve read about dislike for Meghan Markle-Mountbatten-Windsor seems to centre on the fact that some people dislike her for her complexion, and so will find excuses to criticize her and point out how she is not “up to snuff” as a royal.
Take note of the Charles-Camilla back-and-forth. When he was a young’un, he was told he could not marry her because she was not a virgin… i.e. the “palace” would be horrified if sometime down the road some tabloid published a story about “How the future Queen of England performs in bed” or some such. That was in the early 70’s. She’d shacked up with some guy before Charles came along. So Charles had to wait another 10-plus years and settle for an emotional flake and high school dropout who was at least a virgin. By the 2000’s nobody care about virginity or divorce.
“The past is a foreign country. They do things differently there…” - LP Hartley
Much of what happened with Ed seems weird to modern sensibilities because of different attitudes. He was a playboy and got around, but the double standard was hard at work back then - the future Queen had to be beyond reproach. If a non-virgin future Queen was a no-no in 1970 you can imagine what the attitude would have been to a divorced and promiscuous Queen in 1937. Simpson’s behaviour was quite well-known in society circles, apparently, and would have been impossible to cover up - even if it was too salacious for the regular press, the indirect hints could find their way to the public through the press and rumors (which of course would be far worse than the truth…). The crown may have had little power, but it had serious influence and what happened with the royals had a serious impact on politics. The government of the day apparently threatened to resign if the King insisted on going through with the marriage. They would not even accept a morganatic marriage - any offspring would still be her children. Again, it wasn’t American or not, it was the morality; although it probably reinforced the British prejudice that Americans were uncouth, ill-mannered and lacking morals.
(Although presumably, she was not likely to have children -which would have led to Elizabeth being Queen, just much later.)
But her past affairs are much in the same category. And when they mutually decided to make a full pair bonding, then things got nasty.
It’s that good old double standard. The wife of the King had to be beyond reproach. Not discreet - pure. As long as he was doing some back-room shagging, nobody cared what he did or with whom. But when that whom could be Princess of Wales and eventually Queen, it mattered. I don’t doubt a number of royal brides over the years were not qualified to wear white, but I’m betting none were a regular and well-worn “dance stop” on the bachelor party circuit.
We also forget that while divorce existed, it was incredibly unacceptable in some social circles back then.
The US and Britain didn’t consider themselves allies until generations after the American Revolution. Besides fighting another war around 30 yrs later, they were seriously at odds over the US Civil War (over British sympathy for the CSA) and later in the century the growth in influence of the Irish diaspora in the US was a significant irritant. The Gilded Age upper classes in the two countries came to view themselves as having a lot in common in the late 19th century but ordinary people less so. The strategic interests of the two only came to align at around the end of the century. Britain eventually obtained its goal in WWI of getting the US to join the war on the Entente side, but that caused some backlash in the US postwar. Also the US tended to be being viewed as an arrogant creditor in Europe generally after WWI.
The “Special Relationship” in its modern form really only dates from WWII. And that has had its ups and downs since (the 1956 Suez Crisis found the two countries quite at odds, fallout more recently in the UK from the US seen as bringing UK along into the Iraq War, Trump, etc).
Anyway ‘how was Simpson viewed in Britain and why?’ is the kind of question especially subject to TV/movie depictions tending to substitute for actual history, which is harder to nail down for ‘soft’ questions like that now (basically) outside living memory. She tends to be depicted very negatively in recent Brit TV shows touching on the subject, along with Edward, that’s for sure. Is that what ‘most people’ really felt at the time and what % because she was American? Seems a lot harder to say.
Which I think is illustrated by the discussed drifting over to Meghan Markle. That’s happening right now and people can’t agree here ‘what typical Brits think of her’. But it’s funny to bash Markle as a proto-Kardashian. Interest in outlying members of the royal family isn’t a whole lot different that being interested in the Kardashians, both are basically entertainment. Edward’s abdication was a much bigger deal at the time than what you think of the wife of the guy 6th in line now for a less important throne.
The buts and howevers are deafening, though.
Maybe you’re paying too much attention to Internet noise. That’s not very reliable.
The Daily Express polls has her at 52% approval, and only 14% disapproval. Donald Trump (or moat elected people) would kill for ratings like that. (You want to see a real disliked royal, look at numbers for that bitch Camilla.)
… aren’t indicative of anything much either. The Express is the Poundland version of the Mail, and such polls don’t measure how much or little people really care.
Poundland?
I remember Diana underwent questions about her virginity. An uncle (!) vowed she was. Apparently that question is no longer asked.
But back in the day, I don’t think the gents in the royal family were subjected to such questions. Yet another lopsided thing among those folks.
Dollar Store type of thing
Yeah. The Instructions for American Servicemen who were going to the UK during WWII Britain included sharp reminders not to hold the Revolution, War of 1812 or Irish oppression against the British.
Britain - where the currency is the pound. Like calling America “Dollarland”
Nah, in this context it means the down-market version.