The Royal Forums Coat of Arms


Join The Royal Forums Today
Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
 
  #501  
Old 07-20-2018, 04:19 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,874
Quote:
Originally Posted by muriel View Post
If the Queen is happy for the couple to have a carriage ride through the centre of Windsor, who are we to whine?
Then she can pay for the security cost and no one would say anything about it.

In talking about promoting the monarchy. I can understand making a spectacle of a popular royal or a core member of the family to promote. But why would you spend all of this on someone that's not so popular, or something that there isn't that much interest from the people? Especially for a family that's already seen as entitled and spoiled. Does them no favors.
__________________

  #502  
Old 07-20-2018, 04:30 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Philadelphia, United States
Posts: 5,048
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
Then she can pay for the security cost and no one would say anything about it.

In talking about promoting the monarchy. I can understand making a spectacle of a popular royal or a core member of the family to promote. But why would you spend all of this on someone that's not so popular, or something that there isn't that much interest from the people? Especially for a family that's already seen as entitled and spoiled. Does them no favors.

Good point.
Until recently, Eugenie (and Beatrice) weren't well-known at all.
Lately they are seen at more events and are becoming much more recognizable, but there are still people who mix the two of them up.

(Still, I have to admit I am looking forward to this wedding, and it does seem to be on a more opulent scale than Peter Phillips' wedding was).
__________________

  #503  
Old 07-20-2018, 04:40 PM
Somebody's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Aug 2017
Location: Somewhere, Suriname
Posts: 4,032
Quote:
Originally Posted by O-H Anglophile View Post
I think fairly accurate except Princess Alexandra should be with the Dukes of Kent and Gloucester--and the Queen's children do more than her cousins at this point in their lives.
That's why I put her with a question mark. I doubted between 2 and 3 - previously she clearly was in category 2. I don't follow her closely, so I am not sure about whether she still is as active as when they had a greater need for a female influence.

Furthermore, it seems that especially the duke and duchess of Gloucester are still rather active. They are only a few years older than Charles and Camilla. The duke of Kent indeed has reduced the number of engagements he undertakes for the queen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirabel View Post
Good point.
Until recently, Eugenie (and Beatrice) weren't well-known at all.
Lately they are seen at more events and are becoming much more recognizable, but there are still people who mix the two of them up.

(Still, I have to admit I am looking forward to this wedding, and it does seem to be on a more opulent scale than Peter Phillips' wedding was).
And rightly so, as Eugenie is a royal highness and Peter is not. Which also leads to different royal expectations/participation. For example, the York princesses participated in the Commonwealth meeting and we see them regularly at garden parties (so comparable to prince and princess Michael of Kent - not 'working royals' as in that being their primary occupation but part of the group of royals that the queen might enlist to support her).
  #504  
Old 07-20-2018, 04:47 PM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
Then she can pay for the security cost and no one would say anything about it.

In talking about promoting the monarchy. I can understand making a spectacle of a popular royal or a core member of the family to promote. But why would you spend all of this on someone that's not so popular, or something that there isn't that much interest from the people? Especially for a family that's already seen as entitled and spoiled. Does them no favors.
Since you are apparently not a British citizen, why are you concerned about security costs for Princess Eugenie's wedding? I still don't see what the problem is exactly. Are you referencing the York family as entitled and spoiled?

In my previous post, I wasn't talking about 'promoting' the British monarchy. I said that a lot of positive public interest has extended to the royal family as a direct result of the interest in Prince Harry's relationship with an American citizen, Meghan Markle. That both Harry and Meghan share a wonderful love story and are also positive role models is another factor in their widespread popularity and in the interest generated by their royal wedding. The British monarchy has obviously been naturally promoted in a positive light for the most part simply as an after-effect or after-glow.

Another byproduct of M&H's relationship/wedding has been the huge boost to the British economy. Therefore, in a year of royal wedding fever, I do not personally see security costs for an abbreviated town of Windsor carriage ride for Eugenie's royal wedding as a huge expense. There will be security costs involved anyway with most of the major British royals attending the wedding. I realize there is added cost for the carriage ride happening outside the confines of Windsor Castle grounds. But to me that cost seems negligible under the circumstances (especially relative to what each individual British citizen would be out of pocket for). And it's not as if either Princess Eugenie or Prince Andrew do absolutely nothing for their country.

I've heard some of the criticisms about Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie over the years, but I haven't followed such rancor closely. Some of that negativity likely comes as a result of their parents' general unpopularity. But time has passed, and Beatrice & Eugenie have grown up a bit and are trying to improve their images. I personally do not think either of them have poor characters, so I think they should be given less side-eye and negative criticism, particularly in regard to Eugenie's current desires surrounding her royal wedding.
  #505  
Old 07-20-2018, 05:44 PM
muriel's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,165
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
Then she can pay for the security cost and no one would say anything about it.

In talking about promoting the monarchy. I can understand making a spectacle of a popular royal or a core member of the family to promote. But why would you spend all of this on someone that's not so popular, or something that there isn't that much interest from the people? Especially for a family that's already seen as entitled and spoiled. Does them no favors.
As I have previously stated, we are quite content with having our beloved monarch make these decisions. As far as I am concerned, she has not made any major mistakes in her time as our monarch, and if she is alright with the proposed arrangements, then so be it.

Another way of looking at this is that this is a domestic matter in the UK, and not one for our friends from across the pond to worry themselves with.
  #506  
Old 07-20-2018, 06:04 PM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,722
I'm sure there are anti-monarchists on British soil who may take issue with security costs, but then they would probably take issue with most British monarchy expenses. From what I can detect from afar, there are a majority of British citizens who truly enjoy the tradition and the pomp & circumstance involved with British royal public ceremonies, and royal weddings (no matter that Princess Eugenie leads more of a private life than her cousins, William and Harry).

The traditions surrounding British royal weddings seem to be happy and unifying for many of the British people. Royal weddings are rare, so why not take advantage of enjoying this additional happy royal celebration later this year? Especially, with all the political problems and unavoidable concerns and worries surrounding Britain's economic future? This is a rare time for unity and happy celebrations. I don't feel Eugenie is going over the top. Neither did Harry & Meghan. Perhaps Eugenie's wedding will give a slight additional boost to the economy, particularly in Windsor. And as well, it might sustain the interest in overseas travelers visiting Windsor Castle and the town of Windsor.
  #507  
Old 07-20-2018, 06:08 PM
muriel's Avatar
Majesty
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: London / Guildford, United Kingdom
Posts: 9,165
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
I'm sure there are anti-monarchists on British soil who may take issue with security costs, but then they would probably take issue with most British monarchy expenses. From what I can detect from afar, there are a majority of British citizens who truly enjoy the tradition and the pomp & circumstance involved with British royal public ceremonies, and royal weddings (no matter that Princess Eugenie leads more of a private life than her cousins, William and Harry).

The traditions surrounding British royal weddings seem to be happy and unifying for many of the British people. Royal weddings are rare, so why not take advantage of enjoying this additional happy royal celebration later this year? Especially, with all the political problems and unavoidable concerns and worries surrounding Britain's economic future? This is a rare time for unity and happy celebrations. I don't feel Eugenie is going over the top. Neither did Harry & Meghan. Perhaps Eugenie's wedding will give a slight additional boost to the economy, particularly in Windsor. And as well, it might sustain the interest in overseas travelers visiting Windsor Castle and the town of Windsor.
Very well put!
  #508  
Old 07-20-2018, 06:11 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,874
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
Since you are apparently not a British citizen, why are you concerned about security costs for Princess Eugenie's wedding? I still don't see what the problem is exactly. Are you referencing the York family as entitled and spoiled?

In my previous post, I wasn't talking about 'promoting' the British monarchy. I said that a lot of positive public interest has extended to the royal family as a direct result of the interest in Prince Harry's relationship with an American citizen, Meghan Markle. That both Harry and Meghan share a wonderful love story and are also positive role models is another factor in their widespread popularity and in the interest generated by their royal wedding. The British monarchy has obviously been naturally promoted in a positive light for the most part simply as an after-effect or after-glow.

Another byproduct of M&H's relationship/wedding has been the huge boost to the British economy. Therefore, in a year of royal wedding fever, I do not personally see security costs for an abbreviated town of Windsor carriage ride for Eugenie's royal wedding as a huge expense. There will be security costs involved anyway with most of the major British royals attending the wedding. I realize there is added cost for the carriage ride happening outside the confines of Windsor Castle grounds. But to me that cost seems negligible under the circumstances (especially relative to what each individual British citizen would be out of pocket for). And it's not as if either Princess Eugenie or Prince Andrew do absolutely nothing for their country.

I've heard some of the criticisms about Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie over the years, but I haven't followed such rancor closely. Some of that negativity likely comes as a result of their parents' general unpopularity. But time has passed, and Beatrice & Eugenie have grown up a bit and are trying to improve their images. I personally do not think either of them have poor characters, so I think they should be given less side-eye and negative criticism, particularly in regard to Eugenie's current desires surrounding her royal wedding.
If not being a UK citizens exclude us from talking finances, then most of us shouldn't be talking on this board.

I was pointing out from a public relations standpoint, which is the reason being listed as this is good, that this wouldn't go over well and why. I do agree that the York princesses are disliked not for their own behavior as they've not done much wrong, except for maybe a few weird outfits, but it doesn't rise to the level of mockery thrown at them. It does have to do with the behavior of their parents over the years. I'm just saying this is not making anything better. In fact, it's probably better for them to keep a low profile as private individuals unless they want even more scrutiny on themselves.
  #509  
Old 07-20-2018, 06:35 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 14,679
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
Prince Andrew felt differently. And in the case of Prince Edward, the decision was made that he would inherit his father's title one day, so that he was named the Earl of Wessex in the interim. His children are entitled to be Prince/Princess, but again, the decision was made (likely with the full approval of the Wessexes) for their children to not be styled HRH Prince/Princess.

Because Prince Andrew felt differently, both of his daughters are HRH Princesses. IMHO, there is a lot of positive public interest right now in the royal family due to the relationship between M&H and their subsequent wedding. Jack and Eugenie likely have had an understanding for awhile, and then Prince Harry found the love of his life and beat them to the altar. I see nothing wrong with royal wedding fever.
To be honest, Andrew didn't feel differently about this. When Beatrice and Eugenie were born, things went along with the status quo of how things are done. All children from a marriage of a son of the sovereign were entitled to the styling of Prince or Princess. Its how things are and how things went. No decision needed to be made.

My thoughts is that if Eugenie and Jack are happy with the carriage ride and the Queen is happy with the carriage ride and the people of Windsor are happy with the carriage ride (and the revenue that their businesses will do) and the security forces are happy to work and get paid because of a carriage ride and the people that are interested and plan to travel to Windsor to witness the carriage ride, whats the problem? Pomp and pageantry and ceremony, to me, is what defines the continuity of the British monarchy and the actual cost to the taxpayer is cheaper than a cup of coffee at Starbuck's.

The Queen has often stated that she needs to be seen to be believed. The Queen personifies all that is British in its very long history. Events like Eugenie and Jack's wedding with the carriage ride and all the courtesies extended to the public amplify that sense of continuity. One only has to take a good look at Windsor Castle itself and realize that its been there and in use since the late 11th century to be stricken with a sense of awe and wonder. One only has to look at the Ascot landau and picture royals that have come before riding it in.

In a sense, this wedding isn't only a celebration of the marriage of Eugenie and Jack, but its also a celebration of continuity in the United Kingdom as a whole. It means something. It represents something dear to the heart of the British. Its bigger than the cost. Money comes and money goes but some things endure throughout the ages.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
  #510  
Old 07-20-2018, 06:40 PM
MichelleQ2's Avatar
Serene Highness
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Los Angeles, United States
Posts: 1,212
I think Eugenie wants (and will apparently have) a higher profile wedding than Peter because she runs in a higher profile circle than Peter and Autumn did. Personally I hope they have the reception on the grounds at Royal Lodge rather than Frogmore...just to avoid the most recent comparisons. It is her home. Other that the seasonal difference (which should dictate the foliage and decor, E&J could also have their ceremony in late afternoon, a carriage ride and and then direct to the reception at Royal Lodge. becasue they wont have the dignitaries there really isnt the need for the afternoon reception. but i expect plenty of sparkle.
  #511  
Old 07-20-2018, 06:56 PM
Majesty
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Location: *******, Canada
Posts: 8,922
The wedding is going ahead.

You may not like the logistics of the wedding but it’s taking place. Everyone from The Queen on down will be present.

I’m looking forward to the pomp and ceremony.
  #512  
Old 07-20-2018, 06:56 PM
O-H Anglophile's Avatar
Super Moderator
 
Join Date: May 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 3,640
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichelleQ2 View Post
I think Eugenie wants (and will apparently have) a higher profile wedding than Peter because she runs in a higher profile circle than Peter and Autumn did. Personally I hope they have the reception on the grounds at Royal Lodge rather than Frogmore...just to avoid the most recent comparisons. It is her home. Other that the seasonal difference (which should dictate the foliage and decor, E&J could also have their ceremony in late afternoon, a carriage ride and and then direct to the reception at Royal Lodge. becasue they wont have the dignitaries there really isnt the need for the afternoon reception. but i expect plenty of sparkle.
There were not any dignitaries at the most recent royal wedding. All the guests att he wedding ceremony were invited to the afternoon reception, close friends and some family were invited to the private evening dinner.
  #513  
Old 07-20-2018, 07:03 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,874
If something going ahead has ever stopped anyone from discussing it, most of the threads would be 90% shorter.

Agree that it would be a late morning or noon wedding. Although, I supposed both Frogmore and Royal Lodge can be options for the evening reception. The comparisons will be there no matter what. It has already happened with this announcement. A lot of headline had to drag the Sussexes into it. Specifically Meghan even though Harry is the one related to Eugenie.
  #514  
Old 07-20-2018, 07:10 PM
Osipi's Avatar
Imperial Majesty
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: On the west side of North up from Back, United States
Posts: 14,679
If its the tabloids screaming the headlines, they're just being the tabloids they always have been and always will be. Their aim is create disention.
__________________
No law can be sacred to me but that of my nature. Good and bad are but names very readily transferable to that or this; the only right is what is after my constitution, the only wrong what is against it.

~~~Ralph Waldo Emerson~~~
  #515  
Old 07-20-2018, 07:19 PM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
If not being a UK citizens exclude us from talking finances, then most of us shouldn't be talking on this board.
I didn't say not being a UK citizen excludes any of us from talking about royal wedding finances. I simply observed that you seem quite adamantly opposed to the security costs in a way that seems out of proportion to your lack of responsibility for paying British taxes.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
I was pointing out from a public relations standpoint, which is the reason being listed as this is good, that this wouldn't go over well and why. I do agree that the York princesses are disliked not for their own behavior as they've not done much wrong, except for maybe a few weird outfits, but it doesn't rise to the level of mockery thrown at them. It does have to do with the behavior of their parents over the years. I'm just saying this is not making anything better. In fact, it's probably better for them to keep a low profile as private individuals unless they want even more scrutiny on themselves.
I disagree with your stance on this. Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie truly should not be blamed for their parents' mistakes. I think their parents are both at least trying to improve their public images. And I also think both parents dearly love their two daughters. I hope neither parent puts a foot in it in the lead-up to the wedding.

I'm looking forward to seeing a happy family celebration, and I do hope it will be televised. Not the least because aside from Beatrice, this might well be the last royal family wedding to be attended by both QEII and Prince Philip (especially the latter, as the Queen may still be around if Beatrice marries within a few years).

As royal princesses, Eugenie and Beatrice are simply by birthright and happenstance of their father's wishes never going to be simply private citizens. They will always hold a relatively higher profile than the Phillipses due to their royal status. They could attempt to be lower profile, but the cameras will always follow them to a certain degree. They can't escape their status unless they renounce their titles and flee to a private island somewhere, which I can't see either of them doing.

This situation is somewhat similar to the heightened interest surrounding the wedding of Prince Andrew and Fergie coming five years after the huge romantic wedding of Diana and Charles. In 1986, there still existed great interest in and aura around Diana (the rumors of rifts between her and Charles hadn't widely circulated across the pond at that point). This time two British royal weddings for the subsequent generation are happening in the same year! I say, why not take advantage of royal wedding fever, and the heightened positive interest surrounding the British monarchy as a result of the Sussex relationship/wedding?
  #516  
Old 07-20-2018, 08:12 PM
MaiaMia_53's Avatar
Royal Highness
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Midwest, United States
Posts: 1,722
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
... I supposed both Frogmore and Royal Lodge can be options for the evening reception. The comparisons will be there no matter what. It has already happened with this announcement. A lot of headline had to drag the Sussexes into it. Specifically Meghan even though Harry is the one related to Eugenie.
The tabloid media will always be squawking regardless of anything the royals do. I tend not to click on the more trivial rantings designed to stir up nonexistent 'competition' between the royals or between any of the royal ladies in particular.

Frogmore House is one mile away from Windsor Castle, and Royal Lodge is three miles away. It makes logistical sense to have the reception at Frogmore (where Peter Phillips also had his reception in 2008). I doubt that any of the royals care one whit about silly comparisons being drummed up by the tabloid press. After all, none of the public are exactly going to be invited to the reception, just as none of us were present at either of M&H's receptions. And don't we wish we were! I know I do, especially the one at Frogmore House.

Let's see whether Jack and Eugenie exit Windsor Castle a la 'James Bond style' like M&H? Probably, they will do things a tad differently in a vehicle with 'Just Married' paraphernalia perhaps. It's all just going to be a cause for happy celebration. I'm lightenend up about it all. There's already enough sadness and strife going on in the world today. I don't see any reason to be overly uptight or critically negative about what Eugenie is planning for her wedding.

Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
Again, I’m talking about it from this “PR” angle that’s been brought up. And let’s face it, the royal family is a brand. And they try to protect it. There will be times that you take a hit for what you want, and take away from some goodwill that’s been built up. But I fail to see how creating a spectacle for someone who isn’t popular, and who is supposed to be a private citizen carrying out a private life as many of us have used to defend Eugenie, is helping the brand.
I don't think there's anything much to protect against in terms of the royal brand and plans involving this royal wedding. If anything, another royal wedding in the same year enhances the brand. And they are not going overboard with the planning, as far as I can see.

I don't see the Yorks taking a huge p.r. hit, nor the Queen either for ensuring that their daughter/granddaughter respectively, has the royal wedding of her dreams. Quite the contrary. I think many in the British public will be sharing in celebrating Eugenie's dream wedding. Every bride is popular on their wedding day.
  #517  
Old 07-20-2018, 08:41 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 256
Would it be better if she were Lady Eugenie and they had a private society wedding. Why is she anything to do with us?
  #518  
Old 07-20-2018, 09:02 PM
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Wherever, United States
Posts: 5,874
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
I didn't say not being a UK citizen excludes any of us from talking about royal wedding finances. I simply observed that you seem quite adamantly opposed to the security costs in a way that seems out of proportion to your lack of responsibility for paying British taxes.
Royal finances have always seem to be a hot topic and I'm simply pointing out the obvious about expenses for a nonworking royal would cause backlash since people don't seem want to pay for RPO for her either. I have my opinions and state my reasoning behind it. If there is something that's said that I don't agree with, I state why like I do for all my opinions. That and I always enjoy a good debate. Simple as that.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
I disagree with your stance on this. Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie truly should not be blamed for their parents' mistakes. I think their parents are both at least trying to improve their public images. And I also think both parents dearly love their two daughters. I hope neither parent puts a foot in it in the lead-up to the wedding.
Yes. Given that Fergie has already gone all over the place talking about it on social media and then write an open letter to Eugenie in Hello magazine. Let's do hope there is anything else that comes up before the wedding. I do find it the double standards for the parents of the royal one of the couple and the nonroyal to be quite odd. If a nonroyal's parent did this, it'd be far worse. But there seems to be little controversy when it's the royal's parent.

And yes, I agree children shouldn't be blamed for their parents' mistakes, but everyone lives with the situation they are in. Each person makes the decisions for the life they desire. If they chose to have a private wedding, there might be a few articles here and there about the cost related to the wedding (dress, flowers, etc), and I would've rolled my eyes at all of them and moved on. But this does open another can of worms.

Quote:
Originally Posted by MaiaMia_53 View Post
As royal princesses, Eugenie and Beatrice are simply by birthright and happenstance of their father's wishes never going to be simply private citizens. They will always hold a relatively higher profile than the Phillipses due to their royal status. They could attempt to be lower profile, but the cameras will always follow them to a certain degree. They can't escape their status unless they renounce their titles and flee to a private island somewhere, which I can't see either of them doing.

This situation is somewhat similar to the heightened interest surrounding the wedding of Prince Andrew and Fergie coming five years after the huge romantic wedding of Diana and Charles. In 1986, there still existed great interest in and aura around Diana (the rumors of rifts between her and Charles hadn't widely circulated across the pond at that point). This time two British royal weddings for the subsequent generation are happening in the same year! I say, why not take advantage of royal wedding fever, and the heightened positive interest surrounding the British monarchy as a result of the Sussex relationship/wedding?
If they aren't private citizens, then I will no longer use this to defend them when something unfair comes up. And I will point that out if I see that defense in the future that they aren't private citizens and thus fair game. If they wish for the criticism and the scrutiny to die down and lead private lives, having a public wedding isn't the way to go. And yes, the stories will go away once they are stop seen coming out of clubs and become less

Andrew and Fergie were from a different time as I was often reminded and the excitement over Sussexes' wedding is completely different. Harry is a very popular royal and and both of them are expected to do work on behalf of the Firm for the remainder of their lives. Eugenie is not. The Sussex wedding was also of great interest on a global stage, which if we are going to talk about tourism revenue, that's very important. Even then, there were complaints about the cost. As I've pointed out before, even just going by the coverage by the royal correspondents on this, the interest isn't that high even in UK. Again, I don't see how putting on a spectacle for a non-working member of the family while costing public money would be a good imagery from a cost standpoint, which is always a sore spot.

BTW, what is the precedent for the wedding of a grandchild of a monarch that's not expected to be a child of a monarch (I imagine the last examples would be the Queen's cousins)?
  #519  
Old 07-20-2018, 09:13 PM
Nobility
 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Alexandria, United States
Posts: 422
Quote:
Originally Posted by jacqui24 View Post
BTW, what is the precedent for the wedding of a grandchild of a monarch that's not expected to be a child of a monarch (I imagine the last examples would be the Queen's cousins)?
The precedent for such a wedding would be a televised public occasion at one of the large cathedrals in the UK such as York Minster or Westminster Abbey, with attendees including politicians and foreign royal families even reigning heads of state such as King Olav of Norway, who attended Princess Alexandra's wedding in 1963. The only difference from the wedding of the children of the sovereign would probably be little to no foreign politicians and no balcony appearance, but that doesn't necessarily mean there were not large crowds but a difference did need to be shown so I guess it was not included.
Here is a link to the wedding of the Duke of Kent:
  #520  
Old 07-20-2018, 09:13 PM
CyrilVladisla's Avatar
Heir Apparent
 
Join Date: Dec 2013
Location: Conneaut, United States
Posts: 5,632
Quote:
Originally Posted by Susan D View Post
Would it be better if she were Lady Eugenie and they had a private society wedding. Why is she anything to do with us?
Eugenie should stay Princess Eugenie and have the gorgeous wedding of a royal Princess. Her joy has a right to be shared with the people.
__________________

Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Engagement of Princess Eugenie of York and Jack Brooksbank: January 22, 2018 JessRulz The Duke of York, Sarah Duchess of York, and Family 228 03-15-2018 09:50 PM




Popular Tags
alqasimi archie mountbatten-windsor aristocracy belgian royal family birthday celebration charles of wales chittagong cht clarence house countess of snowdon cover-up crown prince hussein crown prince hussein's future wife crown princess victoria crusades danish history denmark duke & duchess of cambridge; duke of cambridge duke of sussex dutch dutch history dutch royal family felipe vi future games germany henry v hill historical drama house of bourbon house of glucksburg house of grimaldi house of orange-nassau house of saxe-coburg and gotha jerusalem jumma kent languages list of rulers lithuanian castles mail marriage mbs monarchism northern ireland norway norwegian royal family official visit palaces palestine popularity prince charles prince harry prince of wales romanov family royal tour shakespeare snowdon spain spanish royal startling new evidence state visit sweden swedish history swedish royal family tracts trump united kingdom usa


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:02 PM.

Social Knowledge Networks

eXTReMe Tracker
Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2020
Jelsoft Enterprises
×