Wedding of William and Catherine: Suggestions and Musings

[Zonk]

Correct. Prince Andrew's wasnt a state occassion but the circumstances were very different. He was/is the Monarch's son. So I think that is why Nancy Reagan was in attendance.

The Obamas haven't been invited and I don't think they are bothered by it at all. But neither has Sarozky...and I haven't checked but I bet Angela Merkel hasn't been invited as well. Looks like the press and people here are more offended than they are.

Also, since we don't know what goes on with the Queen or the Obamas every minute and every second of the day...I wouldn't goes as far as saying the Queen doesn't have a relationship with the Obamas.

The day is about William and Catherine and those who they have decided to share their special day with. End of Story.

 

[Skippy]

I doubt that many people will make that distinction. Even if they do, they might point out that Prince Andrew's wedding wasn't a state occasion.

I think so too.

 

[Skippy]

Correct. Prince Andrew's wasnt a state occassion but the circumstances were very different. He was/is the Monarch's son. So I think that is why Nancy Reagan was in attendance.

The Obamas haven't been invited and I don't think they are bothered by it at all. But neither has Sarozky...and I haven't checked but I bet Angela Merkel hasn't been invited as well. Looks like the press and people here are more offended than they are.

Also, since we don't know what goes on with the Queen or the Obamas every minute and every second of the day...I wouldn't goes as far as saying the Queen doesn't have a relationship with the Obamas.

The day is about William and Catherine and those who they have decided to share their special day with. End of Story.

Ditto, I second that. I think it will be a very interesting delegation. This wedding is, according to me, the first of its kind in any recent Royal history. Of course, anyone is free to correct me if I am wrong.

 

[Royal_Eagle]

No he's not.



William is not first in line. His father is. Charles is an heir apparent. CP Victoria is an heiress apparent. CP Frederik is an heir apparent. All these people have one thing in common; their mother or father is the current sovereign of their country, meaning upon their death they will become the next sovereign.

Upon the Queen's death, the only thing William becomes or inherits is the Duke of Cornwall. Heir/heiress apparent has a specific meaning that applies to just one person.

Hmm, I guess we have somewhat different interpretations of "Heir Apparent" then. I've always thought it just mean someone who will eventually ascend to the throne in due time, not just the very first in line.

If that's the official/widely accepted definition of Heir Apparent, then I stand corrected. Thanks for the discussion!

Back to the program!

 

[Madame Royale]

Hmm, I guess we have somewhat different interpretations of "Heir Apparent" then.

There is only one heir apparent, and in this case, it is Charles. Case closed

Which I see you had officialy "closed" yourself, so do pardon my late and rather unenlightening contribution as it were...haha.

 

[Mirabel]

Yvonne Yorke: Kate's Royal Wedding Look: The Dress, The Veil, The Tiara and More


According to this, the Queen had all the tiaras in the collection displayed in the ballroom, and invited Kate to select the one she wished to wear to the wedding.

Wouldn't it be better to choose the tiara to go with the dress, rather than the other way? (I would think Kate would want to invite her designer along!)

What does everyone think?

 

[Jacknch]

Ditto, I second that. I think it will be a very interesting delegation. This wedding is, according to me, the first of its kind in any recent Royal history. Of course, anyone is free to correct me if I am wrong.

I agree that in many ways this is the first royal wedding of its kind - certainly for British recent royal history at least. The popular grandson of a British monarch is getting married and I cannot think when that last happened. It is the first high ranking British royal wedding of the 21st century and even Prince Edward's wedding was very much scaled down. It is 25 years since the last royal wedding at Westminster Abbey and so for a whole generation of people it will be something they have not seen before.

 

[Zonk]

I agree that in many ways this is the first royal wedding of its kind - certainly for British recent royal history at least. The popular grandson of a British monarch is getting married and I cannot think when that last happened. It is the first high ranking British royal wedding of the 21st century and even Prince Edward's wedding was very much scaled down. It is 25 years since the last royal wedding at Westminster Abbey and so for a whole generation of people it will be something they have not seen before.

I think the last marriage of a grandson of a reigning British Monarch was Victoria with George, Duke of York marrying Princess May of Teck.

I would agree that this is something that doesn't happen often. Though I would expect that a King William would see his grandchildren married. Due to the ages of the Queen and Charles and the estimated time frame when William will become King.

 

[suztav]

I, too, am curious about the wording of the wedding invitation.

1.) Why is it that the Queen and not Prince Charles, as father of the groom, inviting the guests?
2.) On Prince Charles' wedding invitation, it was the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh who did the inviting ... why not here, too?

 

[georgiea]

Yvonne Yorke: Kate's Royal Wedding Look: The Dress, The Veil, The Tiara and More


According to this, the Queen had all the tiaras in the collection displayed in the ballroom, and invited Kate to select the one she wished to wear to the wedding.

Wouldn't it be better to choose the tiara to go with the dress, rather than the other way? (I would think Kate would want to invite her designer along!)

What does everyone think?

Maybe Ms Middleton had her wedding dress design by the time the Queen let her pick the tiara.

 

[Zonk]

Yvonne Yorke: Kate's Royal Wedding Look: The Dress, The Veil, The Tiara and More


According to this, the Queen had all the tiaras in the collection displayed in the ballroom, and invited Kate to select the one she wished to wear to the wedding.

Wouldn't it be better to choose the tiara to go with the dress, rather than the other way? (I would think Kate would want to invite her designer along!)

What does everyone think?

Honestly, I don't think it matters unless she picks out a color themed tiara (i.e. rubies, emeralds, etc.)

Don't diamonds go with everything

 

[agami.pearl]

I agree. Or maybe if she opted for flowers motif tiara it could be inspiration for the designer.

 

[Jacknch]

What came first, the tiara or the dress? It could go either way depending on what other accessories might be worn. If the dress is plain enough, then any diamond tiara would do. If the dress is embroidered, then I would have thought that the embroidery would match in some way the design of the tiara. In any event, seeing Kate in a tiara will be exciting!

 

[Lumutqueen]

I think deciding if she wears a tiara came first.

 

[Skippy]

I, too, am curious about the wording of the wedding invitation.

1.) Why is it that the Queen and not Prince Charles, as father of the groom, inviting the guests?
2.) On Prince Charles' wedding invitation, it was the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh who did the inviting ... why not here, too?

According to:

Probably because HM and Prince Philip were parents to Charles, Andrew, Anne and Edward. HM is on this invite because she is the highest ranking royal.

My own thoughts: I don't think that Charles will be on top of any royal wedding invite until he is King and thus the highest ranking royal.

 

[Sister Morphine]

I, too, am curious about the wording of the wedding invitation.

1.) Why is it that the Queen and not Prince Charles, as father of the groom, inviting the guests?
2.) On Prince Charles' wedding invitation, it was the Queen and Duke of Edinburgh who did the inviting ... why not here, too?

1. Because the Queen is the highest-ranking royal, and thus all invitations to Buckingham Palace come through her. If Harry marries before the Queen dies, then the invitations to that wedding will come from the Queen as well. Also, Charles can't invite someone to Buckingham Palace because it's not "his" palace yet. I mean, a friend of yours wouldn't put your name at the head of invitations to a party at their house, would they? Just think of it that way.

2. Both the Queen and DoE were on the wedding invites for Anne, Charles, Andrew and Edward because those are their children, slightly different than the situation here.

 

[Skippy]

1. Because the Queen is the highest-ranking royal, and thus all invitations to Buckingham Palace come through her. If Harry marries before the Queen dies, then the invitations to that wedding will come from the Queen as well. Also, Charles can't invite someone to Buckingham Palace because it's not "his" palace yet. I mean, a friend of yours wouldn't put your name at the head of invitations to a party at their house, would they? Just think of it that way.

2. Both the Queen and DoE were on the wedding invites for Anne, Charles, Andrew and Edward because those are their children, slightly different than the situation here.

And that's the third response to this question in itself, we at The Royal Forums are bloody well-informed!

 

[Lumutqueen]

Well with 147 pages to go through, it's good that people answer questions a fair few times. So the asker doesn't have to go back through x amount of pages to find the answer.

 

[Sister Morphine]

I don't care how many times it's been answered, if someone asks a question, I'll answer it, just for the reason you specified. Who want to read through 147 pages to find out the answer to one question?

 

[Skippy]

Well with 147 pages to go through, it's good that people answer questions a fair few times. So the asker doesn't have to go back through x amount of pages to find the answer.

I don't care how many times it's been answered, if someone asks a question, I'll answer it, just for the reason you specified. Who want to read through 147 pages to find out the answer to one question?

I don't know how my remark came across, but I meant it in a positive way; imo it's better to have multiple responses than none at all.

IMO it doesn't take much effort to answer someone's question as we all like to have our questions answered and we all may learn something new along the way too. That's what the Forum is for.

 

[Lumutqueen]

I don't care how many times it's been answered, if someone asks a question, I'll answer it, just for the reason you specified. Who want to read through 147 pages to find out the answer to one question?

No reason for the attack, mine and skippy's post were just a joke. The question has been answered on this page by Skippy who quoted my answer as well, so they wouldn't have to go through 147. My analogy was a joke as well.

I don't know how my remark came across, but I meant it in a positive way; imo it's better to have multiple responses than none at all.

IMO it doesn't take much effort to answer someone's question as we all like to have our questions answered and we all may learn something new along the way too. That's what the Forum is for.

I took it in a positive way, your post made me smile.

 

[Sister Morphine]

I wasn't attacking you, and I don't know where you got that from. I was agreeing with you, for crying out loud.

I said that I personally don't care how many times a question has been answered already, if someone on the current page asks it, I'll answer it for them. It's better than telling the person to go read the 4th comment on page 15.

 

[Zonk]

And now we can move on....weddings suggestions and musings for William and Catherine?

 

[Sister Morphine]

Since an article muses Kate had a chance to look at all the tiaras in the Queen's collection, which one do you think she chose? Obviously it should look right with her dress, but assuming that the designer was there, or that the dress is already done, what tiara would look best on her?

I still vote for the Strathmore Rose tiara, myself. I'd love to see her in the Girls of Great Britain and Ireland, but that's too closely associated with the Queen right now.

 

[HRHHermione]

Since an article muses Kate had a chance to look at all the tiaras in the Queen's collection, which one do you think she chose? Obviously it should look right with her dress, but assuming that the designer was there, or that the dress is already done, what tiara would look best on her?

I still vote for the Strathmore Rose tiara, myself. I'd love to see her in the Girls of Great Britain and Ireland, but that's too closely associated with the Queen right now.

I'd love to see her in the Girls of Great Britain too, but agree it's completely unlikely. However- a very public symbol that the Queen is welcoming Catherine into the family would do a lot to dispel any news stories about the newcomer not being accepted by the firm, dealing with snobbery, etc- the stories that were a big part of the dialogue on why Diana and Sarah's marriages failed. And the Queen loaning Catherine her favorite tiara for the day would be hugely symbolic of her acceptance into the family. So I'm not ruling it out completely even though I know it's unlikely.

 

[Saragli]

In my dream fantasy world the Queen wld allow Kate, and therefore starting a royal tradition for other brides to follow, to wear the Girls of Great Britain tiara for her wedding. It is such a gorgeous thing and would make a perfect british wedding tiara. Of course, the Queen wld only wear it on a regular basis, but I can't think of anything better for the something borrowed bit.

 

[MARG]

If the tiara was going to be a symbol of acceptance as a loaner then obviously it would be the same one both Queen Elizabeth and The Princess Royal wore for their weddings, the Fringe.

 

[ghost_night554]

For Ghost, who asked about the layout of BP, I came across this program from the pre-wedding celebration for Diana and Charles. Pretty cool set up if you ask me. http://everythingroyal.com/scan27.JPG (I love how they keep using the word "disco." It must mean something different in the UK than in the US. Lol.)

Thanks! the ballroom look huge from what I can see!

 

[Saragli]

If the tiara was going to be a symbol of acceptance as a loaner then obviously it would be the same one both Queen Elizabeth and The Princess Royal wore for their weddings, the Fringe.

I agree that would follow tradition and send a msg of acceptance out but its such an unattractive tiara. The Queen made it work but that was only because the bloody thing broke and was off kilter which added a certain charm to the piece. I wish they would take that tiara apart and reconstructed to match the tiara in this portrait of Queen Victoria. It would be a stunner then albeit quite similar to Baden Fringe in the Swedish RF.

 

[HRHHermione]

If the tiara was going to be a symbol of acceptance as a loaner then obviously it would be the same one both Queen Elizabeth and The Princess Royal wore for their weddings, the Fringe.

See, I think we'll see that on Zara at her wedding and it won't make an appearance at Kate's for that reason. I rather like the idea of keeping that tiara in the female line and using another tiara closely associated with the queen for future weddings in the male line- having the girls of great Britain as a tiara worn only by the queen except on the wedding days of women marrying into the family- that could be very nice.