The Royal Forums

The Royal Forums (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/)
-   Current Events Archive (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f166/)
-   -   Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor News and Pictures 1: November 2003-May 2004 (https://www.theroyalforums.com/forums/f166/lady-louise-mountbatten-windsor-news-and-pictures-1-november-2003-may-2004-a-1668.html)

montecarlo 11-10-2003 12:47 PM

Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor News and Pictures 1: November 2003-May 2004
 
Natal Chart:
https://www.astro.com/cgi/showgif.cgi?lang=....gif&res=75&va=

Astrological Aspects:

Sun Opposite Moon; Sun Conjunction Mercury; Sun Trine Mars; Sun Sextile Jupiter; Sun Trine Saturn; Sun Square Neptune; Sun Opposite North Node; Sun Sextile Chiron; Sun Square Ascendant; Sun Opposite Midheaven.

Moon Opposite Mercury; Moon Sextile Mars; Moon Trine Jupiter; Moon Sextile Saturn; Moon Square Neptune; Moon Trine Chiron; Moon Square Ascendant; Moon Conjunction Midheaven.

Mercury Square Uranus; Mercury Opposite North Node; Mercury Square Ascendant.

Venus Square Mars; Venus Square Jupiter; Venus Square Uranus; Venus Sextile Neptune.

Mars Opposite Jupiter; Mars Trine Saturn; Mars Semi-sextile Neptune; Mars Square Pluto; Mars Sextile Chiron; Mars Sextile Midheaven.

Jupiter Sextile Saturn; Jupiter Square Pluto; Jupiter Trine Chiron; Jupiter Trine Midheaven.

Saturn Sesquare Uranus; Saturn Opposite Chiron; Saturn Sextile Midheaven.

Uranus Semi-Square Chiron; Uranus Opposite Ascendant.

Neptune Square Midheaven.

Pluto Trine Ascendant.

North Node Square Ascendant.

Chiron Trine Midheaven.

Natal Chart & Astrological Aspects Interpretation:
https://groups.msn.com/interpretations4/gen...444835116413072

Claire 11-10-2003 04:31 PM

Thanks for the chart. I love astrology. There is however a slight descrepency. The baby was born in Furmley, Surrey so your co-ordinates were wrong. You have London as place of birth. It will mke little difference through

Do you know that the baby was born during a lunar eclipse. Under a red moon. There are a lot of folk lores about such children. That they will be plagued by violence. There is also mention about a royal child born under a red moon in Nostradamus. Lets hope it's nothing but hogwash

Claire

montecarlo 11-10-2003 05:42 PM

Claire, thank you for correcting me. At 23.21 GMT (11:31 p.m., London Time), the Moon entered a partial eclipse. At 01.06 GMT (1:06 a.m., London Time), the Moon entered a total eclipse.

I feel so sorry for the baby. Many of the planets in her chart are horribly aspected to one another. God, why did she have to be born on that day! :cry:

Binny 11-10-2003 08:20 PM

Hi montecarlo,

Just wondering why it was such a 'bad' day? I'm interested, but don't know much about astrology.

Thanks.

sara1981 12-04-2003 10:36 PM

you have plans for her christening?

maybe on christmas day? or in months ?

Sara Boyce

wymanda 12-04-2003 10:52 PM

I would say over Christmas when the family is together at Sandringham :heart:

Martine 12-05-2003 02:00 PM

yeh Eugenie and Beatrice were christened on december 22/23 or so , i think it would be nice around christmas , and the family is together then anyways

Claire 12-16-2003 04:49 PM

Lady Louise Mountbatten-Windsor News and Pictures 2: December 2003-October 2005
 
Remember Sleeping Beauty. For the christening of the young princess, the king and queen called all the fairies in the land to bestow gifts upon the young princess. They were 'gifts' of virutes and future prosperity.

What 'gift' or wish would you make for Louise?

I wish her a happy long life, full of more joy than sadness.

H.M. Margrethe 12-17-2003 05:50 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Claire@Dec 16th, 2003 - 3:49 pm
Remember Sleeping Beauty. For the christening of the young princess, the king and queen called all the fairies in the land to bestow gifts upon the young princess. They were 'gifts' of virutes and future prosperity.

What 'gift' or wish would you make for Louise?

I wish her a happy long life, full of more joy than sadness.

I will wish the same as you Claire do.
I will also wish her a good helth, a strong minde when her familiey are messing ther familiey life up just like Prince Charles,princess Anne,Prince Andrew,the Queen and Prince Phillip.

corazon 12-25-2003 02:21 PM

somebody know when lady louise will be christening?

Sorry for my inglish!!!

kelly9480 12-25-2003 02:36 PM

They haven't announced it yet.

sara1981 12-25-2003 03:01 PM

im sure maybe wait in months maybe Sophie and Edward will decide when?

Sara Boyce

kelly9480 12-25-2003 05:19 PM

No one knows when it will be announced. Just keep checking at https://www.royal.gov.uk for an announcement.

micas 12-26-2003 02:24 PM

I JUST HOPE THAT THIS DECITION BECAME ESYER THAT THE NAME . :lol:

Fireweaver 12-26-2003 02:27 PM

I would assume before May, when Sophie and Edward may end up going to a few royal weddings. :)

corazon 12-26-2003 02:56 PM

princes royals christening in december:
prince charles 1948
peter phillips 1977
prince harry 1984
princess beatrice 1988
princess eugenie 1990

Prince william in august and zara in may

corazon 12-27-2003 09:25 PM

probability lady Louise will be christening may 3 like prince Edward

wymanda 12-28-2003 07:05 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by corazon@Dec 27th, 2003 - 8:25 pm
probability lady Louise will be christening may 3 like prince Edward
As Prince Edward was born on March 10 his christening was less than 8 weeks after his birth.
I think it more likely that Lady Louise's christening will be on her fathers birthday.

sara1981 12-28-2003 12:51 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by wymanda+Dec 28th, 2003 - 6:05 am--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (wymanda @ Dec 28th, 2003 - 6:05 am)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-corazon@Dec 27th, 2003 - 8:25 pm
probability lady Louise will be christening may 3 like prince Edward
As Prince Edward was born on March 10 his christening was less than 8 weeks after his birth.
I think it more likely that Lady Louise&#39;s christening will be on her fathers birthday. [/b][/quote]
that would be nice idea&#33;

its would be honour on her dad&#39;s birthday maybe wait til annoucement first i think its would be in January or February most newly baby will be christening before 1 year old you know that.

Sara Boyce

corazon 12-28-2003 09:37 PM

like diana. William was christening in queen mother birthday.

briela

corazon 01-07-2004 05:43 PM

Good news&#33;&#33;&#33;

7 January 2004

OFFICIAL PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE EARL AND COUNTESS OF WESSEX AND LADY LOUISE WINDSOR

THE FOLLOWING STATEMENT IS ISSUED BY THE PRESS SECRETARY TO THE EARL AND COUNTESS OF WESSEX

A set of official photographs to mark the birth of Lady Louise Windsor is being released for first publication on Saturday, 10 January 2004. A further three photographs will be released for publication on Sunday, 11 January 2004.

The family photographs were taken by The Duke of York at Sandringham over the Christmas holiday.

One image will be available free to members of the media via the Press Association. All profits made from the sale of the other photographs will go to The Earl and Countess of Wessex Charitable Trust.

The Trust, founded in June 1999, is a grant-making trust. Its primary aim is to assist other registered charities and charitable causes, in particular those with which The Earl and Countess have personal connections or interests.

The Trust is particularly interested in supporting projects which provide opportunities to help, support and advance young people. It meets twice a year to consider new applications and review progress from previous recipients. Since 1999, the Trust has made grants totalling Ł537,265 to a total of 77 charities. Of these charities, 51 were located in England, 20 in other parts of the UK and 6 overseas.

sara1981 01-07-2004 07:21 PM

please post pictures of newly baby Lady Louise at christening this weekend we wanted tell you to remind about it&#33;

Sara Boyce

samitude 01-07-2004 11:40 PM

The statement didn&#39;t say that these pictures are the baby&#39;s christening pictures. I don&#39;t think these are. All the British royals have had official posed photographs of their babies taken a month or two after the baby has been born. I think these pictures are going to just be that. I think it will be another month or so before Louise is christened. Also, I&#39;m sure the press will hear about the christening before it actually happens.

CathyEarnshaw 01-07-2004 11:58 PM

British royal babies may be christened six weeks or six months ... there is no defined pattern.

corazon 01-08-2004 01:15 AM

Peter christening was 37 days-old
Zara was 43 days-old
William was 44 days-old
Harry and Beatrice three months
and Eugenie was 9 months-old.
Well, Louise have 61 days-old.

didem 01-08-2004 04:14 AM

next March

liliawodna 01-09-2004 01:08 PM

1 Attachment(s)
PRINCE ANDREW TAKES NEW PICTURES OF WESSEX BABY

When the Wessexes decided the time had come to take some new photos of their baby girl, they wanted to find a photographer they felt completely comfortable with. Step forward Prince Edward&#39;s older sibling Andrew, who has taken the first official snaps of baby Louise since her birth.

A keen amateur photographer, the Duke of York is said to be delighted the Earl and Countess asked him to help out. "Edward and Sophie decided Andrew was the best person for the job," revealed a source at the Palace. "As he is a member of the family it makes it all the more relaxed when the photographs are being taken."

The 43-year-old snapped a selection of photos during the Windsors&#39; Christmas gathering at Sandringham. And some charming new pictures of the Wessexes, along with their new arrival and the rest of the Royal Family, are to be released by Buckingham Palace at the weekend.

They are the first snaps of little Louise since she was born prematurely on November 8. At first there were fears for the infant&#39;s health, but she has since put on several pounds and is said to be doing very well.

jun5 01-09-2004 01:35 PM

1 Attachment(s)
from Yahoo

Undated handout photograph shows Britain&#39;s Earl (L) and Countess of Wessex holding their baby daughter Lady Louise Windsor who was born prematurely in November, 2003. The photograph was taken by the Earl&#39;s brother the Duke of York as the family gathered for Christmas at the Sandringham estated in Norfolk, eastern England. EMBARGOED: Not for publication before 0001 January 10, 2004. REUTERS/HO/HRH The Duke of York

Alexandria 01-09-2004 01:57 PM

Terrific pictures liliawodna and jun5 of andrew and the wessex family.

I love how Edward and Sophie are grinning away at each other in this picture -- in love with each other and ecstatic about Louise.

Dennism 01-09-2004 02:21 PM

Great photos. She does look so small. Only normal for a premature baby. She&#39;s so cute though.

justine 01-09-2004 03:44 PM

well I sure wish it would have been a better picture. Baby&#39;s head is tilted back, can&#39;t see her face well.
Edward and Sophie looking so lovingly...I suppose it&#39;s a &#39;sweet&#39; picture, but just not a very revealing one.
To wait so long for a decent picture, then to see this...it&#39;s a letdown for me.

kelly9480 01-09-2004 03:59 PM

She looks lifeless in that pic. It would have been better if the baby&#39;s head wasn&#39;t titled back and she looked aware of what was going on. Babies that young can be photographed a lot better than this. And it would have been better if the parents were looking at the camera rather than grinning wildly at each other. I&#39;ve seen some of Andrew&#39;s pictures, and he has done better.

justine 01-09-2004 04:31 PM

did I read somewhere (can&#39;t remember...other message board I think), that there were 3 or 4 pictures that were being released? And only one of those was a &#39;freebie&#39; the other had to be purchased.
Let&#39;s hope this was a freebie and the others are better then.

Geez I hate to get on an eyebrow soap box again...but WHAT is going on w/ Edwards eyebrows? Tame those caterpillars now...I see shades of the &#39;grumpy old aristocrat&#39; with the runaway eyebrows in his future ;)

Alexandria 01-09-2004 04:40 PM

There is one &#39;free&#39; picture going to the press and others which can be bought with proceeds going to charity.

Alexandria 01-09-2004 04:55 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by kelly9480@Jan 9th, 2004 - 2:59 pm
She looks lifeless in that pic. It would have been better if the baby&#39;s head wasn&#39;t titled back and she looked aware of what was going on. Babies that young can be photographed a lot better than this. And it would have been better if the parents were looking at the camera rather than grinning wildly at each other.
I actually prefer that Edward and Sophie are grinning "wildly" at each other rather than looking directly at the camera. Part of the reason they said they chose Andrew is because it would be more relaxed to be photographed by someone so close to them. And quite obvious from their grins that it is sincere and not a &#39;forced&#39; or &#39;for the cameras&#39; grin.

Yes, maybe Louise&#39;s head could&#39;ve been propped up a bit more so that we could see her more clearly, but she&#39;ll have the rest of her life to be photographed. This picture, albeit the first one since Louise left the hospital, is certainly not the last we&#39;ll see of her.

justine 01-09-2004 06:33 PM

I dunno Alexandria, what you prefer..."grinning "wildly" at each other rather than looking directly at the camera" comes off as a bit smarmy and forced to me.

I can understand the choice of Andrew, but this really isn&#39;t the intimate family picture I was hoping for.

You are right, she has the rest of her lift to be photographed. But proud parents usually like a decent picture of their child for display.

Binny 01-09-2004 07:53 PM

1 Attachment(s)
This one&#39;s smaller, but clearer..

Martine 01-10-2004 08:10 AM

That picture is really cute &#33;

they seem so happy :flower: µ

I saw a close up of Louise on the news.........really cute

Alexandria 01-10-2004 09:55 AM

The picture of Sophie and Louise is great, fergy&#33; Louise looks so tiny, however ...

Alexandria 01-10-2004 11:32 AM

UK Telegraph

Louise, the little lady who gave everybody a big scare
By Caroline Davies
(Filed: 10/01/2004)

Buckingham Palace has released the first official photographs of Lady Louise Windsor showing that, despite her traumatic entry into the world, the two-month-old daughter of the Earl and Countess of Wessex is thriving.

Lady Louise, who was born prematurely by emergency caesarean, is still small for her age but is putting on weight, according to sources. And she was the focus of attention at Sandringham, where the photographs were taken by her uncle, the Duke of York, between Christmas and New Year.

The Countess too looks well. She is said to be fully recovered from the emergency operation performed to save her daughter&#39;s life, and has clearly lost most of the weight she put on during pregnancy.

The Earl and Countess are in the process of hiring a full-time nanny for Lady Louise, although the Countess intends to be a "hands on" mother.

"She has been spending as much quality time as possible with her daughter, and she is just thrilled at her progress," said one source. "She really is an absolutely adored baby - and a real cutie-pie. She looks like a perfect jolly little baby."

The Earl has also been getting "stuck in", devoting the past few weeks to spending time with her although it is unclear whether he has changed a nappy or not. He will resume his official programme of engagements next week.

Lady Louise Alice Elizabeth Mountbatten-Windsor, who is eighth in line to the throne but does not have the title HRH at her parents&#39; request, is named after the Earl&#39;s paternal great great grandmother, Louise of Hesse (1817-1898).

She was born after the Countess, who had previously suffered an ectopic pregnancy, was rushed to Frimley Park Hospital in Surrey on Nov 8. Immediately after her birth, mother and daughter were separated when Lady Louise was taken to the specialist neo-natal unit at St George&#39;s Hospital in Tooting, south London.

The Queen, who was said to be "very upset" at the time, dotes on her seventh grandchild and spent plenty of time fussing over her during the Royal Family&#39;s annual break at Sandringham.

Unusually, she agreed to pose with the Wessexes and their daughter for an official photograph, taken by the Duke, which will be released tomorrow.

The Earl and Countess asked the Duke, a keen photographer, to take the informal pictures.

"It was their idea and he was delighted to do it," said an aide. "They felt it would look more natural and relaxed if the pictures were taken by a member of the family."

The Duke took more than 200 pictures in all. Seven are being released to the media and the rest distributed to members of the Royal Family, each signed "Edward, Sophie and baby Louise".

The Countess has said she thinks her daughter looks like the Earl. "She really sees him in her," said a source.

The father-daughter bond is obviously strong, demonstrated in one photograph where Lady Louise locks her gaze into the devoted Earl&#39;s eyes. In another, her tiny hand reaches out to grasp the Countess&#39;s finger.

The Countess is not expected to return to a full programme of engagements for some time. Although she has kept in touch with her charities, she has confined herself to paperwork rather than personal appearances.

The pictures are the third official Royal Family photographs taken by Prince Andrew since he bought his first camera in 1983. He took pictures of his mother, the Queen, to mark her 60th birthday, and a portrait for her Golden Jubilee.

He used a Canon EOS 1D digital camera to capture the informal images.

paulette 01-11-2004 11:27 AM

from hellomagazine

PRINCE ANDREW TAKES NEW PICS OF WESSEX BABY

When the Wessexes decided the time had come to take some new photos of their baby girl, they wanted to find a photographer they felt completely comfortable with. Step forward Prince Edward&#39;s older sibling Andrew, who has taken the first official snaps of baby Louise since her birth.

A keen amateur photographer, the Duke of York is said to be delighted the Earl and Countess asked him to help out. "Edward and Sophie decided Andrew was the best person for the job," revealed a source at the Palace. "As he is a member of the family it makes it all the more relaxed when the photographs are being taken."

The 43-year-old snapped a selection of photos during the Windsors&#39; Christmas gathering at Sandringham. And some charming new pictures of the Wessexes, along with their new arrival and the rest of the Royal Family, are to be released by Buckingham Palace at the weekend.

They are the first snaps of little Louise since she was born prematurely on November 8. At first there were fears for the infant&#39;s health, but she has since put on several pounds and is said to be doing very well.

kelly9480 01-11-2004 05:58 PM

The rest have to be paid for, with proceeds going to their charity. Papers may purchase the pics and publish them, though.

paulette 01-12-2004 06:11 AM

from hellomagazine.com

NEW PICTURES OF LITTLE BABY LOUISE

12 JANUARY 2004
The delight is clearly visible on the faces of Prince Edward and Sophie Wessex, as they hold their baby in new photographs released by Buckingham Palace. The pictures, which were taken by the Duke of York, are the first official photos of little Louise since her birth two months ago.

Lady Louise gave the royal family quite a scare when she was born four weeks premature in November. At first there were fears for her health, but she has been putting on weight ever since and appears to be very healthy. And the Countess, who stayed in hospital for 10 days after the delivery, also looks well in the snaps.

"She is spending as much quality time as possible with her daughter, and she is just thrilled at her progress," said a source at the palace. "She really is an absolutely adored baby – and a real cutie-pie. She looks like a perfect jolly little baby."

Prince Andrew took the photographs over the Christmas break when the entire Windsor clan was gathered at Sandringham. A keen amateur photographer, he took 200 pictures in all, though only a handful are being released to the media. Most of the pics have been redistributed to members of the Royal Family, each signed "Edward, Sophie and baby Louise".

Binny 01-14-2004 02:48 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Thanks corazon&#33;

Martine 01-14-2004 09:23 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Edward with Louise

Martine 01-14-2004 09:24 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Sophie with Louise

Martine 01-14-2004 09:29 AM

1 Attachment(s)
with Queen Elizabeth

Martine 01-14-2004 09:33 AM

1 Attachment(s)
Louise with her parents

Elizajane 01-14-2004 09:42 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Martine@Jan 14th, 2004 - 8:23 am
Edward with Louise
I thought that I never would see "this photo" of Edward holding his own child. They married "late in life" ~ probably because of the examples of Edward&#39;s sibling&#39;s marriages, (plus it&#39;s not uncommon that women are having babies in their 30s and up to 42.) ~ her ectopic pregnancy, cutting the odds in half when they removed one of her fallopian tubes, plus the scare of Louise coming a little early. It just looks like Prince Edward is in love with his baby girl.

Gosh, I wish I subscribed to "HELLO" to see all the photos. I&#39;m sure the Queen is over-the-moon (as the British say) about her new little granddaughter. :flower:

Elizajane 01-14-2004 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Martine@Jan 14th, 2004 - 8:33 am
Louise with her parents
Supreme happiness&#33; :heart:

Alexandria 01-14-2004 10:27 AM

Terrific pictures, Martine&#33; Thanks so much for sharing them here.

The last one of Edward, Sophie and Louise facing the cameras is terrifc. I am, however, not so crazy about the one with the Queen. She seems to be sitting quite apart/seperate from the young family, and it doesn&#39;t have the same cozy feeling that the recent pictures of the Dutch Queen with her son, daughter-in-law and grandddaughter evoked.

Beate 01-15-2004 11:22 AM

I absolutely love those pics&#33; Lady Louise is a very cute baby and it&#39;s wonderful to see all those happy faces..

Yes, Alexandria, I feel the same way you do..It&#39;s a pity that the Queen comes across so reserved..it would have been nice to have her hold the baby as well..Perhaps there would have been more warmth there..

A.C.C. 01-15-2004 08:08 PM

I guess that&#39;s not The Queen&#39;s style?&#33;&#33; The pictures are great though&#33;&#33;&#33;

Fireweaver 01-15-2004 08:15 PM

It is a pity there isn&#39;t more projected warmth, but I think the fact that the queen had visited them, and allowed the photo to be taken, shows that she does in fact adore this new granddaughter :)

sophie25 01-29-2004 07:16 PM

I am so happy for the Wessexs&#39; but I fear that the choice of title for Louise signals the death knell for the Royal Family for two reasons. Firstly, it won&#39;t stop press interest in her (just look at the coverage Zara Philips gets). Secondly, the whole point in having a Royal Family is that they are just that ...Royal&#33; It seems that nowadays in the family everyone wants " a quiet life " but at the same time they fully expect Prince William to take on the mantle of full Royal duties. What would have happened if the parents of the present Kents and Gloucesters had taken the same view and stripped their children of their royal titles? Their support to the Queen over the past 50 years has been invaluable and I&#39;m sure that she would be the first to admit that their tireless work has vastly contributed to the success of her reign. If William does not get the same help from his own cousins then I think the burden of Monarchy will be too much for him and one would not blame him if he decided to opt for "the quiet life" himself.

sky 01-29-2004 10:30 PM

I agree with the wessex did. The press coverage will still be like her cousins, they might not follow her so much, because by the time she is in her teens, almost of her cousins will be married and the press will be too busy making up stories about them. Lousie is still a princess, when she turns of age she can decided to use the title or stay a lady. I guess her parents didnt give it to her so she wouldnt have the pressure of being a tennage princess. I think Soiphe spoke out a couple of years about the pressure of being young and royal, a lot of people said she was refuring to the york princesses. I dont think Louise&#39;s non HRH is the death of the RF, giving her the title would have been a death signal of the RF. The citizans have to pay for all these members of the RF with their money, I would guess a Brit would get mad sometimes. I know some do,I&#39;ve been on some websits that are aganist the monarchy. And all they did was talk about taxes and prince Philp. I agree with you about the queens cousins helping plus her was her sister and mother. In the future there is only going to be William(and his wife), harry(with his wife) the york princesses and maybe Lousie, that is pretty small.

A.C.C. 01-29-2004 11:08 PM

Well, the future royal family consisting of William, Harry and their spouses, Beatrice, Eugenie and their spouses, and maybe Louise may seem small now compared to the current huge size of the royal family, or rather the royals who undertake official engagements, but compared to the other royal houses of Europe, they will be average size. Yet don&#39;t forget that when William comes to the throne (and definitely when Charle succeeds), Princess Anne and Princes Andrew and Edward, the Countess of Wessex and maybe even the Gloucesters and Kents will probably still be there. Whether they will be working royals is another story.

The last poster said that when Louise is 18, she could choose to recieve her style and title, or rather be addressed as, HRH Princess Louise. Can she do this???
Technically, she was not stripped of her style and title because their was no act saying this. It is rather a common knowledge thing.

Lastly, the British people pay for The Queen and the Duke of Edinburgh to undertake their official engagements. They pay for them to due their duty, for example entertaing or travel. Yet they don&#39;t pay other working members of the royal family. The Queen gives allowences to Her children, excpet for Charles, and I believe she pays for Her cousins as well, so I don&#39;t think that the British people would have had that much of a problem with Louise being a princess.

sky 01-29-2004 11:45 PM

I read on other MB&#39;s that Louise&#39; s title will always be there and she can choose when she is of age. And in a interview(an old one) she said something about titles and their child having a choise about their role when they are older.To me it makes sence, but I figured that the court would say something about this. They kind of just left it. I dont think the spouces of princesses have any duties, only the wives of princes.

A.C.C. 01-30-2004 12:13 AM

The main role of spouses of royal princesses is to accompany and support them on official engagements.

corazon 02-01-2004 07:58 PM

1 Attachment(s)
Baby Edward, Baby Louise

A.C.C. 02-03-2004 06:52 PM

That is beautiful&#33;&#33;&#33;

sophie25 02-08-2004 08:38 PM

Louise cannot change her title back to "Princess" as The Queen signed a "Letters Patent", a legal document which removed Louise&#39;s Royal title. It can only be restored by the Monarch of the day, either Louise&#39;s grandmother The Queen or her Uncle Charles if he becomes King. This however is highly unlikley as the Royal Family rarely go back on a decision once it has been made.

corazon 02-29-2004 08:49 PM

Well, I have two news about the christening.
1) in hello magazine of Louise presentation say what the christening will be for Easter april 11 in Windsor.
2) in the page Hause Wessex in section News the christening will be in march.
In official page of royal family nothing about this.

tiaraprin 03-01-2004 02:36 AM

I cannot find an answer anywhere to when Lady Louise will be christened?? Why are they waiting and who will be godparents??

tiaraprin 03-01-2004 02:38 AM

an Easter christening or a March christening?? Make up our minds and let the child be baptized already&#33;

corazon 03-29-2004 06:10 PM

a mag for Louise

bweir 03-30-2004 12:53 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by angela@Feb 8th, 2004 - 7:38 pm
Louise cannot change her title back to "Princess" as The Queen signed a "Letters Patent", a legal document which removed Louise&#39;s Royal title. It can only be restored by the Monarch of the day, either Louise&#39;s grandmother The Queen or her Uncle Charles if he becomes King. This however is highly unlikley as the Royal Family rarely go back on a decision once it has been made.
Louise CAN change back to Princess (well not change back since she IS a princess anyway) as the Queen HASN&#39;T signed a letters patent.

almaboud 04-08-2004 10:41 AM

1:46pm (UK)
Windsor Castle Christening for Lady Louise

By Peter Archer, Court Correspondent, PA News


The Queen’s latest grandchild is to be christened later this month at Windsor Castle, Buckingham Palace announced today.

Lady Louise Windsor, the six-month-old daughter of Edward and Sophie, the Earl and Countess of Wessex, will be baptised in the castle’s private chapel on Saturday, April 24.

Society photographer Lord Patrick Lichfield, the Queen’s cousin, will take the official christening photograph.

Louise, who was born prematurely on November 8 last year, has five godparents. They are:

Lady Sarah Chatto, daughter of Princess Margaret and Lord Snowdon, and the Earl’s cousin.

Lord Ivor Mountbatten, grandson of Lord Mountbatten of Burma, and also the Earl’s cousin. Edward and Sophie are godparents to his children, Ella and Alix.

Lady Alexandra Etherington, another of the Earl’s cousins. The Countess is godmother to her daughter, Amelia.

Francesca Schwarzenbach, a friend of both Edward and Sophie.

Rupert Elliott, Cambridge University friend of the Earl who is godfather to his son, Hector.

Jelka 04-08-2004 11:18 AM

That&#39;s on the same day as Johan Friso and Mabel&#39;s wedding&#33;&#33;&#33; Couldn&#39;t they have pîcked another day?

liv 04-08-2004 12:07 PM

So who will be the represents of the British royal house?

liv 04-08-2004 12:10 PM

Windsor Castle Christening for Lady Louise

By Peter Archer, Court Correspondent, PA News


The Queen’s latest grandchild is to be christened on April 24th,2004 at Windsor Castle, Buckingham Palace announced today.

Lady Louise Windsor, the six-month-old daughter of Edward and Sophie, the Earl and Countess of Wessex, will be baptised in the castle’s private chapel on Saturday, April 24.

Society photographer Lord Patrick Lichfield, the Queen’s cousin, will take the official christening photograph.

Louise, who was born prematurely on November 8 last year, has five godparents. They are:

Lady Sarah Chatto, daughter of Princess Margaret and Lord Snowdon, and the Earl’s cousin.

Lord Ivor Mountbatten, grandson of Lord Mountbatten of Burma, and also the Earl’s cousin. Edward and Sophie are godparents to his children, Ella and Alix.

Lady Alexandra Etherington, another of the Earl’s cousins. The Countess is godmother to her daughter, Amelia.

Francesca Schwarzenbach, a friend of both Edward and Sophie.

Rupert Elliott, Cambridge University friend of the Earl who is godfather to his son, Hector.

royal_sophietje 04-08-2004 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Jelka@Apr 8th, 2004 - 3:18 pm
That&#39;s on the same day as Johan Friso and Mabel&#39;s wedding&#33;&#33;&#33; Couldn&#39;t they have pîcked another day?
why would they?? Friso&#39;s wedding isn&#39;t a grand event anymore, after the scandals. It is a "private" wedding and I espect not many royals there....

irishchic5 04-08-2004 12:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by liv@Apr 8th, 2004 - 10:07 am
So who will be the represents of the British royal house?
I doubt there will be any British representatives there. The only likely possibilities were Edward and Sophie anyway, and they certainly won&#39;t be going now&#33; It&#39;s not like it&#39;s the wedding of a Crown Prince, anyway, although it would be a nice show of support if someone went.

Martine 04-08-2004 04:19 PM

yeh and it&#39;s not likely either that there will be members of other royal families at Louise&#39;s christening, it&#39;s probably only gonna be family

*hopes Bea and Eugenie will be there* ;-)

irishchic5 04-08-2004 05:28 PM

A message on the Benelux Message Board said that Prince Charles may go to the wedding in Denmark as "an easy way out" of going to the Christening because he and Edward have not gotten along recently. Is this true? Does anyone have any more info?
Thanks

Alexandria 04-08-2004 09:17 PM

I am not sure exactly of the reason for the riff between Edward and Charles, but I can name a few incidents which might be behind a riff, such as Edward&#39;s (former?) film company Ardent filming William while he was at school when the rest of the British media had agreed to leave William alone.

Charles also holds Sophie responsible for the Sheik/News of the World incident in which she shared some private things about the royal family to land an account when she was still working in PR. And Sophie being married to Edward, increased the animosity.

A.C.C. 04-08-2004 09:25 PM

It is reported that things between Charles and Edward are getting better now, but I don&#39;t think any of this is reason for Charles not to attend his niece&#39;s christening. I doubt Charles is going to the Dutch wedding, or any British royal for that matter.

liv 04-09-2004 05:11 AM

it would be terrible if Charles wouldn´t attend his niece´s christening because of some problems with Edward in the past.Probably it will be the only child for Edward and Sophie.

wymanda 04-09-2004 05:31 AM

I would imagine that if the Queen is to be represented at the dutch wedding she may ask someone like Prince Michael or the Duke of Gloucester to attend with their wife.
Obviously, given the difficulties with Mabel and the recent death of Pncess Juliana, it is possible that the wedding will be a purely family occasion.
The only branch of the british royal family that was related to the dutch royals was Princess Alice of Athlone who was a cousin to Princess Juliana through her mother who was a sister of Queen Wilheminia&#39;s mother. Both were born Princess&#39;s of Waldeck-Pyrmont.

Martine 04-09-2004 09:30 AM

I hope Charles still decides to go to the chritening, he might have problems with Edward, but Louise shouldn&#39;t suffer from those problems...

Alexandria 04-09-2004 10:31 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by wymanda@Apr 9th, 2004 - 4:31 am
I would imagine that if the Queen is to be represented at the dutch wedding she may ask someone like Prince Michael or the Duke of Gloucester to attend with their wife.

I don&#39;t think Prince Michael or the Duke of Gloucester would represent the Queen at all at this occasion if she was invited. It would most likely be one of her own children. If Edward and Sophie are otherwise committed on this day, then it would be Prince Phillip, Charles, Andrew or even Anne.

I highly doubt that Queen Elizabeth would send one of her cousins to the wedding of a reigning sovereign&#39;s son. Whether Johan and Mabel&#39;s wedding is a low-key affair or not, Johan is still the son of the present Queen of the Netherlands. He is not, for example the nephew of the Queen.

I think there is a protocol (formally or not) in which the person represting one royal family at another royal family&#39;s occasion/event must "correspond" to the proximity of being in line to the throne or something like that.

In the Netherlands for example, if Queen Beatrix cannot attend say a special event that one of Queen Elizabeth&#39;s children is hosting, then one of her sons would go, and if none of them could make it, then her sister Margriet would represent her. But she would never say send Princess Margarita to represent her (for obvious reasons and otherwise).

corazon 04-10-2004 10:48 PM

Wessex baby faces surgery to save sight

NICHOLAS CHRISTIAN



THE baby daughter of the Earl and Countess of Wessex is set to have an operation to save her eyesight.

A rare condition, called exotropia, could leave six-month-old Louise blind in one eye unless surgeons can correct the defect.

Louise, who was born a month premature in an emergency Caesarean which threatened the life of her mother, is to undergo rigorous tests before specialists can perform the risky procedure.

Prince Edward and his bride Sophie first noticed that something might be wrong when Louise developed a pronounced squint soon after being born.

It is understood that the Queen has been informed and has offered her personal support to her grandson and his wife.

Louise has already had a tough time since she came into the world after a traumatic birth that at one stage threatened Sophie’s life.

Exotropia causes one eye to deviate from its normal position and look outwards, affecting the sufferer’s ability to focus. In some cases it leads to blindness.

A royal source said yesterday: "The squint is very noticeable and is causing the Wessexes huge concern. No one wants to see their child undergo an operation and Louise has already had a tough time coming into the world."

A few hours before Louise’s birth, Sophie collapsed at the couple’s home at Bagshot Park in Surrey.

In the subsequent confusion, there was a 30-minute delay before she was rushed to the nearby NHS Frimley Park Hospital.

There she underwent life-saving surgery to stop the haemorrhaging, during which doctors said she lost an estimated nine pints of blood before Louise was born at the fragile weight of just 4lb 9oz.

Edward and Sophie have been preparing for Louise’s christening at the private chapel at Windsor Castle on April 24.

moosey60 04-11-2004 12:42 AM

Oh, dear. I hope Louise will be all right. This is such sad news&#33; Especially following her already traumatic entrance into the World. Well, I&#39;m glad they discovered this before it got too serious.

I really hope she gets better soon. I&#39;d hate to think that life is a procession of needles and medicine...

Quote:

the Queen has been informed and has offered her personal support to her grandson and his wife.
BTW- The Queen is Edward&#39;s mother, not his grandmother. :)

sky 04-11-2004 12:46 AM

I really hope she is okay. :(

royal_sophietje 04-11-2004 10:15 AM

:cry: oh poor little girl. I hope that the operation is going well and that she recovers well.

Alexandria 04-11-2004 11:58 AM

Poor Wessex family. What a difficult first year Louise is having. But catching it in advance is a good thing.

btsnyder 04-11-2004 11:59 AM

https://www.royal.gov.uk/output/Page3081.asp

Martine 04-11-2004 02:56 PM

:cry: :cry: :cry:

poor Louise... I really hope she gets better

corazon 04-11-2004 11:33 PM

Wessex baby may face treatment after doctors diagnose eye defect
By Caroline Davies
(Filed: 12/04/2004)


The five-month-old baby daughter of the Earl and Countess of Wessex, who was born by emergency caesarean four weeks prematurely, may need medical attention after doctors discovered that she was suffering from a slight squint in one of her eyes.

Lady Louise Windsor is believed to be suffering from exotropia - an outward-turning eye - which may, if it does not self-correct, require surgery.


The condition is not uncommon in small children, but in extreme cases surgery is needed to correct the eye, to obtain three-dimensional vision and to prevent permanent vision loss.

Buckingham Palace would not comment on what is seen as a private medical matter. But a source indicated that speculation that Lady Louise could be left permanently blind in one eye was wide of the mark.

"She has astigmatism, which a lot of babies are born with. She&#39;s not about to lose her sight. It is a tiny squint, which may or may not correct itself. In most cases it does."

Lady Louise is otherwise believed to be doing very well after her traumatic birth on Nov 8. Doctors had to fight to save both mother and daughter and they were apart for two weeks.


The Queen attends mass at St George&#39;s chapel
Yesterday the Earl and Countess joined the Queen and Prince Philip at the traditional Easter Sunday service at Windsor Castle. Nine senior members of the Royal Family were present for the service at St George&#39;s chapel in the castle grounds, which was led by the Dean of Windsor, the Right Rev David Conner.

Around 200 members of the public gathered in the cold to see them arrive. Absent were the Prince of Wales and Prince William, who are in Scotland, according to Buckingham Palace, and Prince Harry, who is in southern Africa on his gap year.

The Duke of York is in Augusta for the US Masters golf championship.

First to arrive on foot was Prince Philip accompanied by the Princess Royal. They were joined by Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie, the Duke of York&#39;s daughters; the Princess Royal&#39;s husband, Commander Tim Laurence; and her son Peter Phillips.

Prince Philip departed five minutes before the congregation and some 35 minutes before the rest of the royal party emerged because of a horse carriage driving engagement - one of his favourite pastimes.

The rest of the party left together and went for drinks, as is customary, in the deanery. The Queen accepted a posy of flowers from Abigail Gainher, five, and her sister Natasha, seven.

corazon 04-20-2004 08:56 PM

Note: Lady Louise not will be christening in St. Geroge, the christening will be in private chapel of windsor. Like Zara, Harry was christened in St. George.

micas 04-20-2004 09:09 PM

When, existe some date?

corazon 04-20-2004 09:14 PM

Date of Louise, of Zara, of Harry?
Well, Zara july 27 1981, Harry december 21 1984 and Louise 24 april 2004.

micas 04-21-2004 06:46 AM

Thanks, i am refering Louise. But that match with the wedding Of Prince Johan-friso And Mabel??????????? Some 1 have to miss the cristing. :

A.C.C. 04-21-2004 08:31 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by micas@Apr 21st, 2004 - 4:46 am
Thanks, i am refering Louise. But that match with the wedding Of Prince Johan-friso And Mabel??????????? Some 1 have to miss the cristing. :
I dont think there will be any members of the British Royal Family at the wedding.

micas 04-22-2004 07:47 AM

Well, direct members gona be correct stay for Louise cristing but with so many duques and condes i belive one go......................... or maibe they with 2 crown princes married thay probably gona rest for others 2. Normally is Prince Charles that go.

HMQueenElizabethII 04-22-2004 11:42 AM

[SIZE=7]Who will attend Lady Louise&#39;s Christening?
1.Her Majesty and HRH The Duke of Edinburgh
2.Princess Anne
And??????????Who will attend????? :wacko:

liv 04-22-2004 12:04 PM

I think the family will be present.No foreign royalty will participate.But perhaps the Greek royalty because they live in London.


I think these persons will sure be there:

-The Queen
-Prince Philip
- Prince Charles
- Prince William
- Princess Anne, her husband
-Zara Philipps
-Peter Philipps
-Prince Andrew
-Princes Beatrice
-Princess Eugenie
-Viscount Linley and wife
-Lady Helen Taylor


-Christopher and Mary Rhys-Jones
-David and Zara Rhys-Jones(with their children)

and of course her godparents and some friends...

HMQueenElizabethII 04-22-2004 01:15 PM

WHAT????Louise&#39;s Christening is a private christening.It doesn&#39;t like Ingrid Alexandra&#39;s christening?Only official photos.In fact,we won&#39;t have many pictures of the christening like Ingrid?

CathyEarnshaw 04-22-2004 01:21 PM

Most royal baptisms are private in the UK. Lord Lichfield is taking the official photos,which will be released to the media after the event.

liv 04-22-2004 01:52 PM

I read that there will only one pic published.


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

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2021
Jelsoft Enterprises