# Why did Edward VIII abdicate? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 22, 2004, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516 "2004-05-22T13:25:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 4:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516/21 "2004-05-23T04:41:15Z")
> [@RandomLetters](#): > > But Wallis’s ex-husband was an American, and like any good American would have a gun to keep the King of England out of his face. > 😉 Damn, and his name was Simpson, too. How could I have used such an obvious straight line? ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 5:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516/22 "2004-05-23T05:59:30Z")
> [@Mk VII](#): > > it always was. The legal fiction was that Henry’s marriage to his dead brother’s fiance was outside the prohibited degrees of consanguinity, and so had no validity. It wasn’t a legal fiction. After Prince Arthur’s death, Henry VII wanted to marry his second son, young Henry, to Katherine of Aragon to keep the Spanish alliance and the dowry. To do that, it was well-recognised that young Henry needed to get a dispensation from the pope. The pope at the time gave the dispensation. When Katherine never produced a male heir, Henry VIII claimed his conscience had always bothered him about the dispensation and that it should be set aside. While there were a lot of snickers about that aspect of Henry’s behaviour, there wasn’t much dispute that a marriage to the deceased brother’s widow was within the prohibited degrees. In fact, such marriages continued to be illegal in England (and in many Commonwealth countries that inherited English law) until late in the 19th century. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 6:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516/23 "2004-05-23T06:15:33Z")
> [@Futile Gesture](#): > > There is no such thing as “King Of England”. Hasn’t been for centuries. Yes but there is theoretically a “King” (obviously currently a Queen) of Great Britain, since the official title of the nation is the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, with **and** obviously making it a fact that the realms of NI and GB are separate holdings obviously tied to the same crown. And of course Great Britain contains England. And anyone who is the Queen of Grreat Britain and Northern Ireland is also of course the Queen of England, though it is a bit awkward to say so. Sort of like saying George W. Bush is the President of Virginia… which is true in a very murky/goofy sense. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 6:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516/24 "2004-05-23T06:21:58Z")
> [@Mk VII](#): > > there’s nothing to prevent the King from marrying a commoner (the pool would be rather small if there was). Under the Royal Marriages Act, 1752 he may not marry a Catholic, though, nor may any of the members of the Royal Family within the prohibited degrees of proximity to the Succession. (These days, if they do they must waive their rights of succession). They cannot marry without the King’s permission, either. The provisions respecting marriage to Roman Catholics are not in the [Royal Marriages Act, **1772**](http://www.heraldica.org/faqs/rma1772.html). That Act prohibits any descendant of George II (other than princesses who marry into foreign houses, and their issue) from marrying without the consent of the monarch. If the individual insists on marrying without the monarch’s consent, and is over 25 years old, he/she can make a public declaration of his/her intent and wait a year. After a year, he/she can marry without the monarch’s consent, unless in the interval both houses of Parliament have expressed their disapproval of the marriage. There is no prohibition on any member of the Royal Family marrying a Roman Catholic, but under the [Act of Settlement, 1701](http://www.worldfreeinternet.net/parliament/settlement.htm) anyone who would otherwise be eligible to inherit the throne is barred from inheriting. There’s no need for a waiver of succession, since the law operates automatically. The Act doesn’t say what happens if someone once was, but no longer is married to a Roman Catholic at the time the succession issue arises - is it a life-time ban on inheriting, or simply a prohibition on anyone who is currently married to a Roman Catholic? ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 7:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516/25 "2004-05-23T07:19:59Z")
I don’t think Wallis Simpson’s being an American was any problem. The history of the English monarchy is full of non-British queens. ---
**Author:** ![Rube\_E.Tewesday](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/f0a364/32.png) [@Rube\_E.Tewesday](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rube_E.Tewesday)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 12:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516/26 "2004-05-23T12:09:41Z")
> [@Walloon](#): > > I don’t think Wallis Simpson’s being an American was any problem. The history of the English monarchy is full of non-British queens. I don’t think anybody’s saying it was the crucial point – just that it didn’t help with all of the other negatives. ---
**Author:** ![BrotherCadfael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@BrotherCadfael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrotherCadfael)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 12:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516/27 "2004-05-23T12:52:16Z")
> [@Bryan Ekers](#): > > Damn, and his name was Simpson, too. How could I have used such an obvious straight line? I’m surprised that no one has referenced Henry’s “canonisation” of Cardinal Wolsley in the Simpson’s “history” episode… ---
**Author:** ![BiblioCat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/ed8c4c/32.png) [@BiblioCat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BiblioCat)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 1:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516/28 "2004-05-23T13:25:16Z")
> [@postcards](#): > > IIRC, Mrs Simpson was also divorced. > > The divorce, apparently, is what put the kibosh on the whole thing. And she wasn’t just divorced, she’d been divorced _twice_. ---
**Author:** ![Bryan\_Ekers](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bryan_ekers/32/183_2.png) [@Bryan\_Ekers](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bryan_Ekers)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516/29 "2004-05-23T14:45:09Z")
> [@Walloon](#): > > The history of the English monarchy is full of non-British queens. And most of them were women! ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 2:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516/30 "2004-05-23T14:55:54Z")
One of my students recently declared her intention to marry into the British royal family and eventually become Queen of England. Remembering Ed VIII, I told her that I wasn’t sure if such a thing was possible – Prince William might have to renounce the throne in order to marry an ordinary Japanese girl. Thanks to this thread, I now know much more about the situation than I did, and it seems that there actually would be no strict legal barrier to William marrying a foreign commoner and still taking the throne (although dad, grandma, or Parliament could potentially make trouble if they opposed the match). Am I correct in this? ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516/31 "2004-05-23T15:46:54Z")
> [@Walloon](#): > > I don’t think Wallis Simpson’s being an American was any problem. The history of the English monarchy is full of non-British queens. True but most of them were of royal lineage and had never been divorced. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516/32 "2004-05-23T21:39:49Z")
> [@Lamia](#): > > One of my students recently declared her intention to marry into the British royal family and eventually become Queen of England. Remembering Ed VIII, I told her that I wasn’t sure if such a thing was possible – Prince William might have to renounce the throne in order to marry an ordinary Japanese girl. > > Thanks to this thread, I now know much more about the situation than I did, and it seems that there actually would be no strict legal barrier to William marrying a foreign commoner and still taking the throne (although dad, grandma, or Parliament could potentially make trouble if they opposed the match). Am I correct in this? Well, she couldn’t be Queen of England; she’d be Queen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. However, she’d also be Queen of Canada, Australian, New Zealand and several other countries, so perhaps she could do without having “England” in her title. Now that William is over 21, I don’t think Dad could legally make any fuss - it would be the Queen and Parliament that would have to agree, under the terms of the _Royal Marriage Act_. Provided your student isn’t Roman Catholic, there would not be a legal bar. None of that takes into account the politics of it - although there was no legal ban on Edward marrying Wallis, the Prime Minister of the day, Baldwin, formally advised Edward not to do so, and threatened to have an election if the King declined to follow the PM’s advice. That would have triggered a constitutional crisis, as by convention, the Crown must follow advice tendered by the Prime Minister. Would a future PM agree to the marrige? Would depend largely on the circumstances at the time, the young lady’s background, etc. After all, if an Aussie lawyer can marry the Crown Prince of Denmark, who knows what might happen in future royal marriages? The old rules that royalty only married royalty are disappearing. ---
**Author:** ![Martin\_Hyde](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/47e85d/32.png) [@Martin\_Hyde](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martin_Hyde)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516/33 "2004-05-23T22:08:11Z")
I didn’t think you would be Queen if you married into the British Royal family. Prince Philip isn’t title King just because he’s married to Elizabeth. ---
**Author:** ![yabob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yabob/32/2821_2.png) [@yabob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yabob)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516/34 "2004-05-23T22:18:41Z")
> [@Martin Hyde](#): > > I didn’t think you would be Queen if you married into the British Royal family. > > Prince Philip isn’t title King just because he’s married to Elizabeth. Because you can’t have a non-ruling “king”. You can have a non-ruling queen (a “Queen Consort”) married to a ruling king: > **[Queen consort](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_consort)** > > A queen consort is the wife of a reigning king, or an empress consort in the case of an emperor. A queen consort usually shares her spouse's social rank and status. She holds the feminine equivalent of the king's monarchical titles, and is crowned and anointed, but historically, she does not formally share the regnant's political and military powers, unless on occasion acting as regent. > In contrast, a queen regnant is a female monarch who rules in her own right, and usually becomes queen by in... Had Edward VIII wound up with a Morganatic marriage, “Queen Consort” would have been a title denied to Mrs. Simpson. Lord knows what they would have called her … formally that is. I don’t believe a Morganatic marriage has ever been granted a British king. ---
**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516/35 "2004-05-23T22:19:09Z")
True, but I’m assuming from the question that the young lady in question would be trying to get Prince William’s attention, and then play the waiting game for Elizabeth and Charles to shuffle off this mortal coil. If she’s planning on marrying Prince Harry and still expects to be queen, she’s either misinformed or perhaps has more sinister plans than she’s let on to **Lamia**. :eek: ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 10:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516/36 "2004-05-23T22:21:03Z")
> [@Martin Hyde](#): > > I didn’t think you would be Queen if you married into the British Royal family. > > Prince Philip isn’t title King just because he’s married to Elizabeth. _Female_ royal consorts _are_ designated “Queen”. Male royal consorts are designated “Prince”. Cecil has written about it. ---
**Author:** ![yabob](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/yabob/32/2821_2.png) [@yabob](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yabob)\ **Post date:** [May 23, 2004, 10:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516/37 "2004-05-23T22:26:25Z")
BTW, I’m aware that a stumbling block to Morganatic marriage by a British king is that the Church of England currently doesn’t recognize it. Nevertheless, it was actively suggested for Edward’s case, and is being bandied about for Prince Charles. CoE might be made to alter their stance if it became expedient to do so. ---
**Author:** ![Walloon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/fbc32d/32.png) [@Walloon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walloon)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2004, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516/38 "2004-05-24T00:06:49Z")
**Martin Hyde** and **Northern Piper** , [read Cecil](http://www.straightdope.com/classics/a970214a.html). ---
**Author:** ![Polycarp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/82dd89/32.png) [@Polycarp](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Polycarp)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2004, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516/39 "2004-05-24T01:33:04Z")
I suspect strongly that unless Charles makes an issue of it, the likely course will be that he does not marry Camilla but simply continues the present arrangement, perhaps moving her into a Buckingham Palace apartment, while all concerned turn a blind eye to the arrangement and she does not appear with him at official functions. However, I’m curious as to whether anyone is aware of whether nomenclature has been agreed to if Prince Philip outlives his wife, whereupon he would be in what I believe is the historically unique role of father of the King. Any clue what he would be formally styled? (And for that matter, there was a several-months period in 1952-3 when England had three Queens – one regnant, Elizabeth II, and two former consorts, Elizabeth the Queen Mother and the Queen’s grandmother Queen Mary. Was there ever anything formally stated as to what she should be styled?) ---
**Author:** ![Kel\_Varnsen\_Latex\_Division](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/aeb1de/32.png) [@Kel\_Varnsen\_Latex\_Division](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kel_Varnsen_Latex_Division)\ **Post date:** [May 24, 2004, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516/40 "2004-05-24T03:36:47Z")
> [@](#): > > One of my students recently declared her intention to marry into the British royal family and eventually become Queen of England. Remembering Ed VIII, I told her that I wasn’t sure if such a thing was possible – Prince William might have to renounce the throne in order to marry an ordinary Japanese girl. > > Thanks to this thread, I now know much more about the situation than I did, and it seems that there actually would be no strict legal barrier to William marrying a foreign commoner and still taking the throne (although dad, grandma, or Parliament could potentially make trouble if they opposed the match). Am I correct in this? I don’t think she could become Queen. I believe the Royal Family or Parliament recently changed the rules on this. After, Diana they changed the rule on who would officially be referred as His/Her Royal Highness. I believe she would have some lower title. I will try to find a cite. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-did-edward-viii-abdicate/246516.md?page=3)