Beatrice and Eduardo's Wedding

wannable · December 15, 2019, 01:34:45 PM

I do too hope, but the article IMO doesn't sound under or over, halfway. It states for a fact that the under St James chapel is a no go, explaining that it's fully booked.

Princess Cassandra · December 16, 2019, 10:07:21 PM

I agree that the scandal is not going to go away, but if she has to have a small private wedding because of it her wedding memories will always be tainted by it, which is very sad. For sure she won't have a huge wedding, anyway. I've noticed the latest pictures showing the two of them looking relaxed and happy.

dianab · December 17, 2019, 08:02:03 PM

i hope her memories to be tainted because the scandal that his father was a willing participant than a small private wedding.

if bea decides for a big wedding, she deserves every criticism she'll get. she and her sister dont even should have royal titles and to live in royal residences

sandy · December 17, 2019, 08:14:48 PM

I don't think Bea is going to have that easy a time with Edo. Both have to work hard on that marriage IMO.

amabel · December 17, 2019, 08:21:32 PM

Quote from: dianab on December 17, 2019, 08:02:03 PM
i hope her memories to be tainted because the scandal that his father was a willing participant than a small private wedding.

if bea decides for a big wedding, she deserves every criticism she'll get. she and her sister dont even should have royal titles and to live in royal residences

They are quite entitled to Royal titles as they are the granddagthers of the queen in the male line. and if the queen is ok for them to live in royal residences I don't see the problem.

dianab · December 17, 2019, 08:51:10 PM

peter and zara and edward children are the queen grandchildren too. and they dont have any royal titles and it's the correct.

Double post auto-merged: December 17, 2019, 08:52:36 PM

Quote from: sandy on December 17, 2019, 08:14:48 PM
I don't think Bea is going to have that easy a time with Edo. Both have to work hard on that marriage IMO.

let's hope she isnt feeling like she's 'existing, not living' soon after her wedding...

amabel · December 17, 2019, 08:52:38 PM

Quote from: dianab on December 17, 2019, 08:51:10 PM
peter and zara and edward children are the queen grandchildren too. and they dont have any royal titles and it's the correct.

It was decided by Edward and the queen at the tiem of his marriage that his children would not have HRH - and Anne's children are not in the male line and as such are not eliglbe to be HRH....

TLLK · December 17, 2019, 09:01:08 PM

Quote from: amabel on December 17, 2019, 08:21:32 PM
They are quite entitled to Royal titles as they are the granddagthers of the queen in the male line. and if the queen is ok for them to live in royal residences I don't see the problem.

Yes according to the Letters Patent 1917 the Yorks' children were certainly entitled to be HRH Princess Beatrice and HRH Princess Eugenie of York. The Wessexes could have had the same but chose to decline royal titles for Lady Louise and Viscount James.

amabel · December 17, 2019, 09:05:45 PM

Quote from: TLLK on December 17, 2019, 09:01:08 PM
Yes according to the Letters Patent 1917 the Yorks' children were certainly entitled to be HRH Princess Beatrice and HRH Princess Eugenie of York. The Wessexes could have had the same but chose to decline royal titles for Lady Louise and Viscount James.

true, they were entitled to be Prince and Princess.. and Beat and Eugenie have done nothing to merit taking their titles away from them.

dianab · December 18, 2019, 02:06:28 PM

Quote from: TLLK on December 17, 2019, 09:01:08 PM
Yes according to the Letters Patent 1917 the Yorks' children were certainly entitled to be HRH Princess Beatrice and HRH Princess Eugenie of York. The Wessexes could have had the same but chose to decline royal titles for Lady Louise and Viscount James.

Andrew should have had the same choice. Royal residences should to be just for working royals

TLLK · December 18, 2019, 02:20:46 PM

@dianab-IMO the Windsors' marital scandals of the late 1980's and 1990's had changed public opinion from 1986 when the Yorks married to 1998 when the Wessexes married.

As to the royal residences, there are many people who live in the royal residences in the "grace and favor" dwellings who are staff for the BRF and do not have royal titles ie: Robert and Jane Fellowes lived at Kensington Palace. Even if the York princesses had their titles changed from HRH Princess to Lady, I believe that they'd still be permitted to live there.

sara8150 · December 18, 2019, 09:51:35 PM

Prince Andrew WILL walk Princess Beatrice down the aisle at low key wedding to multi-millionaire after Epstein scandal ? The Sun

sandy · December 19, 2019, 12:08:28 AM

I am not surprised.

amabel · December 19, 2019, 08:17:36 AM

Quote from: TLLK on December 18, 2019, 02:20:46 PM
@dianab-IMO the Windsors' marital scandals of the late 1980's and 1990's had changed public opinion from 1986 when the Yorks married to 1998 when the Wessexes married.

As to the royal residences, there are many people who live in the royal residences in the "grace and favor" dwellings who are staff for the BRF and do not have royal titles ie: Robert and Jane Fellowes lived at Kensington Palace. Even if the York princesses had their titles changed from HRH Princess to Lady, I believe that they'd still be permitted to live there.

Of course, and if only working royals lived in Royal palaces (a) lots of non royals would be put out from them and (b) someone like Diana, who was left in one of the palace apartments for convenience.. would have to leave.
and when Andrew married I think it was always expected that he would be a full tiem royal worker some day when his Naval days were over and that he and Sarah were part of the RF and it was unthinkable that they and their children should nt have the usual titles. When Edward married.. there were different circumtnaces. I see no reason why Bea and Eugenie should lose their titles.. (or their homes). they haven't done anything wrong

wannable · December 19, 2019, 12:26:24 PM

So the engagement party did happen last night after all same venue and date.

Extraordinary they threw a Red Herring, purposely misleading the press. It worked.

PrincessOfPeace · December 19, 2019, 01:41:17 PM

James Middleton and his fianc? Alizee were there

wannable · December 19, 2019, 01:50:36 PM

Yes and also James Mathew and Pippa Mathew. I posted the DM article, as per usual with tons of pictures of the engagement party (cancelled, not cancelled :P ) thread. Honestly, I'm glad Bea and Edo were able to carry this out, she shouldn't be paying for her disgraceful father. :xmas4:

Bea, Edo, Eug and Jack post, reply, like, love click with the Middleton's SM...

Princess Cassandra · December 22, 2019, 02:41:23 PM

Quote from: amabel on December 19, 2019, 08:17:36 AM
Of course, and if only working royals lived in Royal palaces (a) lots of non royals would be put out from them and (b) someone like Diana, who was left in one of the palace apartments for convenience.. would have to leave.
and when Andrew married I think it was always expected that he would be a full tiem royal worker some day when his Naval days were over and that he and Sarah were part of the RF and it was unthinkable that they and their children should nt have the usual titles. When Edward married.. there were different circumtnaces. I see no reason why Bea and Eugenie should lose their titles.. (or their homes). they haven't done anything wrong

Agree. If you are born a royal princess I don't see how anyone could ever change your title. It isn't something that is given to you, it's just a fact of your birth.

sandy · December 22, 2019, 02:54:24 PM

Titles have been changed in the past.

amabel · December 22, 2019, 03:06:34 PM

Quote from: sandy on December 22, 2019, 02:54:24 PM
Titles have been changed in the past.

very rarely... True in Sweden the Kings taken the HRH from several of his family but I can't see the queen doing that. Why would she wish to take it away from her granddaughters? THey have not done anything to merit losing..it

sandy · December 22, 2019, 03:16:01 PM

I doubt the QUeen will.

amabel · December 22, 2019, 04:44:13 PM

of course she wont, I don't know why anyone would imagine that she would.

LouisFerdinand · December 23, 2019, 12:13:31 AM

I do not believe that Queen Elizabeth II would take away a royal title.

TLLK · December 23, 2019, 03:28:05 PM

Those that are born with a title are not going to lose those however they could choose to voluntarily give them up. On the other hand parents might opt to decline a title that their children would have been granted based upon the Letters Patent 1917 ie: Wessex children Lady Louise and Viscount Sevren (HRH Princess Louise/ HRH Prince James) and Archie (Earl of Dumbarton).

amabel · December 23, 2019, 03:31:17 PM

Quote from: TLLK on December 23, 2019, 03:28:05 PM
Those that are born with a title are not going to lose those however they could choose to voluntarily give them up. On the other hand parents might opt to decline a title that their children would have been granted based upon the Letters Patent 1917 ie: Wessex children Lady Louise and Viscount Sevren (HRH Princess Louise/ HRH Prince James) and Archie (Earl of Dumbarton).

I've always wondered about that. Was it Edward's choice? Or was it to do with the sitatuion In 1999 where the RF was not in the best shape and it was felt that a little bit of "cutting back" was good for their image? Of course there were other issues, such as the fact that Ed ws meant ot become Duke of Ed when Philip went.. and that Ed and Sophie were meant to be only part timers because they had busineses to run.