Wedding of William and Catherine: Suggestions and Musings


If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Zembla...it looks like not every head of state was invited. Which is quite right IMO. I don't think the Obama's feel slighted. William is the heir's heir. Its more important to pay attention to the couple's friends and family as well as members of the Commonwealth.

Well, I don't think Michelle or Barack would loudly complain about it -- they aren't five years old. It would look bad. It just sends out a peculiar message...that's all.

It will be interesting to see how many of the high profile guests from the Middle East come with all the turmoil - it may be considered a frivolous event to be seen at with all the unrest.
 
:previous: I would agree with that assessment regarding the Middle East rulers.

In regards to the Obamas, we always have the State Visit.:flowers:

Melania...in reference to Marie Chantal..for some reason I can't open the document. Most likely MC was invited but for whatever reason, can't attend. Again, I don't see how you can invite one person of a married couple and not the other, especially since you are a godparent to their son.
 
Speaking of Middle East rulers...

RoyalReporter (Richard Palmer): Anti-monarchy group Republic says the Queen has made a "catastrophic error" in reportedly inviting the King of Bahrain to the royal wedding. Five people died on Thursday in Bahrain when the King's troops tried to put down pro-democracy demonstrations.

I hope he wasn't invited. And if he was, I would hope he'd have the courtesy not to attend.
 
Zonk said:
Who said she wasn't invited? I haven't heard she wasn't invited. Since she is Pavlos's wife...it would be rude to invite one without the other. In addition to William being the godfather of her eldest son.

Of the royals invited I think its going to be heirs and not too many monarchs. So from Denmark I would expect to see Frederik/Mary or Joachim/Marie, Victoria and Daniel from Sweden, Felipe and Letizia from Spain, WA and Maxima from the Netherlands, etc.

I read the royals invited are closer to Williams generation so Victoria and Daniel yes but do you think WA and Max and Letizia and Felipe are considered same generation? Also I agree with you for MC from Greece- sure she was invited and if she not going probably due to conflict- Think we will see any of the Luxembourg RF there? Maybe Tessy or Guillaume?
 
Last edited:
I'm not sure how royal wedding invitations should look, but I thought Kate and Wills invites were a bit plain...aren't there usually some kind of design on the invitations?
 
CrownPrincess5 said:
I'm not sure how royal wedding invitations should look, but I thought Kate and Wills invites were a bit plain...aren't there usually some kind of design on the invitations?

I think they wedding invites are pretty much the same style as previous royal weddings. :)
 
That room is the formal dining room not the ballroom. It's got carpet on the floor! You can't dance on a carpeted floor! The ballroom has a wooden floor and no sideboards at the walls when food dishes are kept. They could very easily eat on one room and then open out into the ballroom where a band is stationed to play the night away. (This is what happened at the Swedish royal wedding last year, the final royal guests were see leaving at 4am! It was a good night!)
That's why I was like huh? Strange since that's the only thing that comes up when I type in ballroom Buckingham palace on google. Are there any pics available of the real ballroom?
 
I read the royals invited are closer to Williams generation so Victoria and Daniel yes but do you think WA and Max and Letizia and Felipe are considered same generation? Also I agree with you for MC from Greece- sure she was invited and if she not going probably due to conflict- Think we will see any of the Luxembourg RF there? Maybe Tessy or Guillaume?

If we are speaking peer/rank wise....all of them are on the same level as Charles. But age wise....William and Kate are 29 (right) and William and everyone is around 40. So yes, i think you will see WA and Maxima, or perhaps Constatjin (sp) and Laurentien (they attended Charles and Camilla's wedding). Definitely Haakon and Mette Marit. I think you will see the Grand Ducal couple at the wedding or Guillaume. Not Tessy and Louis.
 
I know it's been said, but it is stunning that the Obama's will not be invited. I can't imagine they would overshadow the event, but it's definitely a weird statement to send out. They are one of the most (if not the most) prominent couple in the world.


It's not stunning at all. This isn't the wedding to the heir to the throne, or someone who is already King. He's second in line. It's an important wedding, but not that important. The President and First Lady of the United States are a prominent couple regardless of who the titleholder is.

Not inviting them sends out no statement, it's not a slight or a rebuke or any kind of insult.
 
^^previous
Agreed. Makes no statement at all that they were not invited.
I think they made it clear from the start that the majority of the guest list was to be made up of their personal friends as well as acquaintances from charities as this is not a state occasion.
 
Is there any specific reason why the invitation to the 1981 wedding was written on behalf of the Queen and Prince Philip and this year's was only on behalf of the Queen. How was it on Andrew and Edward invitations?
 
Probably because HM and Prince Philip were parents to Charles, Andrew, Anne and Edward. HM is on this invite because she is the highest ranking royal.
 
Probably because HM and Prince Philip were parents to Charles, Andrew, Anne and Edward. HM is on this invite because she is the highest ranking royal.

I think only the Queen is on the invitation because she is the highest ranking royal and I believe paying for a lot of the wedding.
But it would have been nice to include Prince Philip because he is the grandfather.
Is there a separate invite to the dinner? And will that have Prince Charles and the Duchess on it?
BTW I think Prince Philip, Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall should also be on the invite.
 
Last edited:
And the Queen is paying for the formal luncheon. But it would have been nice to include Prince Philip because he is the grandfather.

Is there a separate invite to the dinner? And will that have Prince Charles and the Duchess on it?

But like I said, The Queen is on this letter because she is the highest ranking royal, not because she is William's grandmother.

I don't see why they'll be another invite for the private dinner, guests who are invited will be informed via on this invite or some other means.
 
I read that the middle-east royals were sent the "save teh date" notifications so obviously the decision to invite them was taken along time ago when the situation in the middle east was less inflamed.
 
I read that the middle-east royals were sent the "save teh date" notifications so obviously the decision to invite them was taken along time ago when the situation in the middle east was less inflamed.

That sounds about right. I would think that some of them might not attend for a couple of reasons including 1) attending a royal wedding outside of the country can lead to claims of extravagance and 2) who wants to leave the country and give people (especially those who oppose you) the opportunity of closing the door behind you?

In reference to the dinner and the breakfast, I woudl imagine that there were little cards (i.e.worded with something along the lines reception to follow at BP) inserted with the wedding invite, so that those who were invited to the additional events know.
 
I know it's been said, but it is stunning that the Obama's will not be invited. I can't imagine they would overshadow the event, but it's definitely a weird statement to send out. They are one of the most (if not the most) prominent couple in the world.

No it isn't. This is not a state wedding. Heads of the Commonwealth are invited because the Elizabeth II is the Queen of the Commonwealth and William will one day be King of the Commonwealth realms.

The Obama's would have only received an invitation if this was a state wedding and other heads of state were invited.
 
Last edited:
it seems to me, looking on from afar (New Zealand) that the average Brit couldn't care less about the wedding, or about the Royal Family in general, and that in a lot of cases they are positively malevolent about Kate and Camilla. Now, this could be because i read the Daily Mail which seems to be heavily slanted towards sensationalism (over the truth). But even with our magazines over here, one at present is saying Camilla is Kate's ally and the other is reporting Kate's fury at Camilla. I don't think any of them tell the truth, and at least it's refreshing to read peoples' comments on this forum as they are mainly positive. Hello magazine of course is also positive. But please tell me, Britons, is it really that negative over there? I remember when Victoria and Daniel were about to be married there was a lot of negative press there too, in Sweden, but on the day, looking at the photos, there were hundreds of thousands there on the day. And the people concerned about the cost in a recession; well just harking back to when the Queen began to pay tax (which i agree she should), well i doubt that made any difference to the general economy. Britain without the Royal family (IMO) would not be Britain anymore. And then the public would need to pay for a president or whatever. I feel sorry for Prince William; it's always seemed to me that even though he will do his duty, kingship would not have been his first choice of career. I'm sure he and Kate will do their bit (along with the rest of the Royal Family) but i wonder if they feel sometimes how wanted they really are. Prince Charles and Camilla would probably have been feeling that in that car episode a couple of months back, when they were attacked. And yet i see time and time again the Royal Family doing their best; they're on a hiding to nothing. No matter what they do they're heavily criticised. And here are William and Kate going to have a wonderful wedding because they're in love, and a big wedding because he's Royal, and i'm sure a lot of people will complain about the cost, and if they went and got married in a village church costing nothing to nobody, they'd still get criticised.

well, that's that off my chest; i look forward to 29 April and i hope all the kerfuffle doesn't get in the way of them enjoying their big day.
 
EllieCat you made very good points that probably should be discussed in other threads.

What I will say is stay away from the DM! And I say that as someone who reads it as well. Maybe we can support each other. We both need to stay away. They seem to have good pictures, the stories are sometimes out there but the readers are just nasty! I am not one of those people who just likes sugary things but poison is not my cup of tea as well.

From what I can see there are some people who have legit concerns about the cost of the wedding, but these people would complain either way in my book. The cost of a monarchy vs a democracy is just the same.

I think you will see some happiness on April 29th.
 
If Kate and William are following protocol when it comes to invites, then the programs might look similar as well. Here's Diana and Charles' program: ORIGINAL ROYAL WEDDING PROGRAMME | Princess Diana Book Boutique

I came across Fergie and Andrew's invite and program earlier as well, and they are the same style.

For Ghost, who asked about the layout of BP, I came across this program from the pre-wedding celebration for Diana and Charles. Pretty cool set up if you ask me. http://everythingroyal.com/scan27.JPG (I love how they keep using the word "disco." It must mean something different in the UK than in the US. Lol.)
 
No it isn't. This is not a state wedding. Heads of the Commonwealth are invited because the Elizabeth II is the Queen of the Commonwealth and William will one day be King of the Commonwealth realms.

The Obama's would have only received an invitation if this was a state wedding and other heads of state were invited.

I've always thought it was slightly odd that the wedding wasn't treated like a State Occassion since he is a Heir Apparent to the Throne, just like his Dad. Granted he will not ascend to the Throne for many years but nonetheless, he WILL ascend, bar untimely accident.

In any case, I can understand why they might not want to make it a State occasion. And I'm sure the Obamas wouldn't want to go in any case due to their heavy security presence.
 
I'm guessing the King of Bahrain got his "save the date" before the protests started, I just hope there is enough backdoor diplomacy for the Bahrain RF to not attend.

Have any pre-wedding festivities been announced? I know the Scandinavians love putting on a good show before the wedding but I am not familiar with British customs. Did Charles and Diana have any balls or anything?
 
I've always thought it was slightly odd that the wedding wasn't treated like a State Occassion since he is a Heir Apparent to the Throne, just like his Dad. Granted he will not ascend to the Throne for many years but nonetheless, he WILL ascend, bar untimely accident.

In any case, I can understand why they might not want to make it a State occasion. And I'm sure the Obamas wouldn't want to go in any case due to their heavy security presence.

But Charles was the heir at the time of his marriage whilst William is "only" the heir to the heir, effectively a rung below what his father was at time of marriage.

Plus I get the feeling that William, in particular, wouldn't have wanted his wedding to be a full on state occasion. He seems to like to be a bit more low key & sort of lessen some of the protocol/pomp that surrounds him. Obviously he seems to know that he can't get rid of it entirely but I think he likes to not go all out & so probably would have wanted to avoid having the full state occasion if he could & obviously now we know it isn't a full state occasion so I suspect he likes it that way. Of course that is just my impression/opinion.
 
But Charles was the heir at the time of his marriage whilst William is "only" the heir to the heir, effectively a rung below what his father was at time of marriage.

Plus I get the feeling that William, in particular, wouldn't have wanted his wedding to be a full on state occasion. He seems to like to be a bit more low key & sort of lessen some of the protocol/pomp that surrounds him. Obviously he seems to know that he can't get rid of it entirely but I think he likes to not go all out & so probably would have wanted to avoid having the full state occasion if he could & obviously now we know it isn't a full state occasion so I suspect he likes it that way. Of course that is just my impression/opinion.

Oh, I quite agree with you regarding Prince William's feelings regarding all those pomp and circumstance. My point was that I thought as a Heir Apparent, his wedding could have been treated as a State Occasion, if that was technically permitted. After all, it's only because of timing that it's not a wedding of the immediate heir, since his grandmother the Queen is still alive. Otherwise it'd have been treated like an State Ocassion.

Don't mind me, I can be quite pedantic at times. ;) :flowers:
 
William isn't an heir apparent. He won't be until his father is King. Heirs/Heiresses apparent are the next-in-line to the throne, not the next-in-line's eldest child.

Keeping that in mind, it would make no sense to make William's wedding a state occasion. His position, while an important one, doesn't demand all the pomp and circumstance the BRF can muster just yet.
 
Nancy Reagan represented the USA at Prince Andrew's wedding so why not invite Michelle Obama to William's wedding?
 
angela said:
Nancy Reagan represented the USA at Prince Andrew's wedding so why not invite Michelle Obama to William's wedding?

They didn't invite Sarozy either... Maybe William and Kate just didn't want to invite them
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom