Royal Round Up: Kate’s Luxembourg itinerary, Beatrice speaks on entrepreneurship

This royal round up features a scheduling update from Kate Middleton, and an interview with Princess Beatrice.

Up first is a scheduling update from Duchess Kate. KP released her schedule for her upcoming Luxembourg trip. At the request of HM’s government, Kate will undertake 5 engagements in Luxembourg on May 11.

On arrival, Kate will visit the Grand Duke Jean Museum of Modern Art (MUDAM) to tour the current exhibitions by British artists Sir Tony Cragg and Darren Almond. At the musuem, Kate will also attend a reception with leading young Luxembourgers in the fields of culture, education, business and the charitable sector.

Kate will then visit Place Clairefontaine, in the center of the capital, to tour a cycling-themed festival, which celebrates the shared UK and Luxembourg passion for the sport. Kate will meet Luxembourg’s most famous cycling icons and children who are designing Tour de France jerseys ahead of the tour coming to Luxembourg in July. Kate will also unveil a mural of British cyclist Tom Simpson and Luxembourg cycling legend Charly Gaul.

The next stop for Kate is a meeting with Grand Duke Henri and Grand Duchess Maria Teresa at the Grand Ducal Palace.

Kate will then join the official commemoration of the 1867 Treaty of London, which confirmed Luxembourg’s independence and neutrality, at Luxembourg City Museum. At the museum, a new collection about Luxembourg’s history will be unveiled. Afterward, Kate and others will be led on a short walk outside the museum to take in the views of the capital on the corniche (viewing trail).

Kate will next continue to Dräi Eechelen Museum for the main commemoration event, where the Prime Minister, Mayor, and Museum Director will speak. Kate will be given a guided tour of ‘Luxembourg 1867 – Open City’, the new exhibition, which explains how the dismantling of Luxembourg’s fortifications laid the foundation for the transformation of Luxembourg into an open and outward-looking city and country.

Princess Beatrice has been out and about this past week, attending various events. On April 21, Beatrice attended the Kairos Society Global Summit At One World Observatory in New York City (above, light blue coat and black dress), where she spoke to Vogue about entrepreneurship.

    “It was a gray day in New York City, but Princess Beatrice, with her red hair and smart trench coat, easily stood out from the crowds. ‘I got involved in Kairos through a really good friend of mine,’ Princess Beatrice says, explaining that she is also very involved in Pitch@Palace, an organization run by her father, Prince Andrew. ‘You have to make it okay to empower young people, and say you have the support, the backing, the ear, and the platform in order to make that change. And I find that incredibly motivating.’
    “What else is at the root of Princess Beatrice’s interest in youth entrepreneurship? ‘I also have a foundation called Big Change, which works on education reform and supports entrepreneurs as well,’ she says. ‘I think we are now living in a period where we need 21st-century education to support technology requirements, and we need to focus on getting young people the tools necessary in order to succeed.’
    “Entrepreneurship in the 21st century is an incredibly stimulating field to work in. ‘I think that what’s really exciting is that there’s no road map, really,’ Princess Beatrice says. ‘You have so many people innovating—and I’m not just talking about disruptive technologies. Right now, I think there’s really a chance to take everything that we’ve learned and educate people to make them be the best that they can be.’
    “Inspiring words, but does Princess Beatrice ever get time to explore New York City? ‘I’m a big fan of the Soho House group,’ she says, when asked about her favorite local spot. ‘It’s a good British brand that’s doing very well in the U.S.!’ True, and therefore yet another example of entrepreneurial success.”

[Vogue]

I think the last time we checked in on Beatrice’s job situation was last summer when the DM reported that she was leaving her job to form her own startup. Apparently now, since November 2016, she is working in NYC as Vice President, Partnerships & Strategy at Afiniti.com, which is a technology company that uses AI to pair customers with employees. Looking at Bea’s CV, she’s been all over the map with her employment. As a fellow History major, yep that sounds about right.

On April 25, Bea attended a VIP dinner celebrating Mrs. Alice for French Sole at The Connaught Hotel in London (above, blue dress). And on April 26 she, along with Princess Eugenie and Sarah, Duchess of York, attended the launch of The Ned, the latest venture from the Soho House group, in London (below, black coat with white bird pattern – it’s from Zara and $149.00). And on April 27, Bea attended the BT Sport Industry Awards at Battersea Evolution in London (second below, black fringe outfit).

I wonder if they get paid to attend these types of events. All three York ladies attend many of these types of events for seemingly no reason.

64 Comments on Royal Round Up: Kate’s Luxembourg itinerary, Beatrice speaks on entrepreneurship

  1. Lovely Blossom
    April 30, 2017 at 12:17 am (5 months ago)

    I’m looking forward to Kate’s Luxembourg visit.I find the royals there quite interesting. I always wonder about Stéphanie. At their wedding, Guillaume and she said that they wanted many, many children.Until now, she was not pregnant.I hope all is right.
    I like that Kate has to do a real tour, visting different interesting places.

    • M from Germany
      April 30, 2017 at 10:17 am (5 months ago)

      I am also concerned about Stephanie’s health as well. Maybe they only found out after te wedding that there was a problem (which I really hope is not the case, she seems to be such a lovely and sweet lady, while a bit shy!)… I read that Stephanie chose to remain a virgin until the wedding bc she is so deeply rooted in her Catholic faith…

      • Lovely Blossom
        April 30, 2017 at 11:02 am (5 months ago)

        Yes, that would be a huge problem for both and the monarchy.They seem to really love each other which makes me sad to think about such unhappy circumstances.I.really hope they are just one of these cases in which it takes long to get pregnant.

        • Laura
          April 30, 2017 at 1:02 pm (5 months ago)

          Is it bad wanting to wait? I was a little shocked that Kate was jealous about her protection officer becoming a mother before her. Couldn’t Kate have just been happy. The days are long gone when Elizabeth of York was expected to have a baby before marriage. The throne was rocky, Henry was seen by some as an usurper etc.

          • Herazeus
            April 30, 2017 at 2:17 pm (5 months ago)

            Henry was a usurper even if he won the battle of bosworth field. He rewrote history to say otherwise.

          • Lovely Blossom
            April 30, 2017 at 2:35 pm (5 months ago)

            They can wait as long as they want in my opinion.The reason why I posted it is, that they both said several times in interviews that they want many children, they love a big family.He has many siblings, she has a lot. They can wait of course, it’s their choice of course, but I don’t think that’s the case here.

      • Sarah
        April 30, 2017 at 2:14 pm (5 months ago)

        It could the husband that has/is the problem…

        • Lovely Blossom
          April 30, 2017 at 2:37 pm (5 months ago)

          True, of course.

        • Laura
          April 30, 2017 at 2:38 pm (5 months ago)

          Lucy Worsley did a series of myths and facts on Royals and showed how the Tudors placed the Red rose everywhere. Even on the twenty pence piece. Some couples are happier without children. In the nicest possible way it is what the couple wants and can change their mind. My dad always wanted kids. My mum didn’t and now just wants my brother.

    • notasugarhere
      May 1, 2017 at 11:48 am (5 months ago)

      She stated outright in their engagement interview that they were going to wait at least three years before trying to start a family. Interesting statement for a “devout Catholic”, but moving on from a religion discussion.

      She’s only 33. If it turned out they couldn’t have children, when and if they try? That would be very sad for them if they personally wanted children, but not a problem for the monarchy. There are plenty of royals to inherit. The 2nd in line, Felix, and his wife have two young children. The throne could pass to them, just as it did in Belgium.

      I’d be more worried about her laziness, which has been discussed for years. She was handed the presidency of the modern art museum, but she’s not a part of this visit at all?

    • Miley
      May 1, 2017 at 1:46 pm (5 months ago)

      I hope Stephanie and her husband are just waiting to enjoy their marriage together before children. It would honestly break my heart that they are struggling, as I am struggling after 1 failed and 1 successful pregnancy. And then I always think of Japan crown Prince and Princess and their pregnancy struggles.

  2. Ellie
    April 30, 2017 at 12:29 am (5 months ago)

    Nice to see Bea out and about. I don’t like Andrew, but his Pitch@Palace and stuff he’s done for people starting up businesses to get them promoted and give them attention and money is a good thing. I wonder if Bea would get more heavily involved with it and encourage young entrepreneurial spirits. Kinda like The Prince’s Trust but more tech oriented? Talking out my butt here. 🙂 It must be odd for her and Eugenie, who have been raised to think they’d have a role later on (thus having the Princess title) to only grow up without one and not know what to do with their lives. Bea seems to have a harder time than Eugenie. They seem like very sweet, kind hearted girls. I like them.

    Bea looks GORGEOUS in that blue dress! So flattering a color and cut on her.

    Seems like some of Kate’s day is basically walking around instead of doing much, I bet that will count as an engagement on the CC. So she’ll just stand around, look pretty or orange in a wrinkled skirt suit like she did in the Netherlands, and otherwise…not much. I mean, I hope it goes well but I just don’t expect much of her, ever.

    • Herazeus
      April 30, 2017 at 6:08 am (5 months ago)

      I agree with everything you’ve written except the frequently repeated misinformation about the girls’ titles. This misinformation is fiction and or public imagination.

      Their title is not tied into whether they are working royals or not. Titles don’t work like that. If they did, most of the aristocracy wouldn’t hold them as the heir would be the only one working for the family and therefore the only one holding a title.

      As grandchildren of a monarch, born in the male line, they are automatically Prince, legally and by right. They also enjoy the HRH style for same reasons – the letters patent 1917 that explicitly sets this criteria are still in force today.

      Edward’s children currently use the title of the children of an Earl, but legally and by right they are also Princes. If they decide to use their full titles, no one should be shocked.

      If Harry has children when HM is still alive, and has accepted a ducal title as we think he will, they will be have the titles given to the children of a duke.

      And once Charles becomes monarch, they will be upgraded to princes because at that point they become the grandchildren of a monarch born of the male line.

      Anne’s kids not having titles is only because they are females and they can’t pass on titles.

      The Queen’s father had to pass a special order to ensure that her children were given prince titles even though they were grandchildren of a monarch AND the Queen was the heir presumptive. As a female, she couldn’t pass any titles to them and if her father hadn’t passed the special order, all her kids would have the titles given to the children of a duke because their father, Philip, was only a duke.

      • Carter
        April 30, 2017 at 8:17 am (5 months ago)

        I have always found the titles of Louise and James interesting. What do you think about the experts that say they are not actually legally entitled to princely status as titles and princely status is solely up to the will and pleasure of the sovereign; therefore, the Queen making her will known (regardless of whether an LP was issued) is enough to strip them of their princely status. Personally, I think the Queen left it deliberately vague.

        On a side note, I fully believe that Edward and Sophie have set a new precedent, and children of younger sons of the monarch will be styled as children of a duke/earl etc, eventually forcing a new LP anyway. I honestly cannot see Harry wanting his children styled as princes when Charles is king. I think he’s going to want them to live as normal a life and out of the spotlight as possible.

      • Lizzie
        April 30, 2017 at 10:40 am (5 months ago)

        So, if James has a son or sons, and they have sons, and so on, will the title of Prince and HRH continue, no matter how many generations pass?

        • Esme
          April 30, 2017 at 11:10 am (5 months ago)

          My understanding is no, because James’s son will not be the grandchild of the monarch (assuming the royal family doesn’t suffer a disaster major enough to get down the depth chart to crown Edward.)

        • Herazeus
          April 30, 2017 at 11:56 am (5 months ago)

          In a word,nNo.

          The 1917 letters patent restrict HRH/ prince style and title to children and grandchildren of monarchs.

          That was extended to include the children of the eldest son of the POW.

          They do not extend further than that, and can not be inherited beyond that generation for qualifying princes.

          To be clear, out of the current generation of grandchildren, only William, Harry and James can pass any titles to their children as they are males and the law is restricted to males.

          However, James’s children can not be HRH/Princes because they are beyond the generational criteria.

          * Harry’s children will qualify once Charles becomes King, BUT if he never becomes king, then Harry’s children will also miss out because they won’t fit the generational criteria.

          Of the current generation of great-grandchildren, only George’s children will inherit HRH/ princes style. Primarily because he is male and a future monarch, plus his father AND grandfather will be monarchs.

          Charlotte, being female, is in the same position as Margaret, Anne, Alexandra, Beatrice, Eugenie and Louise in being unable to pass titles to any of her children.

          The future of James and his children can be seen with the Kents and the Gloucesters.

          They are grandchildren of George V. They are all HRH/Princes even if they are better known by their ducal titles.

          Further, Prince Michael wasn’t raised with expectation that he would work for the royal family even though the perks were fully extended to him.

          With exception of their heirs who use father’s secondary titles, all the Kent/Gloucester children have the Lord/Lady style of a duke. Ditto the grandchildren *fathered by the heirs to the ducal title.

          *Eldest son of a Duke is an Earl and their kids are also Lord/Lady.

          With regards Edward and Sophie, you have to remember that the royal family was deeply unpopular in the 90s. The way ahead group was created to figure out ways to make them popular and relatable. Media friendly pronouncements were made and occassionally changes were implemented.

          What is more interesting is whether legal moves are made to follow the pronouncements. Edward and Sophie’s children are addressed as children of an Earl, but their HRH/princes style has never been legally removed. It’s not enough for HM to let her will be known. She has to ratify her will in parliament. Eg she made the Previous Duchess of Gloucester a princess, but didn’t ratify it in parliament which means Princess Alice wasn’t a princess of the UK despite HM’s will. When she made Philip a British Prince, it was ratified by parliament which makes him a British Prince of the UK.

          Overall, if the monarch doesn’t indulge in a large family eg 15 kids by George 3 or 9 kids by Victoria, then there is a natural limit to the number of HRH/princelings running around the UK, and generationally, they are culled after the grandchildren stage as well as being born of female line at the child/grandchild stage.

          • Lizzie
            April 30, 2017 at 12:54 pm (5 months ago)

            Thank you Esme and Herazeus for the explanations. Just wondering about Princess Alice: Did HM not present the title of Princess to parliament for ratification or did parliament vote against ratification? If voted down, why? And do all new titles from the Queen have to be approved by parliament? Since many have speculated that the Middletons are hoping to receive some sort of title, if this should ever happen would it also have to be ratified by parliament, or not, since it would only be aristocratic and not within the royal family itself? Love how much I learn on this forum, but I have to admit I find trying to understand the differences in titles–those that are inherited, created or bought–very confusing!

          • Herazeus
            April 30, 2017 at 1:01 pm (5 months ago)

            Lizzie: regarding Princess Alice, title wasn’t ratified by parliament.

            HM doesn’t appear to have presented it to parliament. No one seems to have objected to the use of ‘Princess Alice’ because she was a very strong advocate for charity, but fact remains that she wasn’t a legitimate Princess of the UK in her own right.

            Regarding Middleton titles, parliament would have to ratify any titles William gives them in order to make them legitimate.

            He can’t stamp his feet and it happens.

            Further, we don’t hand out hereditary titles anymore which means if William manages to have Mike enobled, it will be only as a life peer ie title will cease to exist when Mike dies.

            Yet, as risible and venal as the current peerage system is, no one has yet been granted one for marriage or birthing the future Queen Consort in the modern era.

            People granted titles try to have a record of service to the crown and or charity works. The Middletons haven’t contributed anything to the crown or to charity that warrants titles and i think claiming kinship to the future monarchs will be stretching it too far.

          • Sarah
            April 30, 2017 at 2:19 pm (5 months ago)

            I know it will never happen but I think it would be smart for Harry’s wife (and kids) not to automatically get the HRH and just be duchess——-
            The fewer HRH’s going around the better, especially since his kids should be out in the general workforce. Or do what Edward and Sophie do with their kids.

          • Herazeus
            April 30, 2017 at 2:46 pm (5 months ago)

            Sarah….but why would you want a morganatic marriage for Harry’s wife and the subsequent lack of status for his kids?

            His wife not becoming an HRH makes her a visible, daily reminder that she is of lesser status.

            It would create difficulty in social situations of the kind that forced Charles of finally marry Camilla.

            She (and the kids) would be pushed completely to the back of the room like a bad smell and something Harry is ashamed of. They couldn’t stand next to him because they wouldn’t be of sufficient rank.

          • Sarah
            April 30, 2017 at 3:09 pm (5 months ago)

            For the same reason I don’t think Sofia of Sweden should have automatically gotten the HRH. And as much I like the kids there will be 6 kids in a small country with HRH titles. Times change and their kids (unless just live off inheritance) should be out working and the HRH seems to impede that to some extent.
            How many state dinners/functions does Harry attend now? I can’t see William wanting him to attend many in the future.

          • Herazeus
            April 30, 2017 at 4:25 pm (5 months ago)

            Sarah: their second class status wouldn’t be limited to public events.

            It would extend to every occassion that involved all other members of the royal family, private and public.

            That HRH/prince style is not just about public events.

            It’s complete loss or lack of status is the reason Diana had a hissyfit after voluntarily giving it up. The royal club doesn’t stop recognising status in private.

            Further, the govt wouldn’t justify the perks extended to the family if they were private citizens eg the need to give the wife and kids security and have them live in either secure compounds or in palaces.

            Harry would have to renounce his own status such that he doesn’t have his wife and kids reduced or treated differently.

            And if you think it isn’t a big deal, it forced Charles to marry Camilla in order for their friends to have them sit together at gatherings!!!

            Not because Camilla was a mistress or a dirty secret, but because as a commoner, she couldn’t be seated next to Charles at functions that involved other aristos.

          • Kitty
            April 30, 2017 at 5:03 pm (5 months ago)

            I think The Queen will change the LP for Harry’s kids.

      • Bunnyette
        April 30, 2017 at 12:00 pm (5 months ago)

        Anne has 1 son & 1 daughter. They don’t have titles because she decided not to give them titles.

        • Herazeus
          April 30, 2017 at 12:19 pm (5 months ago)

          Anne, being female, can’t pass on titles. She married a man without title therefore her kids don’t have titles.

          Rule 101 about titles: *Females cannot pass on titles.

          Only males can pass on titles.

          If a titled female marries a male without title, their children will have their father’s title meaning no titles eg Anne and Alexandra.

          If a titled/untitled female marries a titled male, their children will carry the male’s title eg Margaret.

          *In history, only 2 females have inherited and passed on titles and in both cases, a special order was granted by Parliament to allow this scenerio because otherwise title would have reverted to the crown. And with each case, the order was written such that the immediate MALE heir of the female’s body would inherit the title.

          The 2 special cases are 2nd Duke of Marlborough and the current Countess of Mountbatten.

          • EL
            April 30, 2017 at 7:24 pm (5 months ago)

            Herazeus, I think most people are confused about the Anne situation because Mark Phillips turned down an earldom on his wedding and the media has repeatedly reported that as “turned down titles” for their children. If Mark Phillips had accepted, Peter and Zara would have had titles, even though they would be of a lesser status.

            P.S. a question, how are Peter and Zara handled then as non-titled members of the RF? Can they not sit next to William let’s say at an event with other aristocrats?

      • Ellie
        April 30, 2017 at 12:48 pm (5 months ago)

        Yes, I’m aware, what I meant more is that I think their parents and certainly THEY expected to be working royals and would have probably be better served by a situation like Louise and James who, correct me if I am wrong, ARE Princess/Prince legally yet choose not to use those titles due to the whole popularity thing of the monarchy in the early 2000s not being so good.

  3. Oz Shan
    April 30, 2017 at 12:51 am (5 months ago)

    I’m sure the Lux RF would rather have had Sophie visit than Kate – Sophie is in a different league to Kate and can hold her own with poise and grace. Kate’s conversation will be limited no doubt – and she probably knows little about Lux and apparently does little to no research ahead of her visits.

    • Cathy
      April 30, 2017 at 1:38 am (5 months ago)

      +1

    • Dolittle
      April 30, 2017 at 9:50 am (5 months ago)

      ++2

      A lot of fun meet greet rather than substance and speaking.

      Countess Wessex would be great, and the Princesses York, who also seem confident in speaking and representing HM/BRF. They also look lovely and appropriate in above photos.

  4. Cathy
    April 30, 2017 at 1:39 am (5 months ago)

    Please please please no wrinkled clothes on Kate during the visit. And make sure her shoes aren’t scuffed either?

    • jenny
      April 30, 2017 at 1:07 pm (5 months ago)

      And, no flashing! Maybe that is all “behind” us. Hope so.

      • Laura
        April 30, 2017 at 2:04 pm (5 months ago)

        hehe Jenny. I hope we don’t. India was bad enough. Has Kate never heard of petticoatsslips.

        • Laura
          April 30, 2017 at 2:22 pm (5 months ago)

          or slips.

        • Cathy
          May 1, 2017 at 1:08 am (5 months ago)

          Has Kate never heard of petticoats slips.

          I wish it was a Pippatips? Like wearing sunglasses to the tennis so you can snooze if the game gets boring and no one will know?

          • mary elizabeth
            May 1, 2017 at 9:57 am (5 months ago)

            Funny, Cathy. Pippa, however, needs a lesson, too. when she flashed her panties at Wimbledon last year, I had to think, “It’s in their genes Or, something like that.”

  5. Nic919
    April 30, 2017 at 5:33 am (5 months ago)

    How much money will she have spent on new clothing for her visit to the museum and walking tour? It’s a joke that this is considered work. It doesn’t even look like she will actually speak at any point. So is standing around tossing the wiglet considered soft diplomacy for Brexit now?

  6. Ann
    April 30, 2017 at 6:11 am (5 months ago)

    Very similar to the Netherlands – art museum, young people, meet very briefly with royalty. All she needs is her next solo trip to be Belgium and she’ll have completed the BeNeLux. I actually think it’s nice how the palace is having her start her solo visits with small countries so close to home – they really have bent over backwards to be accommodating to her and her family, in my opinion. Even the big international tours have been publicized as Kate’s dream spot (India), chosen location (Prince Edward Island) or family friendly locale (inconviently flying every day from Victoria).

    • Kitty
      April 30, 2017 at 9:28 am (5 months ago)

      The monarchy will be at its worse once The Queen passes.

      • Dolittle
        April 30, 2017 at 9:57 am (5 months ago)

        … after King Charles! if King Henry is not the successor.

        Without the POW – Brexit is in even more trouble with the useless lazy Willnot and co..

      • Jessica
        April 30, 2017 at 10:05 am (5 months ago)

        I think Charles unpopularity is overestimated. I think it’ll be fine and no one will cause a big ruckus. The BRF is a symbol of nationalism and heritage in a time of increased nationalism and anti-globalization sentiment in Europe. King Charles will be alright and so will Prince William, Prince of Wales.

        • Dolittle
          April 30, 2017 at 11:49 am (5 months ago)

          +100

          to think anyone even breathe that Willnot middelton the henparty decoy prince – should be the next after HM – his wife of 6 years cannot make represent HM GB on a foreign trip without her hands held/no duties to the people, give a speech, dress decent and appropriate,/as a royal people representative, who fund her and parents entitled lifestyle – what fake middelton PR….!

          Whiny is NOT HM heir – there are TWO other sons after POW- without a King Charles there is NO bill middelton the heir . Fingers and toes cross we get King Henry Line above middeltons!!

        • Ellie
          April 30, 2017 at 12:52 pm (5 months ago)

          I doubt he monarchy will be in as dire straits as post-Diana when the hysteria of her death caused the monarchy to become so unpopular.

          The monarchy isn’t going anywhere. It is so entrenched in political life, in culture, in history, in everything, removing it would require a civil war of some kind just like in the 1600s.

          • Kitty
            April 30, 2017 at 5:04 pm (5 months ago)

            A lot of people are predicting it will end once The Queen passes.

  7. Lizzie
    April 30, 2017 at 10:43 am (5 months ago)

    Will be interesting to see how many KP and BP staff and officials are required to prop Kate up on this day-long, “solo” tour.

  8. MavenTheFirst
    April 30, 2017 at 11:44 am (5 months ago)

    I don’t understand the point of Kate’s trip except for new clothes and PR. Again, it’s fluffy and passive. Nice little freebie holiday for her seeing the sights, with everything taken care of for her.

    Beatrice looks really great.

    “Right now, I think there’s really a chance to take everything that we’ve learned and educate people to make them be the best that they can be.”

    Meh, more pie in the sky glib phrases. I’m not understanding Beatrice’s expertise in this respect. I do remember that she wanted to be an inspirational life speaker and that got wiped away on a speakers’ website ( I found the thought of her as a life coach hilarious); she also wanted to be a meet and greeter for money. She seems feckless as well and I’m not sure what she’s really qualified to do other than be a princess.

    • Herazeus
      April 30, 2017 at 12:29 pm (5 months ago)

      If she was paying attention to her ex-boyfriend, and learning, then she has alot to say. He worked her connections to raise funding for virgin galactic and was the reason she appeared to be on endless holidays because he used her as bait with the famous and wealthy.

  9. Laura
    April 30, 2017 at 2:03 pm (5 months ago)

    So Lady Louise and Viscount Seven James are legally Princess Louise and Prince James? I think Anne had the right idea not giving her children titles but if they are entitled I see no reason why they should not use them.

    I have to say the dresses Beatrice is wearing along with the purple dress with the boots from a few days ago I would totally wear. Beatrice can be so confident when she wants to be and seeing Eugenie and her mum together is such a warm feeling. Though I suspect with her boyfriend , Eugenie is wishing she was with him. I like that Beatrice is carving a career for herself but I didn’t think it would be in business.

    I agree. Sophie would make a better choice to go to Luxembourg. Sophie has substance. I don’t even know what Kate would discuss. This is where Kate’s prep is key.

    Thank you for the roundup KMR.

    • Herazeus
      April 30, 2017 at 2:51 pm (5 months ago)

      Yes, Louise and James are legally HRH Princess Louise of Wessex and HRH Prince James of Wessex.

      Anne didn’t choose not to give her kids titles. Females cannot inherit OR pass on titles.

      Anne married a man who didn’t have a title. The children follow the man which means the children have no title.

      Legally, Anne’s children have no right to titles via their parents and more importantly as a direct result of their father having no titles.

      Comparatively, Margaret’s children have titles because she married the Earl of Snowden. Therefore her children hold titles that flow from their father.

      Another clear example is Diana and her sisters. 2 married men without titles, one married a man with a title. Diana’s kids have titles whilst her sisters’ kids do not.

      • IDA
        May 1, 2017 at 4:27 am (5 months ago)

        Anthony Armstrong-Jones was given the title Earl of Snowdon by the Queen upon his marriage to Princess Margaret. He wasn’t a titled man before his marriage. I thought when the Duke of Edinburgh dies, Prince Edward will inherit his title & so Sophie will become the Duchess of Edinburgh ( the Queen’s previous title before ascending the throne) & James will become the earl of Wessex & Louise will get some new title ( or not).

  10. Sarah
    April 30, 2017 at 2:26 pm (5 months ago)

    I’ve never been to Luxembourg so I’m jealous of all of Kate’s
    Private museum tours =) haha I love how part of the agenda is walk out the museum and take in the views of the city!! Does that count on the cc?! Nice work if you can get it.
    Who sets the agenda when a Royal visits? The British side or country they visit?
    I love how Bea’s had what 6 jobs (and none very long) yet all that experience equates to a VP position in new job

    • Jen
      April 30, 2017 at 7:24 pm (5 months ago)

      Seeing the York girls trying to negotiate the huge divide between royalty (unearned privilege) and normal work (accountability) would give Edward and Sophie pause for thought if they are raising their children to navigate the world as private citizens. Titles can be millstones. The model example of extricating herself from such a millstone would be Sarah Chatto who has cultivated her talents, enjoys a stable marriage, conducts herself with dignity but does not publicly flaunt her family status.

      In one way, I feel for B & E if they have been unequivocally told that they would be ‘working royals’, although when circumstances change, they need to be resilient enough to steer their lives differently. However, the gulf is huge between unfettered privilege and consistent work in the ‘real’ world. My takeaway from all that has been written is that the York’s are clinging to the idea of being working royals – hence, their patronages, attending functions etc – because that is what they want and feel is their right. And what their parents want. But it sits uneasily with the everyday grind of paid employment, being consistently accountable etc; up till now, Bea has had difficulty in balancing the two parts of her life. Not to raise the ire of her defenders but the perception is one of a dilettante; neither one thing nor the other. It’s eye-raising that after several intern jobs (usual these days) and one or two entry-level jobs she would have the necessary depth of experience to rise to a VP in just a few years, even if taking careful notes from her ex-boyfriend. I found her statements about youth entrepreneurship woolly; nominating Soho House as a great example – ugh! Really? Is a poncy private club the best she can think of? Definitely off-message given the projects supported by her foundation. No young social entrepreneurs in the UK with barely two beans to rub together who nevertheless impact positively on people’s lives?

      • Herazeus
        April 30, 2017 at 9:38 pm (5 months ago)

        I read her mention of Soho house as a joke that helped her side step a potential trap of a royal promoting an American business. By mentioning Soho House, she kills 2 birds with one stone even if a soho house mention emphasises her privilege.

      • Red Tulip
        April 30, 2017 at 11:28 pm (5 months ago)

        There are a lot of York sisters defenders here so I usually don’t say anything. I generally find them as useless as William and Kate. And I’m sorry but Beatrice is rather funny looking. The BRF are definitely not the “Easy on the eyes” bunch unlike the Swedish, Bhutanese and the Spanish royals.

        • Jen
          May 1, 2017 at 1:19 am (5 months ago)

          The question is, are they (or any of the minor family members) needed for core royal work? And what should that comprise, apart from the monarch’s constitutional function? The charity work has been a relatively recent device to remain visible and appear relevant, but is it core? Ultimately, that’s up to Britons to decide what they’re prepared to fund.

          My observation, for what it’s worth, is that the sisters would have been better steered to construct careers and lives independent of the family business much earlier on in life. Clearly not everyone can have a publicly supported role.

          • notasugarhere
            May 1, 2017 at 5:29 pm (5 months ago)

            It is the bread and butter engagements that keep them in their jobs. Stop doing those, the rural, Home Counties support of them drops dramatically. 3000 engagements a year are currently done. Do you honestly expect W&K to ever do 500+ each, which would be their fair share?

            I think the pushing aside of the Yorks is a more recent development, that they were raised with everyone (themselves included) thinking they’d being doing the Alexandra, Gloucesters, Duke of Kent roles.

            Beatrice especially (but also Eugenie) are hampered by Counsellors of State. It is likely that one or both of them will end up in those roles, which conflicts with moving abroad and limits what careers they can undertake (accusations of favoritism, businesses influencing the Crown through them).

            https://www.royal.uk/counsellors-state

            They’re neither fish nor fowl. It would make more sense for them (esp Beatrice) to be working royals for the next 15-20 years, then retire from royal work when W&K’s kids start royal engagements.

      • Dolittle
        May 1, 2017 at 12:07 pm (5 months ago)

        It’s a total contradiction and fakery to have any member of HM immediate RF not be demanded to perform duties/serve on boards – work to give back to the people of GB CW. This includes P’ess R Philips children/Princess Margaret’s. The older Royals – Kents, Gloucester, P Alexandra continues their noble service and the young 20s onward should be doing the same.

        The POW Line especially, should be ordered to carry out the most for all the RF Lines since they gain the greatest benefits, entitlement of taxpayers/Duchy hundreds of millions…(next to the monarch)- Prince Henry Line will no doubt involve his family kids early ( as the SRF) -any marry in refuse duties, should be removed within 5 years! Chutney should be performing serious duties serving, rather than waste of taking pictures/drawing middelton kids.

        ALL benefit as member of the Monarch RF, status, entitlements, personal projects monetary gains (corruption) as a RF – and should be serving GB UK CW. QM QEl (even duty bound Di) must be spinning in their graves.

  11. porcupette
    April 30, 2017 at 4:38 pm (5 months ago)

    “Kate will be given a guided tour of ‘Luxembourg 1867 – Open City’, the new exhibition, which explains how the dismantling of Luxembourg’s fortifications laid the foundation for the transformation of Luxembourg into an open and outward-looking city and country.”

    Who knew Luxembourg had a sense of humour? And Kim il May’s Foreign Office arranged this tour to pimp Brexit Britain?

  12. porcupette
    April 30, 2017 at 5:01 pm (5 months ago)

    Getting played by Luxembourg? The Platonic form of lame.

    Britain: not waving but drowning in the great lake of fail

    Because of a Tory prank.

    Lord help the world.

  13. Sue
    April 30, 2017 at 7:44 pm (5 months ago)

    This may be a dumb question but I am going to ask anyway. Has there been any mention of royals from other countries attending the Luxembourg anniversary? I haven’t seen any mention of them but it would seem that there should be some others going. If there are other royals, is Kate going to be able to remember who she needs to curtsey to? For the life of me, I can’t understand why the UK is sending her.

    • Stephanie
      May 1, 2017 at 2:54 am (5 months ago)

      She’s never going to get better at the job if she doesn’t practice.

  14. mary elizabeth
    May 1, 2017 at 10:01 am (5 months ago)

    What an easy, breezy itinerary for Kate. Should be a piece of cake. However, if she looks as out of sorts as she did when visiting The Neteherlands solo, this could be painful to watch.

    I so wish she would prepare for her visits. Know things about the places and people she is meeting/seeing. Show a bit of confidence when she walks into a room, or is photographed. I am sure she is a nervous wreck over this. She needs help, KP. Ger her some.