Beatrice and Edoardo: Wedding Suggestions and Musings Thread

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Madame Verseau

I don't think Bea's wedding is going to be televised because of Andrew's mess. As for the Sussexes since the queen made the statement that Harry and Meghan are still part of the family just not working royals questions will be raised if they don't attend. The reception is going to be are Buckingham Palace and we may get official pictures.

Of course it wont be televised. And as the Sussexes are going to be abroad, most probably, there is a perfect excuse for them not to attend, if they don't want ot… They are far away and have a small child.

[tausi]

I attended mass at St Margaret’s Church while I was in London in October. It is so beautiful! I loved everything about it and everyone was so nice to me.

Perfect for a wedding. I hope Bea and Edo get married there.

I met many Americans!

[Stefan]

Originally Posted by Durham

The issue with Windsor Castle was because the 2005 marriage was a civil ceremony.

I understand that Buckingham Palace has a chapel. The last one was destroyed by an air raid in ww2. That one was of a decent enough size to hold the wedding of The Duke & Duchess of Gloucester in 1935 once the venue had been changed from Westminster Abbey following the death of the bride's father.

Is there really a Chapel in Buckuingham Palace? bvecause the christening's who have been held there like the one of Prince Wiilliam and Peter Phillips took oplace in the Music room. If there would be a Chapel would it not have been held there?.

[Durham]

Originally Posted by Stefan

Is there really a Chapel in Buckuingham Palace? bvecause the christening's who have been held there like the one of Prince Wiilliam and Peter Phillips took oplace in the Music room. If there would be a Chapel would it not have been held there?.

Well that's a good question which is why I said I "understand" that there's a chapel.
This link from the Telegraph says that there is.


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/l...ingham-palace/


Maybe it's tiny & dour! Or maybe the Telegraph is wrong.

[Denville]

Originally Posted by Durham

Well that's a good question which is why I said I "understand" that there's a chapel.
This link from the Telegraph says that there is.


https://www.telegraph.co.uk/travel/l...ingham-palace/


Maybe it's tiny & dour! Or maybe the Telegraph is wrong.

Possibly the chapel is too small to accommodate everyone who was to be there, and take photographs...

[Countessmeout]

The chapels located in the palaces don’t tend to be overly large. Meant more for private family worship. Buckingham palace did have a larger chapel before WWII but it was turned into a gallery and I don’t believe it was that large either. Even baptisms at the palace they tend to have in the music room.

It’s the same issue with the royal chapel or St Margaret’s which I have seen suggested. Less then 200 people is just not realistic for this wedding and BP chapel is likely not even half that.

These two aren’t going to have a small family only wedding.

[Iluvbertie]

Not any more.

[tommy100]

I can see St Margarets as a possibility for somewhere near to BP, its big and could fit over200 (its certainly as big as Guards Chapel IMO) from what I've seen inside it but not as big as Westminster Abbey which it is next to. It comes under the auspices of Westminster Abbey so could still involve a lot of the people use to royal weddings without using the larger, more stately Abbey.

I've never really seen much truth in the Guards Chapel theory, Beatrice herself has little connection to it, Andrew has only held the post with the Grenadier Guards since 2017 and it doesn't seem particularly big or have many royal connections. TBH apart from W&H hosting a service for Diana (when both were in the relevant regiments to make it their local chapel) there are few links to the RF apart from events for the military.

I can honestly see them not marrying in a church or marrying in small church service and having a bigger party at BP after for many more people than may attend the service.

[Gawin]

As noted in the Telegraph article linked by Durham, the Chapel in Buckingham Palace was destroyed when the Palace was bombed during World War II (specific date: September 13, 1940).

Following the war a plan to rebuild the chapel was rejected due to the expense. Later, during the present Queen's reign, the former chapel was turned into The Queen's [Picture] Gallery at Prince Philip's suggestion, with a small section walled off for a tiny chapel. The Queen's Gallery opened on July 25, 1962 and was the first part of the Palace opened to the public.

Source: Edna Healey, The Queen's House: A Social History of Buckingham Palace (1997), pp. 301-302, 320, and 348.

[Mirabel]

Originally Posted by tommy100

I can see St Margarets as a possibility for somewhere near to BP, its big and could fit over200 (its certainly as big as Guards Chapel IMO) from what I've seen inside it but not as big as Westminster Abbey which it is next to. It comes under the auspices of Westminster Abbey so could still involve a lot of the people use to royal weddings without using the larger, more stately Abbey.

If St. Margaret's can only fit 200, it would be too small, I think.
The Guards' Chapel has a capacity of 500, and even that would be tight.
Remember, Eugenie's wedding had 850 guests, and Beatrice and Edo have an even wider circle that they might want to include.

I just don't see the problem with using the Abbey! If there's no carriage ride and no guardsmen, then it will just be the ceremony and no need for increased security.

Is it just that WA gives an aura of grandeur that people don't care to have the Yorks experience??

[wyevale]

IMO the Guards Chapel is an ugly place in which to commence married life..and so has nothing, [beyond its proximity to Buck House] to recommend it..

[sophie25]

Originally Posted by Mirabel

If St. Margaret's can only fit 200, it would be too small, I think.
The Guards' Chapel has a capacity of 500, and even that would be tight.
Remember, Eugenie's wedding had 850 guests, and Beatrice and Edo have an even wider circle that they might want to include.

I just don't see the problem with using the Abbey! If there's no carriage ride and no guardsmen, then it will just be the ceremony and no need for increased security.

Is it just that WA gives an aura of grandeur that people don't care to have the Yorks experience??

Diana's parents married at WA and they are not the only non-royal couple to have done so over the years so I don't see a problem with B using it either. If there's no carraige ride, balcony appearance or televised service it couldn't be compared to William's wedding.

[JR76]

Let's be frank - Beatrice could be married in a two minute ceremony at Hackney Town Hall wearing a potato sack followed by lunch at the local Pret and she'd still be blasted by the media. She's never going to win so hopefully she'll do whatever she and Edo wants anyway without one single consideration of the media.

[tommy100]

Sorry my reference to St Margarets was more about it being capable of seating over 200 so bigger than many other options mentioned (Royal Chapel of All Saints etc).

Westminster Abbey is available for marriages to members of the RF, members of the Order of Bath and their children and people who live in the precincts of the Abbey.

[Alison H]

Originally Posted by JR76

Let's be frank - Beatrice could be married in a two minute ceremony at Hackney Town Hall wearing a potato sack followed by lunch at the local Pret and she'd still be blasted by the media. She's never going to win so hopefully she'll do whatever she and Edo wants anyway without one single consideration of the media.

Very true! Zara got married in Edinburgh, presumably thinking it'd be lower profile than London, and there were still loads of press there.

There are going to be a load of senior royals there, so it'll have to be somewhere where there can be some sort of security, whether it's Westminster Abbey or the local registry office. I don't see why they shouldn't use the Abbey, but I think there might be a feeling that that'd be too grand and showy ... which is very unfair, because it's not as if the public'd be paying for it, so it's no-one else's business. I hope they don't feel pushed into keeping a low profile because of the goings-on with Prince Andrew. It's not as if Beatrice and Edo have done anything wrong.

[CyrilVladisla]

Originally Posted by Iluvbertie

Not any more.

When did marriage banns stop being announced at the church where the wedding is to occur?

[Lilyflo]

Originally Posted by CyrilVladisla

When did marriage banns stop being announced at the church where the wedding is to occur?

You've never needed to have banns read if you get married by licence.

[Moonmaiden23]

If the public is not paying for it, it can and should be as grand as the bride and groom want it to be.

I see no reason whatsoever why it cannot be at WA. Beatrice is a born Royal princess, the granddaughter of a reigning queen.

[Pranter]

Originally Posted by Moonmaiden23

If the public is not paying for it, it can and should be as grand as the bride and groom want it to be.

I see no reason whatsoever why it cannot be at WA. Beatrice is a born Royal princess, the granddaughter of a reigning queen.

You'd have to ask the Queen why...if Andrew is to be believed, he pretty much said in that interview the Queen determined where Eugenie married.



LaRae

[QueenMathilde]

I wasn't interested in Harry and Meghan's wedding so I didn't watch it on TV. It's nothing against them. I watched Will and Kate's wedding on TV.



I didn't watch Eugenie's wedding though I loved it when she wore the backless dress to show off her scars.


I know it's impossible to show Bea's wedding with all that is going on but I would watch it if it were televised.