Death of Queen Elizabeth II - Lying-in-State, Edinburgh and London


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
See posts with no answers
It's not very clear what time it'll be. Some things say 5:45 and some things say 7:30.
 
At the official Youtube Channel of the Royal Family
 
I think they all did very well. It made me very emotional to see them. Peter Phillips especially looked so devastated.
 
It was very emotional. Actually the bit that got me the most was watching the emotional Wessexes watching Viscount Severn.

So glad that the granddaughters were allowed to take part. Apart from anything else it's also a fitting tribute to a female monarch.
 
It was powerful , to say the least ...
 
Does anyone know who all the people are who were in the box with the Earl and Countess of Wessex? The man in uniform right behind the countess looks very familiar.
 
Blog Real said:
The Queen’s grandchildren hold a Vigil at Westminster Hall

Photos:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-11222593/The-Queens-granddaughters-unite.html

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...rry-military-uniform-stand-coffin-honour.html
Click to expand...

Interesting picture. The grandchildren arrived in order of precedence (the Prince of Wales, the Duke of Sussex, Princess Beatrice, Princess Eugenie, Viscount Severn, Lady Louise, Peter Phillips, and Zara Tindall), but broke the order when they left and exited according to their positions in the vigil (with Harry for example coming last).
 
That was very well done by everyone. It can't have been easy, especially with so many people walking past.
 
They did very well. I was so emotional. I saw that something fell on the floor while they took the stairs and Zara picked it up.
 
It was very emotional watching the grandchildren's vigil. Zara, Peter, James and William all had moments where they looked to be struggling. Louise was extremely stoic. Eugenie, Beatrice and Harry seemed to fall in the middle - mostly expressionless, but a few moments where you could see the toll the vigil was taking on them.

And Sophie, at the start, looked absolutely petrified at how her children, especially James, would fare. I saw her check her watch at one point early on, wondering how much time had elapsed/was left of the vigil.
 
For me, the grandchildren’s vigil was the most emotionally powerful event so far. The Queen would have been very proud of all of them.
 
I'm glad they got to do it. I know it was very emotional for them, to stand there silently while hundreds of people file past, but they bore up very well, all of them.
 
Absolutely beautiful respectful moment well done to all of them.
 
I cried during this vigil, it was beautiful and emotional. And I think James, given his age, surpassed some people's expectations. They all did very well.
 
Heavs said:
It was very emotional. Actually the bit that got me the most was watching the emotional Wessexes watching Viscount Severn.

So glad that the granddaughters were allowed to take part. Apart from anything else it's also a fitting tribute to a female monarch.
Click to expand...

Exactly the same here. HM would have expected her children to stand vigil (knowing that three of them had done it for their grandmother, and that Anne had walked in her father’s procession) but this would likely have been a surprise. And what a wonderful one it was.

James did amazingly and seemed to cope with it better than some of the older ones. It’s lovely that he was able to do it and not be the youngest grandchild who missed out.

I had wondered if Sarah Ferguson might be in the box as her daughters stood vigil (given she retained what seems like a good relationship with HM, plus the reduced Royal audience tonight) but alas not.
 
Sunnystar said:
It was very emotional watching the grandchildren's vigil. Zara, Peter, James and William all had moments where they looked to be struggling. Louise was extremely stoic. Eugenie, Beatrice and Harry seemed to fall in the middle - mostly expressionless, but a few moments where you could see the toll the vigil was taking on them.

And Sophie, at the start, looked absolutely petrified at how her children, especially James, would fare. I saw her check her watch at one point early on, wondering how much time had elapsed/was left of the vigil.
Click to expand...



It was very emotional to see. They did all seem to have moments where they struggled. The Queen would have been very proud of them.

This was the first time I’d seen William that emotional. (He may have been other times, but I haven’t seen it.)

I’m glad they- and especially the girls- got to do this. (And Anne led the way, which is fitting.)

Sophie and Edward both seemed very emotional watching. Glad they could be there.
 
Does anyone recognise who was in the gallery? I spotted some children but couldn’t work out who.
 
I admire William, for this event was threefold for him. I wouldn't want to be in his shoes. Or any other member of the family, for that matter. They all do so well under the circumstances.
 
Last edited:
I'm curious about the wearing of stars of the various orders of chivalry, specifically with regard to the vigils (both Friday and Saturday evenings).

The King was wearing the (stars of) the Garter and the Thistle. The same for The Princess Royal, but why wasn't she wearing a (3rd) star for her GCVO?

The Duke of York had on the Garter and the GCVO, but The Earl of Wessex wore only his Garter star and I don't know why The Earl wasn't wearing his GCVO star.

The Duke of Sussex was wearing his KCVO, but The Prince of Wales was wearing only his Garter star when he is also a member of the Order of the Thistle.

I'm not sure how it's decided what stars the Sovereign wears. Is he (or she) not the Sovereign of ALL the orders; or do they (can they) wear only the stars for orders in which they were members before acceding to the Throne?

Any and all comments would be appreciated.
 
Last edited:
Duke of Leaside said:
The Duke of Sussex was wearing his GCVO, but The Prince of Wales was wearing only his Garter star when he is also a member of the Order of the Thistle.

.
Click to expand...

The Duke of Sussex is only a KCVO, not a GCVO, as it could be seen today when he was in uniform and wore the KCVO badge around his neck.
 
Mbruno said:
The Duke of Sussex is only a KCVO, not a GCVO, as it could be seen today when he was in uniform and wore the KCVO badge around his neck.
Click to expand...

Yes of course! Much appreciated for pointing out my error.

I'll see if I can edit my original post.
 
Well done to all of them. Not easy, especially in front of TV cameras and with members of the public passing so close by them. Can’t have been easy.
 
The grandchildren’s vigil was very moving.
I think it’s the first time I’ve seen them together as a group, just them.
 
I doubt if the correct place to ask this question but I don't know where to ask it. Why Andrew's girls have the title of Princess and not Anna's and Edward's?
Edward's kids are Viscount and Lady but Anna's seem not to hold any title. Why?

Sent from my SM-A426B using The Royals Community mobile app
 
fandesacs2003 said:
I doubt if the correct place to ask this question but I don't know where to ask it. Why Andrew's girls have the title of Princess and not Anna's and Edward's?
Edward's kids are Viscount and Lady but Anna's seem not to hold any title. Why?[/URL]
Click to expand...

1. Louise and James are styled as the children of an earl because that's what their parents want. Legally, as grandchildren of the sovereign in the male line, they are Princess Louise and Prince James, but again...that's not what their parents want.

2. Anne's children don't have titles because one, females can't pass down titles and two, neither she nor Mark Philips wanted him to be given an earldom when they married, so their children as such are untitled.

3. Beatrice and Eugenie have the same legal titles as Louise and James, only their parents chose to have them styled with the HRH.
 
fandesacs2003 said:
I doubt if the correct place to ask this question but I don't know where to ask it. Why Andrew's girls have the title of Princess and not Anna's and Edward's?
Edward's kids are Viscount and Lady but Anna's seem not to hold any title. Why?

Sent from my SM-A426B using The Royals Community mobile app
Click to expand...

Annes children as family of the female did not automatically receive a title, on her marriage she declined a title for her husband or they would probably have had some form of title (not prince or princess).

Louise and James use their secondary titles, as their parents decided it would serve them better as it was unlikely that they would be working royals and would need to make their own way.

That is just a brief summary not a reference to all the various letter patents etc
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

JessRulz
State Funeral of HM Queen Elizabeth II: 19 September 2022
11 12 13
Replies
389
Views
50K
Mbruno
M
JessRulz
  • Locked
Death of Queen Elizabeth II - Pre-Funeral Discussion and Reception
14 15 16
Replies
462
Views
51K
muriel
muriel
doro
State Visits paid by King Carl XVI Gustaf since 1974
Replies
0
Views
667
doro
doro
Blog Real
Prince Aimone, 4th Duke of Aosta (1900-1948) and Princess Irene of Greece and Denmark (1904-1974), King and Queen of Croatia
Replies
2
Views
342
maria-olivia
maria-olivia
Blog Real
King Vittorio Amadeo II (1666-1732) and Spouses (Anne Marie d'Orléans & Anna Canalis)
Replies
2
Views
410
Blog Real
Blog Real

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom