The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #221  
Old 08-29-2011, 09:05 AM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,097
What do weight issues have to do with getting married? or finding a dress designer? I afraid I don't understand the statement to be honest.

Its interesting that many (by some of the posts) find that Phillip is so petty and so disgusted by Sarah that he would forego his granddaughters wedding day so he doesn't have to spend even five minutes in the same room with her. I don't know Phillip personally, but by all accounts this is not that type of man.

While he may be disgusted by Sarah's actions and the unfavorable attention she brings to the BRF, he will not be thinking about Sarah at such an event. Nor will he have that much interaction I suspect. I doubt she means that much to him. He will not doubt be focusing on the brides.

Oh and by the way, a coming out birthday party is by no means in the same category as a wedding. So I woudn't read too much in their absence. I mean, heck, William didn't attend Peter's wedding and they are supposed to be particularly close (and yes, I remember he had a prior engagement).
__________________

__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #222  
Old 08-29-2011, 09:30 AM
Daisiesforever's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 609
I think if either Beatrice and Eugene had to get married, Prince Phillip would attend the wedding, regardless of his feelings for Fergie. They are after all his grand daughters and all attention is usually on the bride. I just hope that, when they do make this decision, they can at least "fit" into a decent wedding gown and that they can find a "decent" designer to design a good gown. They are both attractive girls and could do so much more with themselves.
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
  #223  
Old 08-29-2011, 11:35 AM
NotAPretender's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: WPB FL/Muttontown NY, United States
Posts: 858
Well, if we are discussing this at this length here, I'm certain that the BRF has thought of this situation in at least equal depth, if not more.

I sincerely doubt that Beatrice would plan a substantially sized wedding for next year, during her grandmother's Jubilee. I doubt even more that HM would consent to such a wedding being held during that year.

Smaller wedding held abroad? I'm thinking that would solve a lot of issues for a lot of people. And since I'm fairly certain that the cost of such a wedding would be met by a combination of the groom, the bride's grandmother, and the bride's father - not the bride's mother - then the solution that suits them best will be the solution that prevails.
__________________
"Me, your Highness? On the whole, I wish I'd stayed in Tunbridge Wells"
Reply With Quote
  #224  
Old 08-29-2011, 01:20 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Berkshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 643
Please can I help with a little background information here?

Royal Weddings [which would normally thought to include Beatrice and Eugenie, as Royal Highnesses and Daughters of the second son] are normally organised and paid for by the BRF. The Lord Chamberlain is normally charged with the arrangements. [The 'invitations' for most Royal weddings are actually 'Royal Commands' rather than 'invitations' nb].

The weddings this year have shown how tradition is being surplanted in various minor ways: the weddings of William and Catherine and Zara and Mike seem to show that the proceedings are moving towards emulating the weddings of well-heeled 'non-royals'. Unusually, even the Middletons contributed to Catherine's wedding costs - unheard-of usually in the Royal scheme of things. The contribution of a non-royal Bride's family to a Royal Wedding used to be limited to the Dress and those of the bridesmaids. Everything else was traditionally picked up by the BRF and the taxpayer! Sarah - whether she was rich / poor / in favour/ out of favour - as the Bride's mother would NOT usually be required to pay up - Andrew [as the bride's father] would usually be expected to finance the wedding if it was being organised along typical ' traditional English wedding lines'. Since he is Royal, than I would still expect the BRF to cover the costs of the York daughters' weddings.

There is no real difficulty if the wedding is held abroad either - as happened in the case of Princess Michael! Her status as a divorcee meant that the wedding could not be held in England at the time and so the proceedings were transferred to Vienna, where a civil ceremony took place followed by a type of 'nuptual' mass for Princess Michael in a Religious [Catholic] ceremony. The reception [apparently with the British taxpayer helping to foot the bill] took place in the British Embassy from memory.

And as for next year - Jubilee year!! FORGET IT!!!! I can tell you that the calendar for next year is ABSOLUTELY packed with both the Jubilee and the Olympics. I suppose that, arguably, a small wedding could be packed in somewhere, but the English summer season is pretty crammed already with the usual events [Chelsea Flower show, Derby, Birthday Parade, Royal Ascot (a 'biggie' for 2012!) Garden Parties etc plus the usual 'business' of Royalty: Investitures, Diplomatic Audiences and the like. And then of course, there are the 'bread and butter' engagements: the 'usual' Royal visits & engagements up and down the country. I could go on......

Apart from the time available [or rather lack of it], whilst I am sure that all of us here would like to think that any York wedding would be straightforward, I am afraid that, on the current evidence, it would involve a certain amount of what I suppose I could call 'controversy'. There would be large dissections about finances, alleged misbehaviour of the Bride's mother both before, during, after and long after her own wedding to Andrew,York dress sense [or lack thereof], Fergie's latest financial crisis [i.e. when the £100,000 a year she is purported to be earning at the moment either 'runs out' or 'fails to materialise'. I can tell you from my work in the past that EVERY endeavour is made to try to ensure that there are NO controversies during a Jubilee year. And thus I just cannot see that Beatrice could get married in 2012 even if she wanted to:

footnote: I can remember once reading on TRF a post to the effect that Royal Engagements [i.e. duties, not 'betrothals] 'could easily be cancelled'. [I can't remember the exact context, but the writer was advancing the suggestion as a solution to 'freeing up some time']. Could I please respectfully make the point that agreed Royal Engagements are almost never, ever cancelled: the ONLY acceptable reason is illness of the particular 'Royal' due to perform [in whch case the Palace often 'fields a subsitute' if at all possible], or a Royal Family death. And even in the case of the latter, it is usually the express wish of the Royal family that a programme continues if at all possible if it is a 'charity' or 'armed services' function or other important Civic or Public affair [e.g. a univesity graduation]. One of the reasons for the 'non-cancellation' policy is because as soon as a Royal Engagement [ as in duty, not betrothal] is agreed (usually a year or so in advance if the Queen is involved [just slightly less with other members of the BRF]), months of preparation start, which also involves a lot of non-refundable / non-recoverable expensiture in many cases. The upshot of this rule is that an agreed engagement can't usually be cancelled to enable a wedding to be slotted in. If Beatrice really is to marry Dave Clark, then I don't think it could happen any later than January 2012 [and even that would be 'pushing it'] otherwise they will have to wait until 2013. Incidentally, traditionally, Royal Engagments are shorter than 'non-royal ones: obviously no one has to 'save up money' in Royal cases and there is no difficulty in finding a venue; the duration of the typical Royal Engagement is usually limited to the amount of time necessary to make the arrangements.

Hope some of this is of interest,

Alex
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #225  
Old 08-29-2011, 01:53 PM
Lumutqueen's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
Royal Blogger
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Carlton, York, United Kingdom
Posts: 16,934
Quote:
Originally Posted by Diarist View Post
And as for next year - Jubilee year!! FORGET IT!!!! I can tell you that the calendar for next year is ABSOLUTELY packed with both the Jubilee and the Olympics. I suppose that, arguably, a small wedding could be packed in somewhere, but the English summer season is pretty crammed already with the usual events [Chelsea Flower show, Derby, Birthday Parade, Royal Ascot (a 'biggie' for 2012!) Garden Parties etc plus the usual 'business' of Royalty: Investitures, Diplomatic Audiences and the like. And then of course, there are the 'bread and butter' engagements: the 'usual' Royal visits & engagements up and down the country. I could go on......
Jubilee, I grant you - going to make the month of June even more hectic than usual. The ceremony includes Derby day so there'll just be a bit more pomp than usual.

Trooping the Colour - is that going to even happen next year after the Jubilee celebrations?

Royal Ascot - biggie for 2012, why so? I see no difference in what it was this year?

The usual business of being royal is going to still carry on like it did this year after two big BRF weddings - nothing will change.

Olympics? I don't see a problem other than the fact that they're on and there will be lots of people here. Royals will attend the opening and closing ceremony then events at there own choosing I imagine?

I wouldn't say 2012 as a year is packed - Jubilee in June, Olympics July/August, Paralympics August/September. Nothing else going on in the year for the BRF, except the royal bread and butter.

If Beatrice gets engaged this year or early next, having a wedding in 2012 doesn't look like, to me, a problem - have it after August perhaps and you're home and dry.
__________________
We Will Remember Them.
Reply With Quote
  #226  
Old 08-29-2011, 01:59 PM
Grandduchess24's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Cambridge, United States
Posts: 1,319
With William, peter and Zara married I guess the next royal wedding in the BRF would be the expected ones of the other oldest grandchildren of the queen, prince Harry of wales and princess Beatrice of York but harry's is more expected since he's the single prince of the BRF.
__________________
" An ugly baby is a very nasty object, and the prettiest is frightful when undressed."
- Queen Victoria
Reply With Quote
  #227  
Old 08-29-2011, 06:33 PM
MichelleQ2's Avatar
Courtier
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 702
I agree that January 2012 is the latest date before delaying til 2013. As there has been more speculation of late for a possible engagement announcement. I think it all comes down to whether Beatrice wants to be married now or if she wants to wait til 2013. One factor may be with all of the festiviites going on this jubilee/olympic year, she would prefer Dave to be her husband and officially included in everything and not to be excluded as he apparently was for W&K's wedding.

There may be a suitable window available....if an engagement is announced in the next few weeks (possibly in conjunction with the end of the Queen's vacation) then they could pull off a wedding in January right after the new year at the end of the royal winter holiday. The RF returns to London and their very busy year - and Beatrice could head off on her honeymoon. But I would presume it to be a wedding on the scale of Peter's or Zara's. I think SGC is perfect as Royal Lodge is the York family home base, and the Queen could host the reception at Windsor.

If we dont have an engagement announced soon - then I would not expect a wedding until 2013.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #228  
Old 08-29-2011, 07:48 PM
HRHHermione's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Boston, United States
Posts: 1,873
I'd be shocked if they announced an engagement this year or next. The timing doesn't really work out, plus Beatrice is still quite young for marriage, even though she's been dating Dave for quite awhile. Right now, they get to fly under the radar, and an engagement announcement would put them in the spotlight for several months- something I doubt Beatrice would want right on the heels of the "Finding Sarah" disaster.

Plus, her wedding will be bigger than Peter or Zara's- Beatrice is an HRH. It'll probably get more publicity just based on that.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #229  
Old 08-29-2011, 08:11 PM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 2,003
Is Dave Clark really a good match for Beatrice?
There's money behind him, but no title or even birth.
Still, he seems gentlemanlike and discreet, so maybe he'd be acceptable?

What's the consensus?
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #230  
Old 08-29-2011, 09:40 PM
HRHHermione's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Boston, United States
Posts: 1,873
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel
Is Dave Clark really a good match for Beatrice?
There's money behind him, but no title or even birth.
Still, he seems gentlemanlike and discreet, so maybe he'd be acceptable?

What's the consensus?
Who cares about his ancestry? If he's good to her and makes her happy, and they work well together, that's all that matters.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #231  
Old 08-29-2011, 09:45 PM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 721
I don't think Bea needs to lose anymore weight and Eugenie seems to love her curves. I do agree they need to find some good designers and dress for their own body type. They both need to do something about their hair it always looks bad never looks like it has been done properly. I don't think any of that would stop them from getting married if they wanted too. Is Eugenie still dating that guy from the pub? That is all I read about him is that he works in a bar but they have been together for awhile and he doesn't have much money! I would think part of Bea's reason for losing so much weight is to get ready for a wedding that is what I have always thought!
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #232  
Old 08-30-2011, 06:42 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Berkshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by Iluvbertie View Post
But without the Queen's consent they have to wait another year.

The RMA gives two ways a royal can marry - with the consent of the monarch or after 25 they can apply to the Privy Council directly and they can get consent that way but only after a year and only if neither of the houses of parliament have expressed a negative viewpoint.

So they can't marry at 25 without the Queen's consent - they can at 26 if, at 25, they applied to the Privy Council and neither of the houses of parliament objected.
And so far as I can see, the Queen would pretty much automatically give her consent! Do you remember the case of Marina Ogilvy, Bertie? In Royal circles [and far beyond, come to that!] Mowatt was seen as totally undesirable, but since Marina was pregnant as well, the Queen presumably thought that she had no choice but to sanction the marriage! I can remember the rumpus at the time very clearly: the Queeen had to 're-do' the 'Consent' because it was first worded in 'usual' way for such consents, i.e. including the time-honoured phrase along the lines of 'my trusty and well-beloved cousin'; when the Queen came to sign the document though, she read through the time-honoured phrase and immediately ordered it to be re-worded, omitting the 'trust and well-beloved' bit so that it just read 'Cousin'

Hope this is of interest.

Diarist
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #233  
Old 08-30-2011, 07:08 AM
Courtier
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Berkshire, United Kingdom
Posts: 643
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel View Post
Is Dave Clark really a good match for Beatrice?
There's money behind him, but no title or even birth.
Still, he seems gentlemanlike and discreet, so maybe he'd be acceptable?

What's the consensus?
In my humble opinion, Mirabel, although I do see what you mean, over the years I think that the BRF have become much more flexible over people's background. The old days of disaproving dowagers at Balls gazing at parvenus dancing with aristocratic young girls and saying 'Anything known?' [i.e. indicating that they regarded the suitor as coming from nowhere] have long gone.

Provided someone is respectable and is 'not on the make' and clearly loves the royal bride, [or the Royal bridgegroom, come to that] then I don't think that there would be too many objections. The money is a bonus!

Remember, too, that Beatrice and Eugenie are apparently not now going to have formal roles within the BRF. And with every birth to William and in due course Harry's wives, both young ladies will drop further and futher down the succession pecking-order.

There have been some 'interesting' choices as consorts who marry into the BRF for some years now:

Anthony Armstong Jones: He was not titled and before his marriage to Princess Margaret, he had had what is known as an 'exotic' collection of girlfriend. He worked as a photographer [still regarded as 'trade' back in the 1960's by stuffy old courtiers]. He came from a much-divorced family, at a time when divorce [this was pre the 1969 Divorce Reform Acts] was still a but frowned upon. Even the Society columnist in Queen Magazine was appalled by the match, and indeed could never even bear to mention Lord Snowdon by name, referring to him in lists as 'Princess Margaret's husband for years afterwards.

Mark Phillips. Army Captain Mark came from an 'unfashionable regiment' - i.e. not a Guards regiment - and they apparently even had to 'invent' a smart enough uniform for him to wear at the wedding ceremony. Mark's father was a director of an 'unsmart' company - Walls [sausage-makers and mass market ice creams]. Mark's parents did have a little money though - there was the bonus that his mother was a member of the rich and well-connected Tiarks family.


Both the well-connected Lady Diana Spencer and the less-aristocratic Sarah came from divorced backgrounds, which a generation earlier would have caused HUGE raised eyebrows, as they were marrying the heir to the throne and the Queen's second son. Princess Margaret was obviously going to become 'less important' and so her marriage to Anthony Armstrong Jones was always going to be 'less difficult', but even at the time of Lady Diana's engagement, there were people who thought that the Spencer divorce was going to be problematic at Court.

Princess Michael of Kent: take a look at the thread on this board about this lady's lineage if you want to see the challenges her background has brought to the BRF!

Sophie Rhys-Jones. Her parents managed to scrape together the money to fund a private education, but her father was a Tyre [Tire] salesman and therefore not even from the solid upper-middle class professions. Her mother was a secretary [and not at a 'smart' Art Gallery or socially acceptable 'charity'].

And even look at Kate Middleton: Catherine's parents have become wealthy through their own hard work, but before their business 'took off' they were from relatively humble stock. Catherine spent her early years in a modest semi-detached house. I dislike snobbery and the class system, because to me all that really matters is whether you are an honourable person or not: Carole Middleton was born into a working-class family; Michael Middleton was born into a more middle class family, but even so, it was a lower middle class background. He actually worked as an aircraft-dispatcher, a very 'ordinary' sort of job and not as a pilot as has sometimes been reported. There were some good middle class relatives in his ancestry, and although much is made about 'family trusts' in the Middleton background, none of these recent Middleton 'ancestors' seemed to die wealthy [Wills are publically available for inspection here in England]. [In Berkshire, rumours persist that 'Uncle Gary', (Carole Middleton's brother] who the papers refer to as a 'black sheep' had been a useful source of finance to the Middleton family before their business really took off, although who knows how accurate this is.] I think that even 30 years ago, there would have been enough of the stuffy old-guard to have prevented William from even getting involved with Catherine. The fact that this appears to be a love match is, I am sure, one reason why the BRF and their advisors were so quick to 'bless' this union: I am sure that courtiers noted that 'even the right background' had done nothing to prevent the disaster that befell the marriage of William's parents: which I am sure made it easy to overlook Catherine's relatively humble beginnings.

Nowdays, Britain is much more of meritocracy, emphasising that what is important is what you make of yourself, not where you come from. Provided a person is honourable and hard working, I think that it does not matter what a royal suitor's background is. So I do not think that there would be any difficulty whatsoever with Dave Clark's acceptance.

Only my thoughts and not meant to offend,

Alex
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #234  
Old 08-30-2011, 08:00 AM
Heir Presumptive
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 2,003
Thank you, Diarist.

It's nice to get background information from someone on the scene!

But in the case of Princess Anne and Princess Margaret, didn't both marriages occur on the rebound?
I read somewhere that Princess Margaret decided to marry Armstrong-Jones the day she found out about Townsend's marriage to a Belgian girl, and that she admitted it was not a coincidence.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #235  
Old 08-30-2011, 09:02 AM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,097
I believe that information is discussed in great detail (in addition to new information found several years after her death) in this thread Princess Margaret (1930-2002) part 2: May 2007- .

Let's stay on topic with future York weddings.
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #236  
Old 08-30-2011, 03:43 PM
Russophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Portland, United States
Posts: 4,077
MO of Dave Clark isn't much. Yes, he seems to make Princess Beatrice happy and that is important and they have been together for a quite a bit of time, however I never see him DO anything except smile. There doesn't seem to be any other emotion so I refer to him as a "non-person" person. Probably harsh however it is MO after all. . .
__________________
"Not MGM, not the press, not anyone can tell me what to do."--Ava Gardner
Reply With Quote
  #237  
Old 08-30-2011, 03:51 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Toronto (ON) & London (UK), Canada
Posts: 5,262
Well better to be pictured smiling instead of frowning or giving the finger to a photographer. Since he is a private citizen do we have any right to see him other than when he is photographed with the princess? I think he is quite lucky to still be able to pretty much fly under the radar.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #238  
Old 08-30-2011, 03:56 PM
Russophile's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Portland, United States
Posts: 4,077
Quote:
Originally Posted by NGalitzine View Post
Well better to be pictured smiling instead of frowning or giving the finger to a photographer. Since he is a private citizen do we have any right to see him other than when he is photographed with the princess? I think he is quite lucky to still be able to pretty much fly under the radar.
Any right? Oh heck no. Russo is, however, a gossip monger and would love to know more.
__________________
"Not MGM, not the press, not anyone can tell me what to do."--Ava Gardner
Reply With Quote
  #239  
Old 08-30-2011, 03:57 PM
Zonk's Avatar
Administrator
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Somewhere in, United States
Posts: 10,097
Agreed. So much different than Kate. But of course, Kate is/was a female (and the press cared more about her and her clothes before and after she married William) and dating the heir's heir. And Dave is a male dating just one of the heirs.

I tell you though....Beatrice is awful close. God forbid anything happen to either William and/or Harry before he has kids. A couple of days ago a search and rescue team in the States died in a freak accident, and with Harry trying to back to Afghanistan? I had a girl in my sorority die at 22 as a result of ovarian cancer. I am certainly not wishing bad things......

My main point....perhaps we shouldn't be so dismissive of Beatrice, a potential role, the significance of her wedding, or who she marries.....quite so quickly. Well...that's the topic of another thread.
__________________
.

Reply With Quote
  #240  
Old 08-30-2011, 06:12 PM
Mermaid1962's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: NearTheCoast, Canada
Posts: 5,108
True. Tragic things happen among the most privileged; just look at William's mother's accident 14 years ago! And then there was the Kennedy plane going down not long after that. I didn't agree with downgrading Princess Beatrice's security protection for that reason.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zonk View Post
I tell you though....Beatrice is awful close....A couple of days ago a search and rescue team in the States died in a freak accident, and with Harry trying to back to Afghanistan?
__________________

__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
princess beatrice, princess eugenie, wedding


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





Additional Links
Popular Tags
abdication birth birthday bourbon-parma camilla charlene chris o'neill crown prince frederik crown prince haakon crown princess letizia crown princess mary crown princess mette-marit crown princess victoria danish royals engagement fashion genealogy grand duchess maria teresa grand duke henri habsburg hereditary grand duchess stéphanie hereditary grand duke guillaume hohenzollern infanta cristina infanta elena king abdullah king abdullah ii king albert ii king carl xvi gustav king juan carlos king philippe king willem-alexander norway picture of the month picture thread pom pregnancy prince albert prince albert ii prince constantijn prince felipe prince felix prince frederik prince henrik prince joachim princess princess alexia (2005 -) princess ariane princess beatrix princess catharina-amalia princess charlene princess haya princess laurentien princess letizia princess mabel princess madeleine princess marie princess mary princess maxima queen mathilde queen maxima queen rania queen silvia queen sofia royal russia state visit wedding willem-alexander william


Our Communities

Our communities encompass many different hobbies and interests, but each one is built on friendly, intelligent membership.

» More about our Communities

Automotive Communities

Our Automotive communities encompass many different makes and models. From U.S. domestics to European Saloons.

» More about our Automotive Communities

RV & Travel Trailer Communities

Our RV & Travel Trailer sites encompasses virtually all types of Recreational Vehicles, from brand-specific to general RV communities.

» More about our RV Communities

Marine Communities

Our Marine websites focus on Cruising and Sailing Vessels, including forums and the largest cruising Wiki project on the web today.

» More about our Marine Communities


Copyright 2002-2012 Social Knowledge, LLC All Rights Reserved.

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:20 AM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2014
Jelsoft Enterprises

Royal News Delivered to your Email!

You can get the latest Royal News right in your inbox.

unsusbcribe at anytime with one click

Close [X]