I hope at least the Royals will wear what is the traditional outfit for them so if the Duke and Duchess of Sussex are to attend i do expect her to wear a tiara. If she does not own one herself she might be loaned her wedding tiara again. She could of course opt to loan one from a jeweller but it might be seen as slightly tacky for someone considered wealthy enough to outright own one. Even though she was never given one and most likely did not inherit one. Diana only wore two tiara's and we know that the Spencer tiara remained with her family and was only on loan to her and the lovers' knot tiara is with Catherine.
Harry and Meghan will have to attend if they are invited and luckily for them it seems only the Prince of Wales will have to swear an oath of alliance (otherwise things might have become tricky for Harry and Andrew).
The Sussex' will probably sit with Andrew, Sarah and their daughters and sons-in-law either in the rows behind or further away from the working Royals. A similar approach was seen at the Jubilee celebrations.
Meghan like Sarah will be the most predictable in what tiara they'll wear. It's going to be much more interesting to see what jewels the other ladies of the family will wear.
Has Catherine been given more pieces? Will she get another grander tiara for the coronation? What about Anne? Will we see that double meander diamond tiara only worn once by her for a Chinese State Visit? Will Edward have become Duke of Edinburgh before the coronation and will Charles give the new Duchess a grander tiara to use? What tiara will Lady Louise wear? The Lozenge tiara or the Cartier halo tiara might be good options for her. Zara will probably wear one of her mother's tiara's. Beatrice and Eugenie might get another loan from uncle Charles or possibly they may own their own pieces by now.
The Duke of Gloucester has enough pieces for his wife, daughter-in-law and daughters to all shine at the coronation.
The Duke of Kent has only a one tiara left if im correct so the other ladies of his family will need to find access to other tiara's.
Princess Michael of Kent has two tiara's but we've seen her use brooches clustered together as a tiara. So that might be what either her daughter or daughter-in-law might wear.
Princess Alexandra of Kent has her own tiara and i don't expect any women of her line to wear a tiara.
Queen Camilla's daughter and sister will no doubt wear tiara's. There is the Shand tiara and Camilla owns more pieces so we don't know what they'll wear.
Previous Message
If all peeresses wear a tiara - why should not the Duchess of Sussex? But this long - I do not think we know anything about what attire is being worn...?
I am curious if she will wear the purple robe and coronet of a Princess of The UK. I’m curious if any of them except maybe Anne and Catherine do.
I also have this fear that Meghan will opt to wear an American or French designer’s red-carpet style gown (for publicity and reimbursement) instead of promoting British fashion, and that causing commotion. Honestly, I do wish she would stay home I think this is going to be a bad showing for her no matter what she does.
According to his book, Meghan was offered and accepted the Spencer tiara for her wedding so she could have access to their spare tiara. I assume that the Spencer’s will be invited as relatives of the future king.
I find it very hard to believe that Earl Spencer offered the Spencer tiara to Meghan for her wedding. That would have been rather inappropriate as she is not a member of the Spencer family, nor will she ever become one but Meghan seems to be oblivious of any sensitivities aside from her own and those are plentiful.
Earl Spencer recently said in an interview that he does not expect to get an invitation because of the limited available seating and he is not an hereditary peer in the House of Lords. But he did say he had a coronet lying around (in the attic) somewhere...
Previous Message
According to his book, Meghan was offered and accepted the Spencer tiara for her wedding so she could have access to their spare tiara. I assume that the Spencer’s will be invited as relatives of the future king.
one can imagine it must be such an ordeal right now making the guest list, which was probably an ordeal even in 1953 when they squeezed hundreds or thousands more spectators in via temporary (and potentially dangerous) seating galleries. Two thousand seats isn’t much when one has to consider all the sovereign nations in the world (except N Korea) who might want to send a representative, plus all the Commonwealth officials who probably expect to be able to attend. Then there are all Queen Elizabeth’s cousins and their descendants, and all the German houses of Prince Philip’s sisters, which of course even several generations later probably expect to attend.
Previous Message
I find it very hard to believe that Earl Spencer offered the Spencer tiara to Meghan for her wedding. That would have been rather inappropriate as she is not a member of the Spencer family, nor will she ever become one but Meghan seems to be oblivious of any sensitivities aside from her own and those are plentiful.
Earl Spencer recently said in an interview that he does not expect to get an invitation because of the limited available seating and he is not an hereditary peer in the House of Lords. But he did say he had a coronet lying around (in the attic) somewhere...
Previous Message
According to his book, Meghan was offered and accepted the Spencer tiara for her wedding so she could have access to their spare tiara. I assume that the Spencer’s will be invited as relatives of the future king.
Indeed quite a challenge! But I don't think distant (German) relatives will be on the guest list to be frank. You have to stop somewhere. I believe Charles wants people present that represent the numerous charities and organisations that actually make a difference in the UK and throughout the commonwealth. That will of course limited the number of jewels greatly but that's how it is.
Previous Message
one can imagine it must be such an ordeal right now making the guest list, which was probably an ordeal even in 1953 when they squeezed hundreds or thousands more spectators in via temporary (and potentially dangerous) seating galleries. Two thousand seats isn’t much when one has to consider all the sovereign nations in the world (except N Korea) who might want to send a representative, plus all the Commonwealth officials who probably expect to be able to attend. Then there are all Queen Elizabeth’s cousins and their descendants, and all the German houses of Prince Philip’s sisters, which of course even several generations later probably expect to attend.
Previous Message
I find it very hard to believe that Earl Spencer offered the Spencer tiara to Meghan for her wedding. That would have been rather inappropriate as she is not a member of the Spencer family, nor will she ever become one but Meghan seems to be oblivious of any sensitivities aside from her own and those are plentiful.
Earl Spencer recently said in an interview that he does not expect to get an invitation because of the limited available seating and he is not an hereditary peer in the House of Lords. But he did say he had a coronet lying around (in the attic) somewhere...
Previous Message
According to his book, Meghan was offered and accepted the Spencer tiara for her wedding so she could have access to their spare tiara. I assume that the Spencer’s will be invited as relatives of the future king.
Philip's family were so well represented at the coronation as a "make up" for being excluded from the wedding. The majority of the guests in that section of the Abbey were members of the British royal family, including distant Cambridge and Fife cousins.
Harry wrote that it was Lady Sarah who offered it, I presume on behalf of the entire family. It was worn at her wedding by one of Lady Sarah’s two daughters, who is a niece of Lord Spencer, since Harry is a nephew it makes sense that he too would have equal access.
No it does not make sense. Lady Sarah asked her brother to loan the Spencer tiara to HER daughter. In this case it would have been for the WIFE of his nephew. She is NOT related to the Spencer family.
Previous Message
Harry wrote that it was Lady Sarah who offered it, I presume on behalf of the entire family. It was worn at her wedding by one of Lady Sarah’s two daughters, who is a niece of Lord Spencer, since Harry is a nephew it makes sense that he too would have equal access.
did Lady Sarah’s daughter wear the Spencer tiara associated with Diana, Princess of Wales’ wedding? Or the other tiara, with the Greek key bandeau and fleur lys elements?
Previous Message
No it does not make sense. Lady Sarah asked her brother to loan the Spencer tiara to HER daughter. In this case it would have been for the WIFE of his nephew. She is NOT related to the Spencer family.
Previous Message
Harry wrote that it was Lady Sarah who offered it, I presume on behalf of the entire family. It was worn at her wedding by one of Lady Sarah’s two daughters, who is a niece of Lord Spencer, since Harry is a nephew it makes sense that he too would have equal access.
on March 6, 2023, 11:28 am
Previous Message
