Beatrice and Edoardo: Wedding Suggestions and Musings Thread

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by wbenson

https://www.royal.uk/wedding-princes...-mapelli-mozzi

The wedding of HRH Princess Beatrice of York and Mr. Edoardo Mapelli Mozzi will take place on Friday 29 May 2020. The couple became engaged in Italy in September 2019.

Her Majesty The Queen has kindly given permission for the ceremony to take place at The Chapel Royal, St James’s Palace.

The ceremony will be followed by a private reception, given by The Queen, in the gardens of Buckingham Palace.

Originally Posted by JGio

From photographs of the interior, I think less than 100 guests can attend the ceremony. Quite saddening but I hope it is what she and Edo really wanted.

From the view of protocol, it would be quite illogical for a non-royal member of the extended family (Lady Gabriella Windsor) to be given permission to marry in a venue on the scale of a cathedral (St George's Chapel) while, at nearly the same time, a royal member of the queen's immediate family is required to marry in a small chapel.

As I see no reason for the public to believe that Prince Harry, Princess Eugenie, Lady Gabriella, or Princess Beatrice chose the venues for their weddings, the decision will be seen as leveled at Princess Beatrice herself (unless future weddings of Lady Louise, Viscount Severn, Prince Archie, etc. will receive the same treatment, and there is no indication that that will happen).

Originally Posted by Lady Marlboro

While this is slightly off topic, i can see a time in the not so distant future where the heir or heir to the heir gets married in Westminster Abbey and everyone else gets married at Windsor. So George - the Abbey, Charlotte and Louis - St George's. Mind you, unless they get married really young, I don't expect to be around to say I told you so.

As Prince Harry (the only sibling of the heir in his generation) did not marry at Westminster Abbey, I think it is already established that weddings at Westminster are reserved for heirs.

Originally Posted by JGio

I know. Little OT: Italian noble titles are not recognized by the Republic but still are used and passed down. Simply are not present on official document released by the Republic. He is still a count and will always be and the title will pass down through male descendants. Even if he doesn’t like the title or whatever.

As you say, he is not considered a count by the republic of Italy; nor is he considered a count by the kingdom of Great Britain, where even legal foreign titles held by British citizens are not recognized in British law. He does not recognize himself as having a title (see his interview), nor does the Royal Household (see the announcements of the engagement and wedding, where he is mentioned as Mr.). The same will, I assume, apply to his male descendants.

[sophie25]

I've just looked at some pictures from inside the chapel and seating for about 100 people looks about right but if the choir of the chapels royal will be singing then they will also require seating so you can half the number of guests to around 50. The only alternative would be to have members of the choir sing from the balcony above the congregation which I suppose is possible. This will be a very tight squeeze of a venue and it seems impossible that it will allow for her gown to be very 'big' either. I can't help but feel that the whole scandal surrounding the bride's father has had a major impact on how this wedding has panned out.

[miss whirley]

I'm glad they are doing Chapel Royal, at St. James. I suggested it a few days ago, saying it was one of the only options that made sense if they wanted a London wedding and still wanted to keep security costs down. I'm glad common sense prevailed. I know some royal watchers wanted a big blowout wedding at the Abbey, but Beatrice seems way too loving of a daughter and granddaughter to put Andrew and QE under that kind of scrutiny.

I imagine they'll have some PA photographers and videographers outside the church for the arrivals and departures. Very similar to George and Louis' Christenings.

[Mirabel]

Originally Posted by sophie25

How many people does it hold? I must admit I am very surprised at how small the venue is. If they had wanted to keep it 'in house' the chapel royal at Hampton Court would have done the same job and it's also very beautiful and much bigger than this one.

Not as convenient, considering the reception is at BP.

Wonder if there will be any adult attendants, or if they will have all children, as usual?

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by miss whirley

I'm glad they are doing Chapel Royal, at St. James. I suggested it a few days ago, saying it was one of the only options that made sense if they wanted a London wedding and still wanted to keep security costs down. I'm glad common sense prevailed. I know some royal watchers wanted a big blowout wedding at the Abbey, but Beatrice seems way too loving of a daughter and granddaughter to put Andrew and QE under that kind of scrutiny.

I'm inclined to assume that it will be a London wedding because the Queen required the wedding to be held in a small chapel, rather than the other way around. Or are there equally small options for a wedding in Windsor?

[ACO]

We will probably get an open car ride to the reception. So that’s another potential media and crowd opportunity.

[sophie25]

Originally Posted by ACO

We will probably get an open car ride to the reception. So that’s another potential media and crowd opportunity.

Don't know if it will be an open one.

[miss whirley]

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

I'm inclined to assume that it will be a London wedding because the Queen required the wedding to be held in a small chapel, rather than the other way around. Or are there equally small options for a wedding in Windsor?

I don't think they would of been denied St. George's had they wanted it. But I think the couple wanted a London wedding for a few reasons 1. There has already been 3 BRF wedding at St. George's in the last 2 years. It would have been another assembly line wedding. 2. If they had it at Windsor there would have been some expectation to have an evening party at Royal Lodge. They wanted to avoid that for obvious PR reasons... 3. The couple live at St. James. The chapel is their "home church".

[Lilyflo]

Well that's a relief. The chapel is a good choice as they can keep it quite private & it'll be easy to move the guests over to BP. I expect there will be a far greater number at the reception than at the ceremony.

[O-H Anglophile]

Maybe the ceremony venue was chosen with the bride’s grandfather and the groom’s son in mind.

[muriel]

Originally Posted by Lilyflo

Well that's a relief. The chapel is a good choice as they can keep it quite private & it'll be easy to move the guests over to BP. I expect there will be a far greater number at the reception than at the ceremony.

I could not disagree with the sentiment expressed by you!

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile

Maybe the ceremony venue was chosen with the bride’s grandfather and the groom’s son in mind.

Do you mean the Duke of Edinburgh? Is he living in London?

[Hans-Rickard]

Originally Posted by Tatiana Maria

I'm inclined to assume that it will be a London wedding because the Queen required the wedding to be held in a small chapel, rather than the other way around. Or are there equally small options for a wedding in Windsor?

I don’t think they would have been denied to use St George’s Chapel, had they wanted it.

There is also the ”Royal Chapel of All Saints” in Windsor Great Park, where QEII always attends the Sunday Service when is at Windsor Castle.
But that’s very close to ”Royal Lodge”. Almost situated at Andrew’s backyard, so it would look like in the media as if Andrew was hosting the wedding.

[Lemon Lyman]

Awww I think this is going to be a lovely wedding and I’m looking forward it being different. The options for her wedding gown are so different now in a smaller venue. [emoji177][emoji177][emoji177]

[Ista]

I'm so glad this is all settled, and I hope that this is truly what Beatrice wanted. It is a very small space comparatively. I'm wondering how much Andrew's disgrace as well as the health of the Duke of Edinburgh is playing into the choices made.

Considering the size and style the chapel, I wonder if Beatrice will even wear a tiara. It's certainly going to impact the style of gown she wears.

[Alison H]

I can't imagine for a minute that the Queen's said they've *got* to get married in a small chapel. William and Kate are the only royal couple in nearly 25 years to have got married at Westminster Abbey, but, if Beatrice had wanted St George's, Windsor, or if she'd wanted somewhere like St Margaret's at Westminster or one of the "royal peculiar" (I love that expression!) churches, I'm sure the Queen would not have objected.

It was said from the start that Beatrice didn't want a big do. The Queen would not want to spoil her day, or to give her any less favourable treatment than Eugenie got - not to mention Ella.

I think Prince Philip's at Sandringham.

There's no reason they can't have a big reception, if it's just the ceremony they want to keep low-key … although I hope they've got a wet weather option, rather than just "the gardens"! Maybe a giant marquee …

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by miss whirley

But I think the couple wanted a London wedding for a few reasons 1. There has already been 3 BRF wedding at St. George's in the last 2 years. It would have been another assembly line wedding. 2. If they had it at Windsor there would have been some expectation to have an evening party at Royal Lodge. They wanted to avoid that for obvious PR reasons... 3. The couple live at St. James. The chapel is their "home church".

Originally Posted by Hans-Rickard

There is also the ”Royal Chapel of All Saints” in Windsor Great Park, where QEII always attends the Sunday Service when is at Windsor Castle.
But that’s very close to ”Royal Lodge”. Almost situated at Andrew’s backyard, so it would look like in the media as if Andrew was hosting the wedding.

Thank you both for the information!

Originally Posted by miss whirley

I don't think they would of been denied St. George's had they wanted it.

Originally Posted by Hans-Rickard

I don’t think they would have been denied to use St George’s Chapel, had they wanted it.

Originally Posted by Alison H

I can't imagine for a minute that the Queen's said they've *got* to get married in a small chapel. William and Kate are the only royal couple in nearly 25 years to have got married at Westminster Abbey, but, if Beatrice had wanted St George's, Windsor, or if she'd wanted somewhere like St Margaret's at Westminster or one of the "royal peculiar" (I love that expression!) churches, I'm sure the Queen would not have objected.

Many couples have a personal preference for a downscaled wedding, but taking into account the norms for weddings in the British royal family as well as the circles in which this particular groom and bride socialize, it is difficult for me to imagine they would have chosen a chapel with a capacity of 100(?) over a chapel with a capacity of 800 for their guest list, had they been allowed a say in the matter.

[Ista]

Originally Posted by Alison H

I can't imagine for a minute that the Queen's said they've *got* to get married in a small chapel. William and Kate are the only royal couple in nearly 25 years to have got married at Westminster Abbey, but, if Beatrice had wanted St George's, Windsor, or if she'd wanted somewhere like St Margaret's at Westminster or one of the "royal peculiar" (I love that expression!) churches, I'm sure the Queen would not have objected.

…

You may be right, but as with so many other things that are speculated about on this forum, we have absolutely no idea what the Queen thought or how the decision was made. We're just left with the actual decision without any idea of how it was arrived at.

[sophie25]

Originally Posted by Alison H

I can't imagine for a minute that the Queen's said they've *got* to get married in a small chapel. William and Kate are the only royal couple in nearly 25 years to have got married at Westminster Abbey, but, if Beatrice had wanted St George's, Windsor, or if she'd wanted somewhere like St Margaret's at Westminster or one of the "royal peculiar" (I love that expression!) churches, I'm sure the Queen would not have objected.

It was said from the start that Beatrice didn't want a big do. The Queen would not want to spoil her day, or to give her any less favourable treatment than Eugenie got - not to mention Ella.

I think Prince Philip's at Sandringham.

There's no reason they can't have a big reception, if it's just the ceremony they want to keep low-key … although I hope they've got a wet weather option, rather than just "the gardens"! Maybe a giant marquee …

She got engaged slap bang in the middle of the Epstein scandal so I don't think a huge wedding was going to be on the cards anyway whether she wanted one or not. I think security costs were also a big consideration as the they knew the media would pounce on any scenario that was going to be expensive for taxpayers security wise. A chapel within a royal palace was therefore really the only solution if she wanted a London wedding. The chapel royal is beautuful though and I hope the ceremony will be streamed on tbe BRF YouTube channel.

[Tatiana Maria]

Originally Posted by sophie25

She got engaged slap bang in the middle of the Epstein scandal so I don't think a huge wedding was going to be on the cards anyway whether she wanted one or not.

But St. George's Chapel is not huge by the standards of royal family weddings; as was mentioned earlier, all three weddings in the Windsor family within the last two years (including the wedding of Lady Gabriella Windsor, who is neither a princess nor officially recognized as a member of the Royal Family) were held there.