 |
|

10-25-2006, 11:21 AM
|
 |
Heir Presumptive
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: -In some dark place-, Argentina
Posts: 2,045
|
|
lord nichlas married
According to this week's Hello magazine, the civil marriage took place in London last Thursday with sister, Lady Helen Taylor, as a witness.
the magazine don't have pictures of the event.
__________________
Today the world has embraced new royal Princesses in the form of Mary of Denmark and Maxima of the Netherlands. But it's questionable whether even these hugely popular, increasingly glamorous future Queens will ever capture the world's imagination in the same way as Diana.
As Mario acknowledges: "She really was a true Princess".
-www.theroyalist.net-
|

11-02-2006, 04:48 PM
|
 |
Royal Highness
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: xx, Canada
Posts: 1,649
|
|
Lord Nicholas to marry in the Vatican
__________________
Duchess
|

11-03-2006, 12:43 AM
|
 |
Nobility
|
|
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 471
|
|
There is a photo of the couple on Wikipedia, under Paola Doimi de Frankopan's new title, Lady Nicholas Windsor. Two more pictures of the couple are posted on the Glittering Events Message Board.
It seems they married in a civil ceremony on 19 October 2006 in a London Registry office and they will marry in a religious ceremony this weekend at the Church of Santo Stefano degli Abissini at the Vatican.
A new thread for wedding photos has been created here and several other articles about the couple are posted at The Times The Royalist and Science Daily
|

11-03-2006, 01:19 AM
|
Imperial Majesty
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: ***, United States
Posts: 16,872
|
|
Science Daily? That's a weird paper to be talking about a royal wedding!
Anyway, the thread about the wedding is here.
|

01-13-2007, 07:02 PM
|
Royal Highness
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Scotland, United Kingdom
Posts: 1,702
|
|
Lor Nicholas was married recently in Rome,
|

01-13-2007, 11:53 PM
|
Nobility
|
|
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 459
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by angela
It's interesting to note that the Earl of St. Andrews had to go to Scotland to marry because it was an accepted fact that Royals couldn't legally marry in a register office in England hence the lingering doubt in many quarters over the legality of Charles and Camilla's marraige
|
I'm pretty sure he got married in Scotland because his wife was divorced. The same reason Princess Ann got married (for the second time) in Scotland. At the time, divorced persons couldn't be married in the Church of England.
|

01-14-2007, 12:26 AM
|
 |
Administrator in Memoriam
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,469
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by yvr girl
I'm pretty sure he got married in Scotland...
|
Yes, the Earl of St Andrews was married at Leith, near Edinburgh.
__________________
Seeking information? Check out the extensive Royal A-Z
|

01-14-2007, 09:24 AM
|
Heir Apparent
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 3,011
|
|
The Earl of St. Andrews married her in a register office in Scotland because until Charles married Camilla it was understood that the law stopped members of the Royal Family marrying in a register office in England. I remember seeing a clip of his wedding on the regional Scottish news at the time and that was the reason given. I also remember it being reported that the small reception afterwards was at Holyrood Palace where the Kent clan were staying whilst in Edinburgh. Does anyone have a photo of the wedding? The only picture I ever saw was in the book, My Young Friends, which was printed round 1990 and was all about the Queen's extended family. The Countess of St Andrews wore a blue velvet suit, the Duchess of Kent and Lady Helen wore red and Princesses Michael and Alexandra were in dark colours. No other members of the Royal Family were present.
|

03-07-2007, 09:54 AM
|
 |
Heir Presumptive
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: -In some dark place-, Argentina
Posts: 2,045
|
|
great news!!!!
lord nicholas is to become a father for the first time.
The Royalist - Baby Joy For Royal Newlyweds Nicholas & Paola
__________________
Today the world has embraced new royal Princesses in the form of Mary of Denmark and Maxima of the Netherlands. But it's questionable whether even these hugely popular, increasingly glamorous future Queens will ever capture the world's imagination in the same way as Diana.
As Mario acknowledges: "She really was a true Princess".
-www.theroyalist.net-
|

03-07-2007, 09:56 AM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: London, United Kingdom
Posts: 6,861
|
|
Hmm. I'm inclined to wait till the Palace confirm it. The Royalist isn't exactly the most reliable of sources.
__________________
Kaye aka BeatrixFan
|

03-08-2007, 08:36 AM
|
 |
Royal Highness
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 1,553
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeatrixFan
Hmm. I'm inclined to wait till the Palace confirm it. The Royalist isn't exactly the most reliable of sources.
|
It was also in the Daily Mail yesterday.
__________________
Everything I write here is my opinion and I mean no offence by it.
|

03-23-2007, 05:24 PM
|
 |
Administrator
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: , Germany
Posts: 70,323
|
|
Pics 22.3.2007
Lord Nicholas Windsor and his newly pregnant wife Lady Paola as guests of honour at the Bada Antiques and Fine art fair Charuty gala in aid of Marie Curie cancer care. London. 22/03/2007
Pic 1
Pic 2
__________________
**** Welcome aboard! ****
|

03-26-2007, 05:58 AM
|
 |
Aristocracy
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2003
Posts: 160
|
|
Does anyone know if and when Lord Nicholas and Paola are having the London celebration for their wedding? There was talk of a ball or something like that in the new year to be attended by those who didn't go to Italy.
Maybe it has already happened with no media coverage?
|

03-26-2007, 09:00 AM
|
 |
Heir Apparent
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Ryde, Australia
Posts: 3,773
|
|
I think it'd have already been taken place, helenw. As far as i knew from sources last year, if was not wrong, i think it took place St James's Palace, but maybe it was a private one so the media had no access to.
__________________
"God save our Gracious Queen,
Long live our Noble Queen,
God save The Queen"
God save Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II
|

03-28-2007, 07:24 PM
|
 |
Nobility
|
|
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: NASINU, Fiji
Posts: 259
|
|
I think her correct title would be Lady Nicholas Windsor or Lady Windsor.
|

03-30-2007, 05:57 AM
|
 |
Courtier
|
|
Join Date: May 2004
Location: *******, United States
Posts: 831
|
|
Lady Windsor as the wife of a Lord.
Nicholas should barely have the name Windsor, let alone be important enough that his wife automatically be styled with his name.
If I remember correctly, even if their children were raised Church of England, they cannot bear titles (though they would be in the line of succession).
But since Nicholas took himself out with his Catholic conversion, is married to a Catholic and they clearly intend to raise their children Catholic, those children will not be in the Line of Succession and will not 'need' titles.
__________________
Ann
|

03-30-2007, 06:44 AM
|
 |
Administrator in Memoriam
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sydney, Australia
Posts: 15,469
|
|
Just as any children of the Protestant Lord Frederick Windsor won't have titles, neither will any children of the Catholic Lord Nicholas Windsor.
They'll be Windsors by birth, but of the common variety, and being in or out of the Line of Succession has no bearing on that status.
Although of course, it would be much nicer to appear in the List.
__________________
Seeking information? Check out the extensive Royal A-Z
|

03-31-2007, 05:29 AM
|
 |
Courtier
|
|
Join Date: May 2004
Location: *******, United States
Posts: 831
|
|
I get visions of "King Ralph" and "What a Girl Wants" where people fight over how important they are by how many people have to die for them to become King/Queen.
__________________
Ann
|

04-28-2007, 03:13 PM
|
 |
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Des Moines, United States
Posts: 2,403
|
|
The security considerations for a wedding attended by the queen would have to be horrendous. Maybe it's more than the Gloucesters, or Lord Nicholas, wanted to add to the general wedding craziness.
|

04-28-2007, 03:51 PM
|
 |
Courtier
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Arlington, United States
Posts: 775
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by iowabelle
The security considerations for a wedding attended by the queen would have to be horrendous. Maybe it's more than the Gloucesters, or Lord Nicholas, wanted to add to the general wedding craziness.
|
Too bad she couldn't sneak into the church under a desguise dressed as Helen Mirren.
|
 |
|
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
|
|
Thread Tools |
Search this Thread |
|
|
Display Modes |
Linear Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
|
Recent Discussions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|