King Edward VIII married to Grand Duchess Olga

[black angel]

when they were both quite young then Prince Edward (David to the family) and the first born child of Tsar Nicholas II were matched off by family circles most of all Queen Victoria who hoped her favorite grandchild's (the Tsaritsa) child married to an heir to the throne, now that never got off the ground, and in 1914 they were both quite young (Edward 20, Olga 19) and their parents had been older (George V 28, Mary 26, Nicholas II 26, Alix 22) however, another playboy heir to the British throne had been married off young to the "right kind" of girl in hopes of reigning him in, Edward VII and Alexandra were married at the ages of 21 and 19

so, what if, The Prince of Wales and the Grand Duchess were married or engaged before WWI broke out?

 

[Welshroyalhistory]

when they were both quite young then Prince Edward (David to the family) and the first born child of Tsar Nicholas II were matched off by family circles most of all Queen Victoria who hoped her favorite grandchild's (the Tsaritsa) child married to an heir to the throne, now that never got off the ground, and in 1914 they were both quite young (Edward 20, Olga 19) and their parents had been older (George V 28, Mary 26, Nicholas II 26, Alix 22) however, another playboy heir to the British throne had been married off young to the "right kind" of girl in hopes of reigning him in, Edward VII and Alexandra were married at the ages of 21 and 19

so, what if, The Prince of Wales and the Grand Duchess were married or engaged before WWI broke out?

Its just near impossible to contemplate. It would have required the British Royal Family to have a death wish.

Everyone in the British Royal Family knew about Alexei and they knew exactly how haemophilia worked. Amazingly the main line of the British Royal Family had appeared to escape it, why would they now literally play Russian roulette and take the risk of reintroducing it?

Moreover Queen Mary saw at very close hand, the havoc that haemophilia could cause, her nephew Rupert (son of her brother and Alice of Albany and therefore grandson of Leopold, Duke of Albany, the original royal haemophiliac) was a sufferer.

The Tsar could have probably convinced a Balkan Crown Prince to take one of his daughters, Alexander of Serbia was said to be very keen on Tatiana but we are talking about the future British King/Emperor of India here, there was no need for a Russian dynastic alliance, which to put it bluntly had the potential to be a poisoned challice, which could destroy the blood line of the British monarchy.

After all without a secure blood line, monarchy is pretty meaningless.

 

[black angel]

Its just near impossible to contemplate. It would have required the British Royal Family to have a death wish.

Everyone in the British Royal Family knew about Alexei and they knew exactly how haemophilia worked. Amazingly the main line of the British Royal Family had appeared to escape it, why would they now literally play Russian roulette and take the risk of reintroducing it?

Moreover Queen Mary saw at very close hand, the havoc that haemophilia could cause, her nephew Rupert (son of her brother and Alice of Albany and therefore grandson of Leopold, Duke of Albany, the original royal haemophiliac) was a sufferer.

The Tsar could have probably convinced a Balkan Crown Prince to take one of his daughters, Alexander of Serbia was said to be very keen on Tatiana but we are talking about the future British King/Emperor of India here, there was no need for a Russian dynastic alliance, which to put it bluntly had the potential to be a poisoned challice, which could destroy the blood line of the British monarchy.

After all without a secure blood line, monarchy is pretty meaningless.

not seeing this as big of a problem, it'd take the British royals just seeing human beings and their very own family as breeding stock, while to an extent thats true I think the personality of a wife being "suitable" would be more important

any ways there's no guaranty that Olga would be a carrier of hemophilia, and if she was it'd hardly be the crisis that rocked the Russian monarchy, for one the Monarch of the UK in 1914 didn't rule, he reigned, while he had great influence and some power in foreign policy, he's not the Tsar and Autocrat, so a sick king is a personal, not a political issue, leaving that aside, while in the sexist 1910s a male heir would be strongly preferred, its hardly required by the UK constitution, farther more if some how Edward and Olga had no children, unlike Nicholas II Edward was A) not yet the monarch, and B) had 3 (well 4 but lets not) brothers all of whom would be married in OTL before the death of George V Nicholas II had one dead brother and one brother in exile for his unsuitable marriage leaving no popularly known heir outside his children, also C) unlike Nicholas II Prince Edward's sister could be an heir

so A) there's no way to know if Olga was a carrier of hemophilia, B) even if their son(s) did have it, hardly a national crisis C) if all their sons die from hemophilia(or they had none) daughters can and would become Queen, again hardly a crisis, D) Edward's brothers are well known and popular there would be little popular shock if one of them become King, in OTL Edward was unmarried at age 42 it was understood that his brother Prince Albert (or failing that the Princess Elizabeth) would be the heir on Edward's death him being single and childless in OTL wasn't seen as a crisis

 

[Paul V McNutt]

The big butterfly comes if they have children. A bigger butterfly would be when Edward is on the throne during World War II and world leaks out that he wants to make peace with the Nazis. Churchill strikes me as a blabbermouth.

 

[Welshroyalhistory]

not seeing this as big of a problem, it'd take the British royals just seeing human beings and their very own family as breeding stock, while to an extent thats true I think the personality of a wife being "suitable" would be more important

any ways there's no guaranty that Olga would be a carrier of hemophilia, and if she was it'd hardly be the crisis that rocked the Russian monarchy, for one the Monarch of the UK in 1914 didn't rule, he reigned, while he had great influence and some power in foreign policy, he's not the Tsar and Autocrat, so a sick king is a personal, not a political issue, leaving that aside, while in the sexist 1910s a male heir would be strongly preferred, its hardly required by the UK constitution, farther more if some how Edward and Olga had no children, unlike Nicholas II Edward was A) not yet the monarch, and B) had 3 (well 4 but lets not) brothers all of whom would be married in OTL before the death of George V Nicholas II had one dead brother and one brother in exile for his unsuitable marriage leaving no popularly known heir outside his children, also C) unlike Nicholas II Prince Edward's sister could be an heir

so A) there's no way to know if Olga was a carrier of hemophilia, B) even if their son(s) did have it, hardly a national crisis C) if all their sons die from hemophilia(or they had none) daughters can and would become Queen, again hardly a crisis, D) Edward's brothers are well known and popular there would be little popular shock if one of them become King, in OTL Edward was unmarried at age 42 it was understood that his brother Prince Albert (or failing that the Princess Elizabeth) would be the heir on Edward's death him being single and childless in OTL wasn't seen as a crisis

Ok. If your absolutely sure. I mean you've really thought through a sensible situation here.

I suppose George V and Queen Mary would be really excited at the prospect. I mean their close relations, the Tsarina Alexandra, Queen Ena and Princess Alice of Albany and their husbands had amazingly happy lives watching their children struggle with a life threatening illness, why wouldn't any sensible parent wish that situation on their own son? Its not as if the son and heir would be expected to carry out long, extended Imperial tours or train in the military as George V and his elder brother or his sons had done.

It was widely known within the family that the Tsarina Alexandra was a carrier of haemophilia, it was known that at least 1 (Princess Irene of Prussia) of her 3 sisters were also carriers. Of Irene's three sons, two had the condition.

Of the 4 daughters to reach adulthood of Grand Duchess Alice of Hesse, 2 were defintely carriers, Elizabeth never had children so its impossible to be clear.

Still those are not great odds.

Its interesting, at the same time you are proposing that King George and Queen Mary would let/encourage their eldest son and heir marry a bride, who had the potential to destroy the British blood line, they had their own little problem.

Prince John.

The way they dealt with that is quite interesting and rather telling. He was separated from his family and sent to live in semi seculsion. His condition was kept secret from the public out of fear it could be seen as damaging.

King George and Queen Mary clearly had a great deal of sympathy for children, who were born with disabilities.

 

[jb3]

I don't know if this effects the scenario any but DNA tests on the Russian Imperial Family remains have shown that only one of the four daughters was a carrier of hemophilia and that it was either Maria or Anastasia. So Olga would not have passed it on had she married Edward VIII. The clash of personalities between the two however would have obvious very early on as they were very different in world-views, religious views (Olga was actually said to be the MOST religious of the children by some) and political views. It would NOT have been a happy marriage.

 

[Welshroyalhistory]

I don't know if this effects the scenario any but DNA tests on the Russian Imperial Family remains have shown that only one of the four daughters was a carrier of hemophilia and that it was either Maria or Anastasia. So Olga would not have passed it on had she married Edward VIII. The clash of personalities between the two however would have obvious very early on as they were very different in world-views, religious views (Olga was actually said to be the MOST religious of the children by some) and political views. It would NOT have been a happy marriage.

Agreed. The only way this marriage could have concievably taken place, would be a dramatic transformation of the personalities of the key players, Olga, Edward, George, Nicholas, Alexandra and Mary.

 

[LordKalvert]

Agreed. The only way this marriage could have concievably taken place, would be a dramatic transformation of the personalities of the key players, Olga, Edward, George, Nicholas, Alexandra and Mary.

It would really just take Edward and Olga more than anything. Nicholas and Alexandra were clear in all their discussions on the subjects- the children would choose their own spouses

Now, a really interesting thing is what happens to the Russian Civil War- Olga would have been outside of Russia at the time her family is murdered. Would she then have fled back home to rally the Whites?

 

[black angel]

Now, a really interesting thing is what happens to the Russian Civil War- Olga would have been outside of Russia at the time her family is murdered. Would she then have fled back home to rally the Whites?

very unlikely, though..... in OTL the Russian Royal family could have been saved by the British, if they'd wanted to, for political reasons they didn't, now Alix was George V's paternal cousin and Nicholas II was his maternal cousin, George V's mother Queen Alexandra's dear sister was Nicholas II's mother the Empress Dowager Maria Feodorovna (Minnie to her sister Alix) Maria Feodorovna would serve some of her exile with the Queen Dowager (Alexandra was very upset that George V didn't save her sister's family)

any ways, it might be much harder to allow the Princess of Wales' family die

but if George V wouldn't do it for his Mother.... that said, it might come that Olga will be named the head of the Romanov family.... unlikely she'd want to but last living member of the Royal family for sure you'd end up with a branch of monarchism that viewed her and her heirs as the Tsars.

 

[ranichi17]

but if George V wouldn't do it for his Mother.... that said, it might come that Olga will be named the head of the Romanov family.... unlikely she'd want to but last living member of the Royal family for sure you'd end up with a branch of monarchism that viewed her and her heirs as the Tsars.

But that's only if all of her male-line male relatives are decimated. Paulinian law puts all the women behind all the men in the line of succession.

 

[LordKalvert]

very unlikely, though..... in OTL the Russian Royal family could have been saved by the British, if they'd wanted to, for political reasons they didn't, now Alix was George V's paternal cousin and Nicholas II was his maternal cousin, George V's mother Queen Alexandra's dear sister was Nicholas II's mother the Empress Dowager Maria Feodorovna (Minnie to her sister Alix) Maria Feodorovna would serve some of her exile with the Queen Dowager (Alexandra was very upset that George V didn't save her sister's family)

any ways, it might be much harder to allow the Princess of Wales' family die

but if George V wouldn't do it for his Mother.... that said, it might come that Olga will be named the head of the Romanov family.... unlikely she'd want to but last living member of the Royal family for sure you'd end up with a branch of monarchism that viewed her and her heirs as the Tsars.

But were talking not about the British Royal Family but Olga Nikolaevna Romanova leaving Britain to avenge her mother, father, brother and sisters not to mention her uncles, her aunts, her cousins and every other relative she had.

I can easily see her doing it no matter what her husband's family does, says or wants. They might disown her but that's another story.

Would be interesting if we got the absurd situation where Olga regains the Russian throne and has a child who is heir to both the Russian and British thrones

 

[LordKalvert]

But that's only if all of her male-line male relatives are decimated. Paulinian law puts all the women behind all the men in the line of succession.

Technically true but in a Civil War its who the people rally to. A daughter of Nicholas is going to be much more formidable than some distant cousin no one has ever heard of.

 

[black angel]

But that's only if all of her male-line male relatives are decimated. Paulinian law puts all the women behind all the men in the line of succession.

there's a difference between the law and what people would do, in 1921 the All-Russian Monarchical Assembly offered Maria Feodorovna the crown (locum tenens) she refused because she refused to believe that her son(s) and grandchildren were dead, but they offered her the job of regent/placeholder queen even though she was A) a woman and B) a member of the royal family by marriage not by blood

why? well thats easy, it'd be like if tomorrow the Queen, Charles, William, George and Harry all dropped dead, more like the Queen and all of her line just dropped dead, sure there are heirs, of course there are, but do most of the public know them? no of course, likewise with Russia, the male heirs were so minor and out of the public light during the last Tsar's reign that it would be very hard (and was) for them to rally any public support

a member of the Tsar's family, a girl showcased endlessly by royal propaganda however would be an easy rallying point for Monarchist, more so if she's now Royal and in public (and married to the heir of the greatest monarchy in Europe)

now of course the British Government and the Royal Family would never allow her to make a claim to the Russian Crown, but I think a lot of people would view her as rightful heiress and her children as such

 

[jb3]

But were talking not about the British Royal Family but Olga Nikolaevna Romanova leaving Britain to avenge her mother, father, brother and sisters not to mention her uncles, her aunts, her cousins and every other relative she had.

I can easily see her doing it no matter what her husband's family does, says or wants. They might disown her but that's another story.

Would be interesting if we got the absurd situation where Olga regains the Russian throne and has a child who is heir to both the Russian and British thrones

Yes. Taking into account OTL Olga's actual personality she would have moved heave and earth to save her family no matter what the newly christened "Windsors" thought. She would probably leave Edward/David without a second's thought. She was also fervently attached to both Russia and her father and if things turned out the same as they did in OTL (except she lives) its very easy to see her becoming the focal point of Russians emigres/resistance. The alternative of course is the hated Vladmir-branch who NII loathed and (via GD Cyril became the first member of the family to betray Nicholas by flying the red flag and pledging himself to the Prov. Govt.). I sincerely doubt Olga or any hard-core monarchists would ever forget it. Many still haven't and look askance at Cyril's granddaughter's pretensions as Head of the Romanov House.

 

[Welshroyalhistory]

I see we've all wandered into ASB territory.

 

[LordKalvert]

I see we've all wandered into ASB territory.

How so? A marriage between the heir to the British throne and a daughter of the Tsar of all the Russias is quite plausible and not just for the obvious political benefits of bringing Britain closer to its Entente partner

The Tsars daughters were just coming of age and were already being courted heavily as one would expect. The Serbs and Romanians basically asked for any of them, they didn't really seem to care which one they got

 

[Welshroyalhistory]

How so? A marriage between the heir to the British throne and a daughter of the Tsar of all the Russias is quite plausible and not just for the obvious political benefits of bringing Britain closer to its Entente partner

The Tsars daughters were just coming of age and were already being courted heavily as one would expect. The Serbs and Romanians basically asked for any of them, they didn't really seem to care which one they got

I was rather thinking of the White crusade to save Russia with Olga, Princess of Wales at the head of the army. Laughable idea.

Olga and Edward hadn't met since 1909, therefore it would have to be a politically arranged match.

The growing socialist and liberal movements in the UK would not support such a marriage, so you would need a Conservative element in the UK to call for it and to convince George V it was a good thing. You would need a dramatic change in the personality of King George V, who showed no interest in arranging the marriages of his children, save his declaration in 1917 that they could marry British subjects. Queen Mary was marginally more involved but even she did not arrange marriages, she was usually brought in to sort out problems and seal the 'deal' as she in fact did with the marriage of the Duke of York and Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon.

You would need a situation where Edward and Olga met and fell madly in love.
This still has problems, Olga had no intention of changing her religion or leaving her Russia, she made that clear when her parents tried to arrange a match with Carol of Romania, this would at least have enabled her to remain Orthodox. The UK would not have accepted an Orthodox Queen and Olga wouldn't convert.

Then we have the haemophilia issue. The Serbians and Romanians could afford to be more generous in overlooking these problems, reading Hannah Pakula's description in her book about Queen Marie about how King Carol of Romania turned into a jibbering wreck of excitement when the Tsar paid a state visit to Romania in 1914, you can appreciate how the prospect of the Tsar's daughter marrying into his dynasty was a great thrill. I doubt the British Royal Family viewed the Russian Imperial Family with the same degree of reverance.

 

[LordKalvert]

I was rather thinking of the White crusade to save Russia with Olga, Princess of Wales at the head of the army. Laughable idea.

Olga and Edward hadn't met since 1909, therefore it would have to be a politically arranged match.

The growing socialist and liberal movements in the UK would not support such a marriage, so you would need a Conservative element in the UK to call for it and to convince George V it was a good thing. You would need a dramatic change in the personality of King George V, who showed no interest in arranging the marriages of his children, save his declaration in 1917 that they could marry British subjects. Queen Mary was marginally more involved but even she did not arrange marriages, she was usually brought in to sort out problems and seal the 'deal' as she in fact did with the marriage of the Duke of York and Lady Elizabeth Bowes-Lyon.

You would need a situation where Edward and Olga met and fell madly in love.
This still has problems, Olga had no intention of changing her religion or leaving her Russia, she made that clear when her parents tried to arrange a match with Carol of Romania, this would at least have enabled her to remain Orthodox. The UK would not have accepted an Orthodox Queen and Olga wouldn't convert.

Then we have the haemophilia issue. The Serbians and Romanians could afford to be more generous in overlooking these problems, reading Hannah Pakula's description in her book about Queen Marie about how King Carol of Romania turned into a jibbering wreck of excitement when the Tsar paid a state visit to Romania in 1914, you can appreciate how the prospect of the Tsar's daughter marrying into his dynasty was a great thrill. I doubt the British Royal Family viewed the Russian Imperial Family with the same degree of reverance.

While the marriage is a bit of a reach, we're dealing with personalities. People do strange things for love. Why even Alix of Hesse relented and changed her faith. Besides, the Act of Settlement denies marriages only to Catholics- not Orthodox

As for the hemophilia issue- it doesn't seem to have mattered much to the Europeans. It was well known that Queen Victoria's bloodline carried the gene since 1853 and the birth of Prince Leopold

Yet her daughters and grand daughters (even ones from lines known to be infected) married into the Prussian, Spanish, Russian and Hessian royal families among others. The Europeans just seem to have been very cavalier on the issue

As you stated the King would be unlikely to interfere and Nicholas was clear that it would be her choice. So if they wanted to, it doesn't look to be a problem

Doubt very seriously that you'd find the mob against it- we're talking the same mob that would fight alongside Russia within a year or so.

 

[david_herdson]

I tend to agree with those who view this as borderline ASB territory but suppose it had happened, what would have been the consequences?

George V may have felt obliged to offer the Romanovs asylum in 1917. Make your own call on how that would have panned out both in Britain and Russia. I doubt it would have influenced government policy - Britain intervened briefly in the Russian Civil War anyway but - and Alexei may well have died not long after anyway, cutting off that male line.

Obviously, there's the question of an heir who may or may not have been haemophiliac (not, if jb3 is right), but whose personality, gender and future can only be completely unknown to us.

Presumably, Edward would have been king for longer which allows us to play the 1940 prime minister scenario but did the king in reality have much choice? Halifax himself was conscious that he wouldn't have made a good PM and Labour wanted Churchill. Even if the king had been keen on Halifax (and let's not forget that George VI was so, whereas Churchill had been close to Edward VIII), it's unlikely to have made much difference. It's still less likely that the king's personal preferences would have affected policy.

What might have had a long-term impact is that Edward VIII was not a diligent monarch like his brother and niece, which may have undermined its support long term, particularly if Olga was aloof and disinclined to integrate into the role of a modern constitutional consort.

There are certainly lots of interesting possibilities, not least because there's so little to go on. However, to return to the start, there almost certainly wouldn't have been a start.