Royal Round Up: Harry takes a selfie, Eugenie hosts the Beckhams, Victoria dons tiara for wedding

Royal Round Up: Harry takes a selfie, Eugenie hosts the Beckhams, Victoria dons tiara for wedding

Here’s a royal round up of some stuff that’s happened the last few days. Prince Harry was spotted taking a selfie after he told everyone to put down their phones. Princess Eugenie attended Harper Beckham’s 6th birthday part which was held at Buckingham Palace for some reason. And there were a couple tiara-filled weddings recently, including one at which Crown Princess Victoria was a guest.

I’m only including this article about Prince Harry because there are a bunch of photos of Harry taking a selfie and looking at his phone while at the British Summer Time Festival in Hyde Park on Saturday night even though he totally hates selfies and thinks we should all stop looking at our phones. You can see the photos here.

A post shared by David Beckham (@davidbeckham) on

This next story is one big WTF? David and Victoria Beckham‘s daughter Harper had her 6th birthday party at Buckingham Palace in Prince Andrew‘s private apartments, and was attended by Andrew, Princess Eugenie, and Sarah Ferguson because apparently the Yorks will attend anything.

This was a private event, the costs of which were covered by Andrew personally, and not paid for by the royal family expense and this was not a situation where the Beckhams rented out BP – which one cannot do, unlike Hampton Court and Kensington Palace, both of which can be rented out for parties. Although, then you have to wonder where Andrew’s “private” money came from, because he gets a stipend from the Queen which comes from the money the Queen gets from the government to run his office and do his engagements and such.

From ITV:

    “A spokesman for Buckingham Palace, who referred to the event as a ‘tea’, told ITV News that this was a private engagement. Members of the Royal Family who live at Buckingham Palace – by which the official meant Prince Andrew – are entitled to invite people to the grounds in a private capacity. The official was also very clear that any refreshments that were made available to the Beckhams for this ‘tea’ were paid for privately – not from Royal Family expenses.”

Of course, the Beckhams being the Beckhams posted all sorts of pics from the party to social media (including the above pic with Eugenie) even though this was supposed to be a private “let’s not let anyone know we’re throwing a celeb’s child’s birthday party at BP” type of event.

From the Daily Mail:

    “Sources close to the Duchess of York insisted it was a ‘family’ event, with the invitation being extended by the whole of the York family. ‘Members of the Royal Family often invite friends for tea at the palace and the Beckhams are family friends. This was a treat for Harper and some of her friends,’ the source said. However, they admitted that the Beckhams’ decision to publish photos had not gone down well. ‘It was very indiscreet for them to have posted pictures on a public forum of what was a private family event,’ they said.”

Do you know who you invited!! You don’t invite the Beckhams to a party and expect them to keep that ish quite.

Funnily, David Beckham tried to splain it away, posting another pic to Instagram with the caption:

    “Just to be clear this wasn’t the palace opening the gates for Harper’s birthday party , this was a tea party where us and other guests were invited so it was a beautiful thing to do with My mum , Harper plus a few school friends… We were honored to be able to there… Beautiful tea party.”

What? This wasn’t the palace opening the gates for a celeb’s child’s birthday party… it’s just that the gates to the palace were miraculously opened for a celeb’s child’s birthday party? I’m side-eyeing the ish out of this.

There was a royal-ish wedding on Saturday, July 8, when Hereditary Prince Ernst August of Hanover married Ekaterina Malysheva in Hanover, Germany. The bride wore a dress by Sandra Mansour made of Chantilly lace and rhinestone embellishment and the diamond Hanover Floral Tiara.

The dress is very old-school fairy tale princess. It’s not my taste, but it’s quite beautiful in it’s own way.

Some Casiraghis – who are step-siblings due to their mother, Princess Caroline, marrying Ernst August’s father – were there, including Pierre Casiraghi, Beatrice Borromeo, and Charlotte Casiraghi.

King Carl XVI Gustaf, Queen Silvia, and Crown Princess Victoria attended the wedding of Astrid Bernadotte to Marquees Filippo Bruti Liberati in Florence yesterday. Carl Gustaf is the bride’s godfather.

While the bride wore a traditional Swedish bridal crown which was also worn by her grandmother at her wedding, Silvia and Victoria got in on the tiara action bringing out the Amethyst Tiara for Silvia and the Steel Cut Bandeau Tiara for Victoria. I just love it when we get surprise tiara appearances.

97 thoughts on “Royal Round Up: Harry takes a selfie, Eugenie hosts the Beckhams, Victoria dons tiara for wedding

  1. The least said about the tea party the better. I hope when Charles is King he really shakes things up and puts a stop to this nonsense. Aligning yourself with grasping celebrities who have criticised the honours system is not good. Love the wedding dress, it suits her perfectly and lovely to see the gorgeous tiaras.

    1. I hope when Charles takes over he puts Andrew out to pasture. Reading how he’s going to be doing things with the Spanish state visit, I had to shake my head and think really? Who wants to have him doing engagements?!

      1. The Queen, sadly, she seems to have a blindspot when it comes to Prince Andrew. He was promoted to Vice Admiral in the middle of the Jeffrey Epstein controversy, the sale of Sunninghill was very dodgy, his links to Kazakhstan, the Gaddafis, Ben Ali, his appearance in the wikileaks diplomatic cables… each would be enough for a slap on the wrist in any normal family, but his behaviour has always been condoned (implicitly if not explicitly) by the royals.

        I really wonder where the York money comes from. Andrew lives at the Royal Lodge rent free (I believe) and receives a nice stipend from the queen, but how that stretches to cover Fergie’s expenses, his daughter’s couture and a £13 million ski lodge is mysterious, at best.

        1. I’d imagine the Queen Mum had quite a bit of money to put away in trusts for not only her grandkids but Andrew, Edward, and Anne as well…

          So tacky. Not surprising coming from Fergie–and HM does still adore her.

          Re: the state visit HM seems to delegate according to your experience, rather than your actual rank in the family, thus Andrew is far, far more experienced at this kind of thing than, say, William (who as rumor has it has refused to do sh*t when HM has told him, and she just accepts this). Also Andrew has done a lot of stuff with Pitch@Palace, business and so on; some good, most super shady, but he gets to do it because he’s HM’s favorite, pedophilia or not. (Since he probably slept with underage girls–teenagers, but still. Gross.)

          1. Even though the Windsor’s have been left substantial funds from the QM, it appears they still prefer to use public money first rather than their own.

        2. The Beckham’s PR woman, also representing royal adjacent Pippa, really does have her work cut out for her. The birthday party story is already starting to change. On one hand, it was a private tea for Harper with her five friends, grandmother and father; on the other, it was a tea party for six children, all from different schools, of which Harper, happily and co-incidentally, was one. It’s not a birthday treat/party for Harper but an afternoon tea, fortuitously and again co-incidentally, a couple of days away from her real birthday.

          It all devolves to the need to flaunt one’s importance to the world at large – in this instance, royal adjacency – however dressed up it is as being a good parent. I wonder, is anything private for the Beckham’s or is everything a potential marketing opportunity, including private family celebrations? As for the York’s, I don’t wonder at all where ‘their’ money comes from; it’s from those mugs with bottomless pockets, aka the British taxpayer, paying for their lifestyle, couture, etc via the Queen’s ‘stipends’.

          1. Scroungers, the lot of them, living off others. This York dealy is shady as hell (£££)- they are consistent that way. The Beckhams are not much better- scrounging up royal favours here and there. Someone’s still bucking for knighthood mayhaps? He’ll be buying one through the queen’s fave boy, Andy, I’m sure (£££).

            Meanwhile, BP lies to us, the queen lies to us, everyone lies to us while these paragons of royal virtue, the BRF, hoard their filthy lucre like the true misers they are and are greedy for more (Charles and Duchy). They are the very definition of ‘common’.

        3. He did have the $$ from the sketchy sale of his house but I’m sure that’s long gone. Don’t forget he has to pay for his daughter’s security which can’t be cheap. Unless he’s somehow talked the Queen into paying for it.
          My theory as why he and fergie got the chalet together is out of the two, she can accept things now so someone else “gifted” her or what have you (paid for) becuase how in the hell did she afford her part?

    2. I think the bride looks lovely and delicate in that first photo. The tiara fits so well with the style.

      Eugenie looks terrific. That dress really suits her.

      1. Totally agree with you about Ekaterina’s wedding gown.Not tacky,flashy,showy,at all considering gowns today.It looked modest as in that it covered her I adore that throwback look in a world of cleavage exposing too much bling and skin tight dresses.She looked just really pretty.The Swedish brides crown like tiara looked,however like a crystal bowl I would keep candy in .

  2. The good-yay appearance of amethyst set?
    The bad-I don’t know really know anything about the Hanovers but yikes! It looks like a 5 yr old cut his hair and could they be any more awkward? She’s holding on to his arm which are just dangling down at his sides?!? Meh okay doesn’t seem like a whole lot of happiness going on there.
    The ugly-the tea party that shouldn’t have happened 1) just gonna say when ever fergie or Andrew is involved you know it’s gonna be shady and did they get something out of this? 2) I would have no problem if bp wanted to help defer the costs of renovations by opening it for rentals. Yes it would mainly be the wealthy that could afford it but it would be more legit than this and the beckhams could actually afford to rent it out. 3) other members may do something like this but obviously their peeps were able to keep it on the down low 4) in what universe did they think something like this would be ok? Bleh
    Happy note can’t wait for Spanish visit to start

    1. Sadly, our German “royals” (we don’t have real royals anymore, the title is just part of the name but they still own a lot of woods and land) have quite a strange taste when it comes to dressing up for weddings. I can’t remember any gown that I really liked in the past ten years.

      1. I’m curious as to why they persist with titles when the German monarchy was abolished? It’s not as if it was a long tradition, 1871-1918.

        1. It is a bit more complicated. Shortly, to abolish a monarchy and forbid the titles can go with separate laws. For example in Hungary is forbidden to use titles, ranks, orders even noble addressing(? , sorry I don’t know the correct English word, that is not my mother language.) In Hungary they abolished the austrian-hungarian monarchy in 1918 and the hungarian kingdom in 1946 and forbade using the noble titles in 1947 (this is because of … well… Iron Curtain… the sovjets…) Behind the Iron curtain the government persecuted, inprisoned, killed, deprived etc. the aristocrats, so of course they prohobited the titles. But in West Germany and West Europe did not broke the noble past ( and people and their property) as the East Block did. So I just wanted to saying even if the Britons vote for republic they would have their princes, dukes etc. just the taxpayers will not pay their life anymore. Well, at least till the government forbid the titles etc. … 🙂

          I love this site. Thanks KMR for this place where I can learn some british history too.

        2. I think if you had titles before, you don’t let them slip so easily.
          Same would go for Great Britain, I guess.The descendants of the British royals would be watched, even without monarchy and would lead a nice life without royal duties.

        3. Saying goodbye to titles is probably hurtful as they are seen as almost a part of your aristocratic or even royal DNA. Just look at the Greek royals.
          And you’ll see the same in France and Italy. These are no longer monarchies, but they have dukes and counts aplenty.
          I have yet to read about a appendicectomy for titles. 🙂 Do you think it would require general anaesthesia?

          The German titles predate the German monarchy, the German Empire, that you are referring to. The different houses ruled different princedoms, dukedoms and kingdoms. These were united in the German Empire under the emperor (German: Kaiser), but most still had their own rulers as well. The House of Hanover – just to pick one – dates back to the 1650’es

          I’m mostly just a lurker here, but every now and then I get up the courage to comment. Have a great day!

          1. Definitely hard to let go. Look at the mediatised royal houses. Even after losing control over their little duchy or principality around 1815, they can still hold on to their titles and be regarded as equals with other royals.
            So the Greek royals are just following in the footsteps of other deposed royals.

          2. The Greek “royals” hanging on to their titles just reeks of dispersion to me. The ex king I could let go but subsequent generations not so much. I think they try and get away with because i think the official title is of Greece and Denmark thus the Denmark part making it somewhat relevant. Still poor judgement. Nothing says desperation like a title to a kingdom you no longer have

        4. Thanks to all for sharing their knowledge. One thing, that is one huge tiara at the Hanover wedding; would it be part of the Hanover diamonds that Queen Victoria was forced to hand over to them?

        5. AnnaH and Mai, thanks so much for sharing your knowledge. I can see why some would be loathe to shed their titles (akin to DNA) although they could also be a prison of sorts in this day ad age.

      1. Oh those pants! Reminds me of when my son refused to try on his tux rental after he picked it up before prom, and we were stuck trying to make temporary alterations minutes before he had to be out the door. Surely there’s no excuse like that for the groom.

  3. *Le Sigh

    Sweet to give a party for Harper Beckham at a real palace.

    Oops. very big oops for letting it become public! If it was in Andrew’s private apartment then maybe (?) it’s ok? But it should have remained private, and not be splashed over social media.

    Personally I think this is a great example of Social Media overuse? Wanting to post everything, and I mean everything, as soon as it happens? The flip side, of course, is when kids don’t do anything – they sit in their bedrooms and spend the day on Facebook etc. I know that when I’ve suggested to my friend’s kids that they get outside, or go see a friend, I’ve been told…
    “I can see what my friends are ddoing on facey, or snapchat. I don’t need to go see them”
    “I can see outside online, why do I want to go there?”

    And then there is the seeing a beautiful sunset comment that I left on the last post…

    But getting back to that birthday party? I can understand a parent wanting to grant their kid’s wishes. Every parent does, right? But don’t post everything as it may come back to bite you?

    As for Harry with the phone? Was he taking selfies or was he taking photos of the band? Harry knows but he’s not posting.

    I do feel that Harry was talking about people putting down their phones sometimes and being in the moment, enjoying what is happening around them. I don’t think that Harry meant we should stop using phones altogether, it just came out wrong?

    1. Doesn’t look like a selfie at all to me. Taking a picture of the show is my guess.

      Were I royal I wouldn’t do selfies either. Would take way too much time out of an engagement, for one, and secondly, it’s just about shoving phones in people’s faces instead of engaging with them.

    2. I agree. Full quote: “I read recently that young people check their phones at least 150 times per day – I’m sure we could all be more effective and efficient if we took a moment to process our thoughts rather than rushing from one thing to the next.” Not once did he say people need to put their phones down.

  4. ‘It was very indiscreet for them to have posted pictures on a public forum of what was a private family event,’ they said.”

    What an understatement!!!!!!

    1. I wouldn’t say ‘front and center’. Harry’s just attending one engagement on day 2.

      1. And most likely the state banquest according to various news articles. More front and center than the heir.

  5. Not every thing belongs on social media. I honestly believe the Beckhams, who probably have mutual friends with Prince Andrew asked to visit the palace as a gift for Harper, and it got extended to a private tea party for the family. IF this is what happened, it was a nice gesture from Prince Andrew, but the Beckham’s should have kept it private. They seem really thirsty about getting more fame, more recognition of their status to the point where people are starting to dislike them a lot. They’re also not doing their kids any favours. They should really look at how Beatrice and Eugenie are vilified because of their parents and protect their kids.

    1. I think part of the problem is that Harper was photographed in the quadrangle which is out of bounds even if you go on a tour.

  6. Doesn’t look like a selfie to me or he is just photographing their hats? It looks like a normal picture or even video. He didn’t say “people should put their phones down”. He said: “I read recently that young people check their phones at least 150 times per day – I’m sure we could all be more effective and efficient if we took a moment to process our thoughts rather than rushing from one thing to the next.” Big difference.

    1. Whether he’s taking a selfie or taking a pic of something else is a moot point. His statement wasn’t meant as a positive. When ever you toss out deets like that the negative connotations is inferred.
      Younguns use their phones 150x a day?Boo not those young kids these days glance at their phone at least 150x a day! Yay
      If he had a better speech writer they could have phrased it into a more positive statement or left if our completely

  7. Just contrast that Beckham tea party with the one Princess Madeleine hosted in the Swedish palace. Or with Camilla’s Christmas lunches. I wonder if Charles can get Andrew out of the palace when he inherits? The visit of the Spanish royals should remind BP what can happen when financial shenanigans related to abusing royal privilege are outed.

      1. It’s also WEIRD. It Harper and Eugenie were a similar age, or Bea had a young daughter of a similar age, it would be *slightly* less odd, but I can’t imagine anyone who less deserves exclusive free access to a BP apartment for a party than the Beckhams, or anyone less trustworthy to offer that access than the Yorks

        1. Yes! That’s the off-part! Eugenie isn’t even remotely close to Harper’s age! Heck, her cousin’s cousins (Savannah or Isla Phillps) are closer in age than she or her older sister, Beatrice!

          Something is just off in general. Why involve the Yorks? The Beckhams have been seen with W & H (heck, even attended the wedding in 2011 while pregnant with Harper) but why the Yorks??

        2. Exactly! I love my nieces but hate having to go to the bday parties becuase as an adult sans kids it’s just boring ask get out. At least now the oldest can do swim parties and I get a friend an old friend to come.
          It’s just going to feed the narrative that the girls by extension of their parents are just as bad. Becuase it now make it look like rent a palace rent a princess in the deal

          1. “Rent a princess”–that’s it exactly. And it fits in perfectly with what we’ve seen of the York “girls” at all of these grand openings, launches, etc., recently. They’re for hire. Heck, they might as well now link up with the Middletons and Party Pieces– line up your party plates, party favors and party princess entertainer all in one stop!

          2. I remember how snooty the royal family was about Princess Michael, who was also called a rent-a-princess. Compared to the Yorks, she is the soul of discretion.

        3. I wonder if the Beckhams are helping Bea with her business ambitions. This would be a nice thank you from her parents. You give my kid a treat, I’ll give one to yours.

          1. She would have to have some. She has no problems getting jobs she has a problem maintaining them. There’s that little problem of most jobs like you being there more often than not.

  8. As much as I love defending the York Princesses (and truly believe that their parents genuinely care for one another), I just can’t stick up for this. **face palm**

    Cute idea for Harper but very, very poor executed. I get the Beckhams wanting to give their daughter a “princess tea party” birthday party but why use Buckingham Palace and **why** was Princess Eugenie even there?? They should’ve used a perfectly rent-able palace and not have allowed Prince Andrew and/or Fergie to be involved in this. There is a fine line between being royal and being a celebrity and the Yorks are flirting with it and this situation didn’t help any of them.

    As for Ernest Jr. of Hanover? His hair reminds me of the style boys used to wear when I was 10 years old…..back in 1990. Not even brushed and just sitting on his head. The bride looks very lovely in her gown. Pierre’s wife, Beatrice, looks lovely in her coat and hat/fascinator. Coral pink/salmon is a lovely, summery color and looks good on nearly anyone. Charlotte’s hat (fedora?) is pulled down too low.

    Victoria (and Sylvia and Maddie) know how to wear (and rock) a tiara!

  9. Ekatarina looked beautiful. Just like a princess bride. But,l as Maven said, “Those clown pants” on the groom! NO!!!

    Onto the kids party at the Palace. I agree that a little girl might very well love the idea of having her friends to a tea party at a palace, but all the photos and media coverage! Shame on all! It’s really a sign of the desire for PR and let’s face it, as already noted, the Beckham PR guru also handled — and maybe, still handles — Pippa! Just too much.

    Just why HM has always favored Andrew is beyond me. Perhaps, he was a darling child, but just what does this man do that sheds good light on the world? He seems totally useless, if you ask me. I say that without knowing if indeed he does do any good anywhere.

    1. I think he was the “Band-Aid” baby (so to speak) that helped confirm that the rough patch between HM and PP had been repaired for good. At least, that’s what I’ve heard/read over the years.

      Anybody can confirm or deny this rumor? Thanks! 🙂

      1. There are other rumours about Andrew and why he is a favourite. I think he did come after the Queen and Philip were allegedly estranged.

          1. Not a band-aid baby. Bea is closer to the mark. Andy may or may not be related to PP and that’s why he’s favoured.

  10. Thanks for posting photos of Victoria and Silvia KMR!!! I do wish we had a full length photo of Victoria, from what little I can see here her dress must be stunning!! While the Steel Cut tiara isn’t my favorite it must light weight, comfortable and pretty perfect for a day time wedding.

    1. I agree, Queen Lauri. I am no fan of the Steel Cut. However, the SWF’s hairdressers know how to style hair to make it look magnificent.

    2. I try and try and try to defend the York girls and Sarah. But they make it so darn hard. Sarah cannot seem to stay out of drama. This whole Beckham thing screams of arrogance and the have and the have nots. Whoever does PR for the palace is horrible. They need a grade A spin doctor.

      As far as Harry is concerned, he does have the right to have his own opinions on cell phones/social media. But the pics are a bit ill timed. While his intent might have been well, it had a negative impact to some people.

      I love Silvia’s tiara. It is simply beautiful. The Hanover/Monaco connection is quite intriguing to me.

      Thanks for the review, KMR! I am saving my strength for Leti to descend in London. And for the love of Godiva chocolate, let Felipe still have his beard.

      1. That dress does little for me. Maybe, in a color, but I just don’t like it. I am not a fan of Jenny Packham. I have only seen about two or three of her designs that I thought were spectacular.

  11. I don’t think it’s a selfie, I think it’s a picture of the band, or whatever is in front of him. The camera angle is weird for a selfie, and neither are posing. Not to mention the daily mail pics have the girl walking away for half- so it’s a selfie of him and the back of her hat?

    1. yai its clearly not a selfie KMR subsequtent picture shows his friend girlffriends back to him still holding up the phone.. its more like he was taking picture of the stage..

  12. Andrew and Sarah Ferguson are treading a dangerous path. Buckingham Palace is going to have a £370m re-fit paid for by the tax payer. The Beckhams have not come out well in discussions about tax. Public sector workers are capped at 1% pay rise. The whole thing adds up very badly and reeks of arrogance and folly.

  13. Forgive me, but did anyone else think Eugenie looked like she was a cast member for Little People in that photo? BTW, I loved her dress, but such an odd way to pose with the girls. I guess she wanted to get down to their level, but the photo could have been taken in a better way.
    I have no clue as to which child is Harper. If it was her b’day, I imagined the child with the crown, but since Mum and Dad are so close to Eugenie and her family, one of the kids next to the Princess?

    1. Harper is 3rd from the right, if that helps.

      Yes, Eugenie definitely looks like a cast member for the show Little People, Big World, which is sad because I’m sure that wasn’t her intention. My guess is that she wanted to get at the girls level but I’m sure there are other ways of doing it and, speaking as a shorty myself, I find it a bit insulting whenever someone crouches down to “my level” whenever they talk to me. Thankfully, they rarely do it whenever I get a picture with the person/people.

      1. Glad I am not the only one that thought Eugenie looked like a cast member for that show. Thanks for the heads up as to which child is Harper.

        If you are going to do something like this do it in private and let the children enjoy themselves without the entire event smacking of PR and as already said, “Rent A Princess.”

  14. The Beckhams are just grotesque……no style, no class, no manners. But on the bright side of this scandal that knighthood they so desperately crave looks further out of reach than ever before. If it wasn’t bad enough they were having a party in the Palace the fact that they boasted about it and talked out of school has finally tipped their aspirations over the edge.

    Whoo hooo Queen Letizia is on her way. I am expecting a masterclass in style, grace, manners, compassion and diplomacy.

    1. I just don’t understand why they needed to do it at Buckingham Palace… am I wrong to say that they could have easily rented a castle or palace for the day like they did for their wedding. Or was it just so they could say we had tea party at Buckingham Palace

      1. The kudos of showing off to their friends and their Instagram followers that they’re still in with The Royals after the earlier scandal this year with David would be my guess. Andrew & Fergie have a history of entertaining in Andrew’s private apartments it’s just most of their guests don’t slap the pictures all over social media. But like all things with Andrew and Sarah the question really is how much they charged people for the privilege or what rewards did the special access reap. Those two really are such a liability even still after all these years.

        1. And one of them is Stella McCartney’s daughter and apparently she’s furious. I would be. They all come out of it badly.

  15. Just who thought this was a good idea? In fact, rephrase that. Who thought this was even a possibility in today’s media age? Good grief, a 3yr old could tell you that hosting the Beckhams ‘privately’ in BP was a bad plan. Add in Andrew, Fergie and the current blame game circus and you’ve got a story that will in no way show the Royals in a good light. Add to that Harry’s recent media disasters, the workshy Middletons and the upcoming BP £370m refit (which I don’t think has fully sunk in yet with the British public, too many other distractions) you have to wonder who is running their PR and whether they are really trolling us. Is there no one that can say no? And if not why not? It makes for great newspaper headlines but I really want my monarchy to be better than this.

  16. The Yorks are a cash for access couple. Nothing is done without them getting something back in return. When Fergie was caught in the bribery sting the official line was that Andrew didn’t know what she was up to, but we all know that was garbage. The yorks are a bunch of hustlers who have gotten away with so much crap. I don’t really blame the Beckham’s for this fiasco because for them it’s always been about showing off.

    The Queen has a tendency to bury her head in the sand when it comes to her children, especially Andrew. I have read stories of his lousy character & his bad treatment of staff. Perhaps the queen or her successor charles could learn from their spanish cournterparts. King Felipe wasn’t afraid to send his sister into virtual exile & stripping away her royal privileges when she & her husband were caught up in a corruption scandal. It’s a pity the BRF won’t do the same. They continue to take advantage of grace & favours not realising that we’re living in different times & the public mood is changing.

  17. First things first, Hereditary Prince Ernst August, if you can afford a morning suit, You. Can. Afford. A. Trip. To. A. Tailor. You’re getting married, not attending senior prom. Get that situation straightened out.

    In brighter news, Astrid’s wedding dress is perfection.

    I’m of two minds about Harper’s tea party – on one hand, I do think it was a kind gesture for Andrew to host her and her friends a tea party in his apartments. I’m seeing that aspect of it as a friend doing a favor for another friend. Putting myself in that situation, if I had a daughter who was into princesses and had that offer, I’d most likely accept it to in order to give her a happy day.
    The other side of me finds everyone in this situation tone deaf – the Yorks for giving favors to sycophants without thinking who those sycophants were and how that could backfire on them, and the Beckhams for being so stupid and tone deaf to trumpet this all over social media. Even during the best of times, that’s questionable. The only one who comes out looking okay here is Harper, who I’m sure had a blast.

    I wonder if those cheesy crisps from the WK India Reception were served there as well. 😛

    1. Great comments Quinn!

      I agree with you with your comments about Harper’s party. It was sweet of Andrew to host a little tea party for Harper and her friends at the Palace. It was in Andrew’s private rooms, not in the grand party of BP, so could you say it was like me holding a party at my house? But then it is Buckingham Palace and it is Prince Andrew so of course it would end up being controversial if it got out. And there is DM’s love of stirring up things? In my opinion this is something the Beckhams were silly to post on Social Media. So, that knighthood maybe slipping further away David?

      I’m going to repeat that bit from Harry speech again

      “I read recently that young people check their phones at least 150 times per day – I’m sure we could all be more effective and efficient if we took a moment to process our thoughts rather than rushing from one thing to the next.”

      If the Beckhams (or should I say their PR firm?) had listened to Harry’s speech then maybe they might have taken a moment to process their thoughts rather than rushing from one thing to the next and realized it wasn’t a good idea to post anything? It’s just a thought.

      (It’s not about wanting us to have to put down our phones but wanting us to think before we post)

      1. Good connection with Harry’s speech – he should consider hiring you to make him less clumsy on that point. 😀

        I agree that the DM is doing their part to stir things up, like the good little wasps that they are. I would hope that the Beckhams have learned their lesson from this and lay low for awhile, but given their history, it’s a very faint hope.

    1. Letizia looks lovely.

      William showed for the lunch, but Kate did not. He didn’t go to the ceremonial welcome.

      1. Leti is so gracious, So very lovely!! That smile!!!!

        As for Kate not showing up…. Mmm, what is she running from? A stylish Queen who would show her up? Leti would always be a lady and be warm and kind. But the truth would win out. Leti, a Perfect 10 in all she wears. Kate? Not so much.
        How threatned can one woman be?

        1. Harry didn’t attend the lunch either. Neither did Anne. Lots of royals didn’t. Not a huge deal.

        2. Well, heirs #1 and #2 showed up, so did Camilla, but no Keen Kate. This was the perfect time to informally and warmly welcome the Spanish royals. I guess Kate was too busy being a housewife whereas she could have visibly consolidated her position as future consort. I wonder if she’ll avoid Letizia for the entire visit.

        3. William in video ignoring F&L, unsurprisingly. Any time they have met, he and Kate have blatantly ignored them. Strange considering W&H would go with their parents to holiday with the Spanish royals as kids!

          Kate was probably busy getting extensions and wiglets put in for tonight.

          1. Charles, Camilla, and Edward and Sophie were also “ignoring” Felipe and Letizia same as William in that none of them with with the group Felipe and Letizia were in which was just those two plus HM and Philip. HM, Philip, Felipe, and Letizia walked the room as a group, and the other royals walked the room in different various groups.

    2. Yowza! Letizia looks amazing (and like a queen)! Actually, everyone looks very, very fine. So regal, so classy. Love, love the pomp and circumstance. I’m actually excited. LOL

      Thanks, Mrs BBV.

      1. Ooh I didn’t mean to put the State visit on the thread……just the comment by an eminent historian re. The Beckham birthday party at BP But both Majestic couples have been knocking the ball out of the park today. Both managing to look engaged and working in true loving partnership with each other. It’s very moving to see both these Royal couples understand and work for the good of their counties. They all epitomise self sacrifice, self restraint and selflessness.

    1. Kate wore a similar dress, but Autumn Phillips wore the exact same dress Carole wore to Wimbledon. Autumn wore the dress to Ascot last month. So does Autumn need a stylist too since she’s wearing the same dress as someone twice her age?

      1. I think Carole on the whole dresses rather well. She certainly works with silhouettes that suit her shape and she’s a great figure for her age. But I cannot say the same for her daughters.

      2. Kate does this on the regular, dressing like someone twice her age. I didn’t like the dress on any of them and I usually like Autumn’s picks. Carole usually does look good because she dresses to her age. Kate should not also be dressing like a 60-something woman. My point is, if you’re basically shopping your mother’s closet, you need help. I think just about everyone here laments Kate’s dressing like a woman twice (or more) her age.

        1. I’ve read a bit about fashion history. Hundreds of years ago, babies had their own clothes, but children were dressed as mini-adults. There are some royal portraits of very young children posing stiffly in corsets and heavily embroidered gowns alongside a toy or two. Later, children wore “children’s clothes” until their teens, when boys would switch to full-length trousers and girls would put up their hair and wear proper hats to signify their entry into the adult world. The expression “teenager” didn’t come into being until the 1950’s when the post-war teens came of age. They got their own clothes, too. No longer children’s outfits, but not yet as adult as what their parents wore, they signified a generational shift that hadn’t been seen since the roaring 20’s. Then the baby boomers styled their hair in un-hattable updos and shortened their skirts to make opaque tights a necessity (underwear as we know it didn’t exist until WWII, so such short styles would NOT have happened) and now it’s hard to say what adult — in the fashion sense — really means.

          Kate’s in her 30’s. She isn’t an ingenue anymore and she represents a wealthy and traditional organization. I think she just tries to dress expensively and traditionally. I wouldn’t say that it makes her look old, since our culture has never had an “old-person’s style”, but it does make her look frumpy. But that might just be an expression of her personality. The cost of her wardrobe also makes her seem a bit callous towards the public, but that’s a different issue.

          Leti’s yellow dress is also traditional and expensive. Somehow, though, she looks fresh and professional in it — even in photos showing her clasping her clutch in front of her body. And Leti is 10 years Kate’s senior. I don’t think the clothes are Kate’s problem. I think it’s how she wears them and what they say about her personality.

Comments are closed.

Back To Top