Wedding of Princess Beatrice and Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi: July 17, 2020

[Denville]

Diana's gown was based on the ones worn by her mid 18th century Spencer-Churchill ancestors in the Gainsborough portraits at Althorp House.
Those were the dresses worn during the period of Charles II -Queen Anne.

Therefore it was way before the Victorians and looked nothing like clothing from that era.

Sarah's was Victorian.. Diana's was a bit of a mix of "fairy tale princess, and earlier and Victorian. her little bridesmaids were semi Victorain...

 

[Denville]

There's also the difference between "looking like" and being the "real deal". Sure all tiaras have had some royal provenance (excluding Sarah's which was store bought) but Beatrice's had a more intense connection as the Queen Mary fringe tiara was significant in that a) it was only worn by Queens and Anne before Beatrice and b) its lineage goes directly back to Victoria.

So.. yeps... it was very much a huge historical connection being made there. ?

Generally royal brides dont wear clothes that were worn before, their tiaras are usually ones that were used before at some stage. So Beatrice is the first to wear a dress that was worn before.. However while the circumstances were unusual, Im not sure it was the best idea...

 

[Osipi]

Generally royal brides dont wear clothes that were worn before, their tiaras are usually ones that were used before at some stage. So Beatrice is the first to wear a dress that was worn before.. However while the circumstances were unusual, Im not sure it was the best idea...

To be honest, it was surprising to me to see such a dress of significance being worn again. That has to be a first.

Usually when there's an historic occasion such as a wedding or a coronation, the dresses worn are treated like newborn children and they're preserved and sometimes put out in a special display. People have flocked to exhibitions that showcase these dresses.

What I'm wondering now if is Beatrice's wedding dress will remain as is or were the sleeves and the bottom hem added in such a way that the dress could easily be restored to its original design?

One thing you have to admit though. It was unique and unexpected.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

There's also the difference between "looking like" and being the "real deal". Sure all tiaras have had some royal provenance (excluding Sarah's which was store bought) but Beatrice's had a more intense connection as the Queen Mary fringe tiara was significant in that a) it was only worn by Queens and Anne before Beatrice and b) its lineage goes directly back to Victoria.

So.. yeps... it was very much a huge historical connection being made there. ?

But I was not discussing tiaras at all. Beatrice or anyone elses'.Only the bridal gown of Diana Spencer looking Victorian.

My firm opinion is that it did not nor was it meant to. The Emmanuels( who designed it) stated that it paid tribute to Diana's own 18th century ancestors at Althorp.

As for tiaras, other than whether or not they are beautiful and/or authentic I don't care about them that much.

 

[Osipi]

But I was not discussing tiaras at all. Only the bridal gown of Diana Spencer looking Victorian

My firm opinion is that it did not nor was it meant to. The Emmanuels( who designed it) stated that it paid tribute to Diana's own 18th century ancestors at Althorp.

As for tiaras, other than whether or not they are beautiful and/or authentic I don't care about them that much.

Ooops. My mistake. I should have also quoted Denville when talking about the tiaras. ?

The gown Beatrice wore was actually a design from the 1960s for a dress made specifically for the Queen, herself. And the designer is no other than Norman Hartwell who designed so many of the Queen's spectacular and historic dresses.

When Beatrice goes retro, she *really* goes retro doesn't she? Actually so much fashion today is actually reverting to designs from previous eras. I just ordered a dress that is definitely along those lines with a "swing" skirt to it.

 

[Denville]

To be honest, it was surprising to me to see such a dress of significance being worn again. That has to be a first.

Usually when there's an historic occasion such as a wedding or a coronation, the dresses worn are treated like newborn children and they're preserved and sometimes put out in a special display. People have flocked to exhibitions that showcase these dresses.

What I'm wondering now if is Beatrice's wedding dress will remain as is or were the sleeves and the bottom hem added in such a way that the dress could easily be restored to its original design?

One thing you have to admit though. It was unique and unexpected.

yes it was.. but Not IMO a great idea. Clearly the queen was trying to signify her approval of the marriage and to give Bea something special since her wedding had to be so small and private...But I think the dress's alteration did not look good.. Unless Bea particularly liked that gown, i am not sure it was a great choice.. Possibly they did not have much time to do a better alteration.. or perhaps the queen hopes to "get it back" take off the additions and display it as the gown it originally was...

Usually royal dresses are one offs and are used in exhibitions, not passed down from mother to daugther...

 

[Osipi]

Then again, its possible there were *no* between the lines stuff to pin on all this. It may have been done that way simply because its what Beatrice thought she'd like to do and the Queen agreed with her.

Not everything the BRF does has some underlying "meaning" to it.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

Ooops. My mistake. I should have also quoted Denville when talking about the tiaras. ?

The gown Beatrice wore was actually a design from the 1960s for a dress made specifically for the Queen, herself. And the designer is no other than Norman Hartwell who designed so many of the Queen's spectacular and historic dresses.

When Beatrice goes retro, she *really* goes retro doesn't she? Actually so much fashion today is actually reverting to designs from previous eras. I just ordered a dress that is definitely along those lines with a "swing" skirt to it.

I could not agree more Osipi. I was so worried that Beatrice would show up in one of Vivienne Westwood's ghastly ( sorry to her fans) creations that it was all i could do not to turn a flip when the photos came out.

I wasn't that impressed on first glance. The full effect of details...the fit, the color, the beautifully realized princess puff sleeves...need to be seen up close to be appreciated. I would especially have loved to have seen how the sparkle of the diamante appeared in the dim light of All Saints. These are the things that photography doesn't always catch.

The only thing i don't feel was an unqualified success was Beatrice's hair. I suspect that like Kate's bridal hair, it didn't hold the set the way it was meant to. Beatrice-like Kate-has amazing hair. The possibilities were almost endless.

I also want to know more about Beatrice's lovely floor length veil....

 

[Denville]

Then again, its possible there were *no* between the lines stuff to pin on all this. It may have been done that way simply because its what Beatrice thought she'd like to do and the Queen agreed with her.

Not everything the BRF does has some underlying "meaning" to it.

If Bea always intended to wear that dress, i would have imagined they could have done a better alteration of it.. Its possible/probable that this plan only came up when it became possible to have a small wedding.. and they chose to have it quietly....

 

[Osipi]

If Bea always intended to wear that dress, i would have imagined they could have done a better alteration of it.. Its possible/probable that this plan only came up when it became possible to have a small wedding.. and they chose to have it quietly....

I *imagined * otherwise. The alterations were done in such a way that they could be easily removed to restore the dress to its original state afterwards.

We'll never know. We can *imagine* until the cows come home.

 

[Kaye1850]

I wasn't that impressed on first glance. The full effect of details...the fit, the color, the beautifully realized princess puff sleeves...need to be seen up close to be appreciated. I would especially have loved to have seen how the sparkle of the diamante appeared in the dim light of All Saints. These are the things that photography doesn't always catch.


I also want to know more about Beatrice's lovely floor length veil....

I also wonder about the veil, especially as to whether it’s the same fine material as the sleeves?

 

[caethi]

yes it was.. but Not IMO a great idea. Clearly the queen was trying to signify her approval of the marriage and to give Bea something special since her wedding had to be so small and private...But I think the dress's alteration did not look good.. Unless Bea particularly liked that gown, i am not sure it was a great choice.. Possibly they did not have much time to do a better alteration.. or perhaps the queen hopes to "get it back" take off the additions and display it as the gown it originally was...

Usually royal dresses are one offs and are used in exhibitions, not passed down from mother to daugther...

In my opinion the dress was stunning and the alterations impeccable. It fit her beautifully and she looked beautiful in it.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

I guess it's time to update the Princess Beatrice of York Current Events thread to include the name of her new husband?

Tomorrow will mark one week since the wedding!

 

[Mirabel]

The only thing i don't feel was an unqualified success was Beatrice's hair. I suspect that like Kate's bridal hair, it didn't hold the set the way it was meant to. Beatrice-like Kate-has amazing hair. The possibilities were almost endless.

I agree that Beatrice's hair is one of her best features, but she almost always wears it down. (I can only recall one occasion when she wore an updo).

 

[Pranter]

I have to say out of all the gorgeous dresses the Queen wore in her younger days there are many better ones she could of worn...however this one may have been one Beatrice always liked etc.

The only thing I didn't like about the dress was that very large hem.



LaRae

 

[QueenJen]

IMHO, I liked the original dress HM wore, but do not like the added sleeves and the hem, or added piece on the bottom. The tiara she wore was and is stunning, and very formal, however Beatrice's hair, although pretty, didn't fit with the tiara. To me, the whole ensemble wasn't terribly cohesive.

Having said that, there was a lot of sentimental value in all of that put together, and Princess Beatrice looked so very happy and pretty, and that's what counts.

 

[Leopoldine]

Generally royal brides dont wear clothes that were worn before, their tiaras are usually ones that were used before at some stage. So Beatrice is the first to wear a dress that was worn before.. However while the circumstances were unusual, Im not sure it was the best idea...

They do tend to use historic lace. For instance, Queen Margrethe's wedding gown had a lovely course of antique lace down the front panel that was eventually removed for future use.

 

[Leopoldine]

I have to say out of all the gorgeous dresses the Queen wore in her younger days there are many better ones she could of worn...however this one may have been one Beatrice always liked etc.

The only thing I didn't like about the dress was that very large hem.



LaRae

There may have been practical reasons for that satin hem. The bottom area may have been soiled irreparably when HM wore it. She wore it at least twice in London, and odds are, one of the days was damp.

 

[Lilyflo]

I posted earlier that the 2006 photo of the dress when it was on display shows stains near the hem so they'd have had to do something about that anyway even if they didn't need to lengthen it.

 

[Denville]

well IMO didn't look so good. The queen has a lot of gowns, would have thought they could have foudn something that didn't require much alteration and done a nicer job.

 

[MARG]

They would have had to add length to that or any other gown because the Queen is VERY petite but still had a fuller bust and tinier waist than any of her decendents. If you look closely at the bodice of the gown on the Queen you will notice that her bust is considerably larger than Bea's which meant that the beautifully fitted bustline would have to be raised and that would involve work on the inside fitted corset. You can see from the subtle change in the line along the bust with the embellishments fitted higher on Bea.

By raising the bustline they maintained the gorgeously fitted bodice and waist. As to the addition of the puff sleeves, that would be for modesty in church but I'd bet what little bling I have that Bea wore it for their intimate evening reception and it didn't have puffed sleeves.

Beatrice has always loved historical gowns and her grandmother's vintage evening gowns must have been her private fairytale. But I bet she didn't see herself ever actually wearing one let alone to her own wedding! [emoji307]

 

[Leopoldine]

well IMO didn't look so good. The queen has a lot of gowns, would have thought they could have foudn something that didn't require much alteration and done a nicer job.

IMHO Beatrice was never going to be a chiffon and lace bride. This gown was right for her. It has intricate pleating that works well with or without crinolines. Those details show up better on Beatrice sans crinolines. The diamante detailing dovetailed beautifully with the fringe tiara. Being that Beatrice isn't an earring gal, the big tiara statement and gorgeous fluffy hair was very pretty.

 

[Countessmeout]

Any gown she wore was going to require alteration. It was going to require sleeves of some kind. Unless she chose to go with one of the queen's gowns from her senior years, which have sleeves already which I highly doubt we would ever see happen.

While there are some beautiful gowns, many of them would be even harder to add sleeves to without looking like some after thought/costume.

Its also a matter of what the queen would allow to be altered, and which ones Beatrice actually liked.

Some of the gowns the ornamentation wouldn't be everyone's taste.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

There may have been practical reasons for that satin hem. The bottom area may have been soiled irreparably when HM wore it. She wore it at least twice in London, and odds are, one of the days was damp.

The obvious reason is that the Queen is very petite in length.
In Sweden Crown Princess Victoria is almost a copy of her mother Queen Silvia, which made it easier to re-use a gown. In the Netherlands Queen Máxima is larger than her mother-in-law Princess Beatrix but they managed to have a floor length gown (Beatrix) worn as cocktail dress length gown (Máxima).

It looks like it could have been a lovely cocktail dress for Princess Beatrice but as a wedding dress it simply required an extension to enlarge it.

 

[JR76]

The obvious reason is that the Queen is very petite in length.
In Sweden Crown Princess Victoria is almost a copy of her mother Queen Silvia, which made it easier to re-use a gown. In the Netherlands Queen Máxima is larger than her mother-in-law Princess Beatrix but they managed to have a floor length gown (Beatrix) worn as cocktail dress length gown (Máxima).

It looks like it could have been a lovely cocktail dress for Princess Beatrice but as a wedding dress it simply required an extension to enlarge it.

My take on the wedding attire is that Beatrice should have used the dress as it was. Cocktail length with something like a bolero jacket to cover her shoulders in church and then a short veil with a smaller tiara than Queen Mary's fringe which I don't think worked that well with her hairstyle anyway. It would have looked fab and it would not have been the first time that we've seen tiaras for cocktail length dresses. In the sixties and seventies there were for example many Swedish brides that got married in mini-dresses, a short veil and a bridal crown. Sod the rules and have some fun.

 

[Moonmaiden23]

According to recent news reports Beatrice had settled on a different bridal gown that she intended to wear as late as three weeks ago before suddenly changing her mind and deciding on vintage Hartnell.

Does anyone think we will ever know the creator of her original dress? Will it make an appearance on Beatrice at some later gala event?

And wouldn't the designer be somewhat put out about having his/her dress just dropped at the last minute?

Unless the dress was off-the-rack, which I rather doubt.

 

[Iluvbertie]

My take on the wedding attire is that Beatrice should have used the dress as it was. Cocktail length with something like a bolero jacket to cover her shoulders in church and then a short veil with a smaller tiara than Queen Mary's fringe which I don't think worked that well with her hairstyle anyway. It would have looked fab and it would not have been the first time that we've seen tiaras for cocktail length dresses. In the sixties and seventies there were for example many Swedish brides that got married in mini-dresses, a short veil and a bridal crown. Sod the rules and have some fun.

The Queen is Supreme Governor of the CoE and she is the one who sets the rules for royal brides in the UK.

Even in the 60s the CoE wouldn't have approved a bride in a mini-dress regarding it as disrespectful to God.

What the Swedes want to do is up to them but the Brits do things their way ... long wedding dresses with covered shoulders. The Queen doesn't allow tiaras except with long dresses so a short dress would have meant no tiara at all.

I love how the decoration on the dress carried through with the tiara.

 

[miss whirley]

According to recent news reports Beatrice had settled on a different bridal gown that she intended to wear as late as three weeks ago before suddenly changing her mind and deciding on vintage Hartnell.

Does anyone think we will ever know the creator of her original dress? Will it make an appearance on Beatrice at some later gala event?

And wouldn't the designer be somewhat put out about having his/her dress just dropped at the last minute?

Unless the dress was off-the-rack, which I rather doubt.

The original dress choice was likely a very pricey one-off designer dress. And Beatrice correctly picked up that this is not the current environment to be flashing your cash to the masses. So going along with Covid austerity she decided to borrow a dress instead. It's hard to surpass a Hartnell, so I doubt anyone in the BRF sees her dress as a downgrade.

I'm not sure if she could wear the other dress to a gala, maybe she'll do what she did with her wacko hat and she'll auction the unused dress with proceeds going to a Covid-related charity. Or give the dress to a bride who lost her job due to the virus and can no longer buy one for herself.

 

[JR76]

Even in the 60s the CoE wouldn't have approved a bride in a mini-dress regarding it as disrespectful to God.

I never suggested that Beatrice should wear a mini-dress.

The Queen doesn't allow tiaras except with long dresses so a short dress would have meant no tiara at all.

Then I'd rather have seen no tiara. Hair pulled to one side and flowing down her shoulder with a piece of jewellery in the style we've seen on Mary and Victoria.
To me the alteration was very semi-final on Project Runway and someone would definitely have been sent home for it. That said Beatrice looked happy and comfortable which is all we should care for in the end.

 

[An Ard Ri]

Do we know if Beatrice and Edoardo are on honeymoon in the UK?