2006-10-11 07:35:57 · 11 answers · asked by Stranger In The Night 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Royalty
If King Edward VIII had not abdicated, and not had any children, the present monarch would be as it is now, Queen Elizabeth II.
If the sovereign has no heirs, the throne passes to the next available heir, which in this case, would have been his younger brother, Prince Albert, Duke of York. However, the Duke of York predeceased his brother in 1952, therefore leaving his eldest daughter, Princess Elizabeth, next in line to the throne. Upon the King's death in 1972, Princess Elizabeth would then have become Queen.
2006-10-11 10:31:04 · answer #1 · answered by Marilyn 3 · 5⤊ 0⤋
If King Edward had not abdicated the throne, but had defied the PM and married the woman of his choice and retained the crown (and had he shown a little gumption, he could have done just that!) it is highly unlikely that Edward and Wallis would have had any issue, as Wallis had been married twice previously and didn't have children, nor did she and Edward have children. On Edward's death, his brother, who assumed the throne as King George, would still have taken the throne and, as he had no sons, his daughter, Queen Elizabeth, would have become our queen. So Edward's move was one of the few that he could have made that didn't change the succession of the throne.
Had he married someone other than Wallis and had children with her, then the succession would have gone to a child of that marriage.
2006-10-11 23:59:04 · answer #2 · answered by old lady 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If he did not abdicate, provided he married a decent woman approved by the then royal family and gave up Mrs Simpson, it will be his first son or daughter on the throne today.
Or he might not marry and become a virgin king as Queen Elizabeth during tudor times, the next of line will either be George XI or George XI's daugther, the now Queen Elizabeth II.
2006-10-11 14:47:50 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
>How would be the king/queen ....
How?? Who ...
If we hadn't had King George the Good on the Throne and his marvelous Queen Consort by his side, England might not have any King or Queen now; rather, the whole of Europe (and maybe America) might have been under German domination with Hitler's successor.
2006-10-11 15:19:28 · answer #4 · answered by kent chatham 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Probably the same person who is queen now, Elizabeth II, because Edward and Mrs. Simpson had no children together (and he didn't have any with anyone else...). Elizabeth would have been the logical/legal heir anyway.
2006-10-11 14:39:22 · answer #5 · answered by tantiemeg 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
If Eward and Mrs Simpson have to be on the throne. Elizabeth would be lady Elizabeth her father was the Duke of York.
2006-10-12 00:45:10 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
of course he would have married Royalty or an Earl's or Dukes daughter. Simpson would have been paid off by Baldwin (PM) at that time and Parliament and told to get lost
and who knows would have had children (2)Victoria and Albert ( Queen Mary's fav names)
well Elizabeth would have been happy, and her father King George toooooooooooo!
2006-10-11 15:23:13 · answer #7 · answered by obanlassie 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Eventually the royal family would have ruined the country... it happens in many societies run by a monarch. Being born into a position of power does not mean the person serving is the correct person for the job.
2006-10-11 14:38:40 · answer #8 · answered by Missy 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Prince William may not have been the sexiest king (or future king at least) that ever lived probably.
2006-10-11 14:38:37 · answer #9 · answered by Liz^24 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It would still be the same old rubbish but in a different costume.
2006-10-11 23:22:56 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋