Tag Archive: The Royal Wedding

Well it’s about time!!!!

Well it’s about time that Kate Middleton gave birth. The name hasn’t been relished yet but they had a boy and it weighs 8 pound 4 ounces. Everyone has been waiting anxiously for the baby’s arrival (or in my mom’s case for the baby’s gender to relished). I just hope the baby is ready because he’ll be the most photographed baby ever. So what is ya’ll take on Kate and William’s new bundle of joy? please comment and let me know but please no negative comments.

pippa middleton


Here’s another site for you guys to go to. Hope ya’ll enjoy. 🙂

Pippa Middleton Needs Prince Harry for Lovelorn Support


Pippa Middleton has heard from Prince Harry since she broke up with Alex Loudon. Not surprising because the two have apparently become fast friends since both stole part of the show at the Royal Wedding. Sources say they regularly talk on the phone, reports Entertainment STV. So it would be very gentlemanly of Prince Harry to offer some firm, masculine support and consolation in Pippa’s lonely moments. If, of course, she needs such a thing.

Reports one unnamed source of Pippa Middleton: “Harry and Pippa have always had a close relationship and when he heard about the break-up he told her he’d be a shoulder to cry on if she needed it.” OK, that’s good to know.

The world’s royal-watchers and fans have been File:Pippa Middleton Prince Philip.jpgon the lookout for something to break—besides a casual brother-sister relationship—between Prince Harry and Pippa Middleton ever since a few sparks between them seemed to fly around the wedding and the endless chain of after-parties. But since then, not much.

Right now, the time is right, because both seem officially unattached. Of course, there is always George Percy, who once shared an apartment with Pippa and has family access to that famous “Hogwarts” castle. And always Chelsy Davy, in Harry’s background.

Meanwhile, friends say Pippa Middleton is doing just fine, with or without Prince Harry’s shoulder. She was recently spotted ice skating with a blond friend. Was that George? Sounds as if Pippa is ok.

© Cindy Kroiss – Gather Inc. 2011



Pippa Middleton: Global sensation


by Claudine Zap, Buzz LogTue, May 3, 2011 9:19 PM GMT+00:00

The royal wedding didn’t just launch Kate Middleton the Duchess of Cambridge into the spotlight. The extravaganza watched around the world made her younger sister Pippa, also decked out in a stunning white Alexander McQueen dress, into an overnight celebrity.

[ Photos: Pippa dazzles in her maid of honor dress ]

The Daily Mail called the famous maid of honor “the world’s most eligible woman” and sites like BauerGriffinOnline.com have dedicated galleries to her scene-stealing green engagement dress. Even Pippa’s backside gained fame on Facebook. Searches on Yahoo! have soared since the wedding: Fans of Pippa wanted to see “pippa middleton photos,” “pippa middleton dress.” They hope for a romance between “pippa middleton and prince harry” despite the fact that she’s already dating Prince William’s friend, retired cricket star Alex Loudon. She and Loudon, now a banker, have been together since December.

Those who know Pippa, officially Philippa Charlotte Middleton, would not be surprised by her sudden celebrity. Born in 1983 and raised in Bucklebury, Berkshire, the tanner of the two sisters easily outshone her older sibling when the two children attended the girls’ boarding school Downe House. According to Katie Nicholl, author of “The Making of a Royal Romance,” “Pippa was the more beautiful of the two of them at that age. But Catherine was more determined, which seemed to set her apart.”

Pippa followed her 14-year-old sister to the prep school Marlborough College in Wiltshire, England, where Nicholl wrote of the sisters, “They were both pretty and very close
they were tall and slim, lean and athletic.”

[Photos: Striking photos of Pippa Middleton]

The middle Middleton attended Edinburgh University in Scotland where she earned her degree in English, and then joined the family’s business, Party Pieces.

Plum Sykes observed in the Daily Mail that Pippa gets all of the fun of being close to the monarchy minus any of the “bad bits.” Adding, “Pippa is the luckiest one of all. She gets all the right sort of attention from men, fashion designers, hostesses and things, and doesn’t have any of the duties.”

[Photos: Pippa’s best looks]

The stunner was named Tatler magazine’s No.1 society singleton in 2008. She is also a good shot: In the same year the multi-talented Middleton bagged 23 birds, including duck, pheasant, and partridge, while on a weekend holiday in Scotland.

Pippa may also have paved the way for her sister’s chic engagement look. The fashionista was photographed backstage at an Issa show wearing the designer’s wrap dress, similar to the look Kate later wore to announce her plans to marry Prince William.

With Pippa’s prospects looking so good, she may soon be donning the Issa dress to make an announcement of her own.

Follow Shine on Facebook for the latest royal wedding updates and enter to win a vacation for two.


By EBEN HARRELL / LONDON Eben Harrell / London – Fri Apr 29, 1:40 pm ET

Technically, it was an act of treason. Britain’s Treason Felony Act of 1848 forbids subjects of the queen from calling for the abolition of the monarchy. The law is no longer enforced, which is good news for the several dozen Brits in central London on Friday who placed a Queen Elizabeth II impersonator in the gallows with a sign on her head saying “Best Before: Circa 1700.”

The mock imprisonment was part of the “Not the Royal Wedding Street Party” hosted by Republic, a campaign group that wishes to replace the monarchy with an elected head of state. The 14,000-strong group wants to strip the Queen of her remaining “prerogative powers,” such as the requirement that parliamentary bills have her formal assent before they become law, and her ability to disband the British Parliament and the legislatures of several Commonwealth countries (which her acting Governor General in Australia did in 1975 after the prime minister refused to call a general election). And it’s seen the wedding of Prince William and Kate Middleton as an opportunity to push its agenda forward. (Timeless Portraits: Photos of All Time Great Royal Weddings)

Talk of revolution and mock gallows aside, the Republican street party was hardly a Cromwellian affair. Unlike the army of Oliver Cromwell, which briefly overthrew the monarchy in the 17th century in two bloody civil wars, these rebels were a jovial, good-humored bunch. Cucumber sandwiches were served, a face-painting artist made the rounds, and a band jammed in the middle of the street.

“Republicanism today is a slow-moving movement,” said Silvia Carter, 65, a stage director in London. “We aren’t radicals. We understand that the abolition of the monarchy might take 40 or 50 years, but it will inevitably happen.” (A Green Makeover for Westminster Abbey: Trees for the Royal Wedding)

If turn-out is any indication of interest, however, the movement may have to wait longer than that. Hundreds of thousands of Britons took to the streets around Buckingham Palace and Westminster Abbey to cheer the royal couple on Friday. Republic’s rival fete attracted only around a thousand people, according to the group. But far from sulking like the losing side of a nationwide popularity contest, many at the party claimed that the massive royal wedding would paradoxically boost their cause by exposing the absurdity of Britain’s antiquated political system.

“The more scrutiny we can place on the royal family the better,” said David James, 27, who pointed to references in the British press of Kate Middleton as a “commoner” because she does not come from a royal lineage. “The whole idea of noble blood – of a class of people intrinsically superior to the rest – is antithetical to a democracy, and this wedding will help expose that.”

Republic was not the only outfit enjoying some irreverent anti-monarchy protesting on the royal family’s big day. The liberal British newspaper The Guardian allowed digital readers to join the rebel cause by signing up to send the couple one of three gifts: a home-assembly guillotine kit, keys to an exile’s apartment in Elba (the Mediterranean island to where Napoleon was exiled) and a biography of Charles I (the monarch beheaded by Cromwell).

And the sentiment stretches beyond Britain. Republic was joined at its street party on Friday by representatives of anti-monarchy movements in Spain, the Netherlands, Belgium, Denmark, Norway and Sweden. On Saturday, this Alliance of European Republican Movements – as the group calls itself – will hold a conference on how to mobilize European populations against the vestiges of absolute rule in what is now the world’s most democratic continent. “We had a similar situation in Sweden when our royal married a non-blue-blood,” says David Hesslefors of the Swedish Republican Association, referring to the marriage last year of Princess Victoria of Sweden to her personal trainer. “But such distinctions can only help expose the absurdity of a situation of having a hereditary head of state.” (See why Sweden wanted Julian Assange arrested.)

Hesslefors says William and Kate’s large following among Brits will draw attention to the monarchy, which he believes cannot survive under continued scrutiny. “British Republicans are lucky that William and Kate are so popular,” he adds, before pausing. “Or at least that’s the theory.”

Royal Faux Pas: What Not to Wear to the Royal Wedding

Kate Middleton’s Fashion Evolution

View this article on Time.com

But Will it Last?


By BELINDA LUSCOMBE Belinda Luscombe – Fri Apr 29, 1:35 pm ET

The royal family has proved yet again that it’s rather good at weddings. At marriage, however, it sucks. While it was a safe bet that the nuptials of Prince William and Catherine Middleton would come off without a hitch, it’s an open question whether their lifelong union will be quite as silky. After the royal horses have been watered and the bridal gown sent to the dry cleaner, there are still two people who have to figure out how to spend their lives together, under epic scrutiny, in an era when more than 40% of first marriages go belly-up.

Unfortunately, one of the best predictors of marital dissolution is whether the couple come from homes of divorce. Kate Middleton’s parents appear to dwell together amiably enough among the hedgerows of Bucklebury. But William’s father, the Prince of Wales, is divorced and remarried. His mother – you may have heard about this – died in a car accident with her then boyfriend, a man many said she was dating only to irritate her former in-laws. William’s uncle the Duke of York is divorced. His aunt the Princess Royal is divorced and remarried. The Queen’s sister Margaret was also divorced. The only British institution that can rival the House of Windsor for spectacular splits is the Royal Ballet. (See pictures of Prince William and Kate Middleton’s wedding day.)

On Diana’s side, William’s uncle Earl Spencer announced in February that he was getting married for the third time. So it’s safe to say William does not have a lot of what marital therapists call model relationships on which he can base his wedded life. Or even his potential divorced life.

But before we all send pre-emptive donations to the Kate Middleton Postmarital Comfort Fund, the differences between William’s marriage and his parents’ should be noted. Diana was just 20 and had been going on furtive dates with Charles for about a year, not exactly an ideal way of getting to know someone. He was 32 and getting hitched for all the wrong reasons, including that he was expected to sire an heir. William was born less than a year after their wedding. Not only were there yawning gaps in their expectations and backgrounds, but they also had little time to figure each other out.

Kate, 29, is older than William, 28, by a few months. They’ve known each other for nine years and been a couple for seven. While Diana had no idea what she was getting herself into, Kate has had time to get used to her fiancÉ’s family business – not to mention the paparazzi.

And while one can never really be equal with a future King, the two met on even ground: they were students at St. Andrews university in Scotland. They graduated the same day. Her family has money, and she had a preamble of a career.

Royal pains notwithstanding, statistics are on their side. College-educated couples who wed after age 26 split up more rarely than those with less education. (Diana didn’t finish high school.)

More important, probably, is Will’s wealth. Well-off couples marry more often and divorce less often than those who are broke. While the stresses on the newlyweds will be legion, they won’t include tiffs about who’s washing up or whether they can afford a sitter so they can sneak off for a quickie in the Throne Room.

Which brings us to the other bogeyman in contemporary domestic life: infidelity. Charles’ feelings for Camilla Parker Bowles, his former mistress and current wife, played a big role in the unraveling of his family. But it’s hard to imagine either William or Kate having a bit on the side without being detected by someone in the omnipresent swarm of paparazzi, tabloid hacks, royal retainers and random citizens with smart phones and Twitter accounts. The British secret service is just not that adroit.

The erstwhile Kate Middleton will have a steep learning curve as she grafts herself onto her new family. But the royals have had something of an education too. The status of women was transformed between the Queen’s marriage and that of her children, taking the transaction of marriage with it. Charles and Diana divorced in 1992, just a year before divorce hit its highest level in Britain and just as many of the gains women had made during the earlier years of the feminist movement were hitting home, literally.

No longer were princesses prepared to sit quietly by, turning a blind eye to concubines or crankiness for Queen and country. And no longer did the women of Britain expect them to. What might ultimately save Kate and Will’s marriage are the royal wives who went before. When they willingly walked out the castle doors and took the people with them, the Queen learned a little something about female power.

See pictures of British royal weddings.

See the complete coverage of the royal wedding.

View this article on Time.com


By Zachary Roth

It’s official!

A smiling Prince William and Kate Middleton were declared man and wife at London’s Westminster Abbey, in front of a congregation of around 1,900 and a worldwide television audience estimated at as many as 2 billion.

Wearing an ivory and white satin dress designed by Sarah Burton–a closely guarded secret until minutes before the service began–Kate accepted a wedding ring of Welsh gold, given to William by the Queen soon after the couple were engaged. The bride also wore a diamond-studded halo tiara loaned by the Queen, with her gently curled hair down at the back.

In a marriage ceremony led by Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, Kate promised William that she would “love him, comfort him, honor him, and keep him,” and he offered the same pledge. Like William’s mother Princess Diana at her own 1981 wedding to Prince Charles, Kate struck a modern note by omitting the traditional vow to “obey” her husband.

[ Photos: Check out a gallery of Kate’s wedding dress ]

William, who chose not to wear a ring, donned a bright red tunic, with a crimson and gold sash and gold sword slings, from the Irish National Guards, a British Army regiment of which he is an honorary colonel. The choice was made in part to honor three members of the Guards who were killed in action in Afghanistan.

The bride’s ring was created by Wartski, a Palace spokesperson said, a family jeweler that also created the wedding bands for Prince Charles’s 2005 marriage to Camilla Parker Bowles, now the Duchess of Cornwall.

Kate, 29, the daughter of creators of a successful party-planning business, becomes the first commoner in line to be queen in modern times. She’ll now be known officially as Her Royal Highness the Duchess of Cambridge, Buckingham Palace said in a statement this morning–though the public will know her as Princess Catherine. William becomes the Duke of Cambridge.

The bride’s three-and-half minute procession through the abbey was accompanied by a choir singing the soaring English choral “I Was Glad,” composed in 1902 by Sir Charles Hubert Hastings Parry. In a tribute to Princess Diana, the congregation began the service by singing “Guide Me O Thou Great Redeemer,” a Welsh hymn sung at her 1997 funeral. It also sang “Jerusalem,” the popular English hymn based on a poem by William Blake.

[ Related: The best hats from the royal wedding ]

Prince Charles and the Duchess of Cornwall, along with Kate’s parents, Michael and Carole Middleton, served as witnesses and signed the marriage registers. The bride’s mother wore a gray-blue dress designed by Catherine Walker, a fashion designer whose work was championed by Princess Diana. The Duchess of Cornwall opted for a champagne silk dress designed by Anna Valentine, and a Philip Treacey hat.

The hour-long service was conducted by the Very Reverend Dr. John Hall, the dean of Westminster. It also included an address from the Right Reverend Richard Chartres, the bishop of London and a friend of the royal family.

William, 28, spent a low-key last bachelor evening with his father at St. James’s Palace, then traveled this morning to the abbey in a uniquely designed Bentley, with his best man, Prince Harry–both brothers smiling and waving through the window to the crowds. Before the service, they greeted members of the congregation, including Earl Spencer, Princess Diana’s brother.

Kate, meanwhile, stayed the night with her family–including her maid of honor, younger sister Philippa–at London’s Goring Hotel, and came to the abbey alongside her father in a Rolls-Royce Phantom VI owned by the queen.

After the service, the newlyweds are set to ride to Buckingham Palace in a horse-drawn open-top carriage–originally built in 1902 for William’s great-great-great grandfather, King Edward VII. They’ll pass Parliament Square, Whitehall, and the Mall along a processional route, lined since yesterday–despite the chilly and overcast weather–with crowds cheering and waving the Union Jack, having heard the service over loudspeakers.

At the palace, the Queen will host a lunchtime reception for a select 650 members of the congregation, during which William and Kate will appear on the balcony–weather permitting–for what’s expected to be their first public kiss as newlyweds. Later, they’ll head to a roughly 300-person dinner and dance party given by Prince Charles, also at Buckingham Palace. The Queen, who wore an Angela Kelly primrose dress and matching coat, will skip that event, the Palace has said, to allow the younger crowd to properly let their hair down.

Elsewhere, millions of Britons took advantage of the national holiday–declared months ago by Prime Minister David Cameron–by gathering in pubs, private homes, and public viewing areas to celebrate the event, which for months has dominated the country’s news coverage. Estimates for the hit to Britain’s economy, thanks to the day off work, have ranged from $10 billion to $50 billion.

[ Photos: See images of the royal wedding party]

Cameron, who famously camped out on the Mall for Charles and Diana’s wedding, called the day “a chance to celebrate.”

“We’re quite a reserved lot, the British,” the prime minister told the BBC this morning. “But then when we go for it, we really go for it.”

The wedding congregation mixed personal friends of the bride and groom, royalty from around the world, dignitaries from numerous former British colonies, foreign officials and diplomats, and celebrities including Elton John and David and Victoria Beckham.

Representatives of all governments with whom Britain has normal diplomatic relations had originally received invitations. But the Syrian ambassador was informed yesterday that he was no longer welcome, amid a violent ongoing crackdown against pro-democracy protesters carried out by the regime of President Bashar Assad. The presence of the Bahraini ambassador, who previously ran a government agency accused of using electric shocks and beatings, has also provoked controversy.

[ Related: All of the details on Kate’s dress]

Adding to the rancor over the guest list, two former Labour Party prime ministers, Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, were not invited, even as two former Conservative PMs, Baroness Thatcher and Sir John Major, were included–an arrangement that was criticized by several Labour members of parliament (Thatcher was too unwell to attend). St. James’s Palace said that Thatcher and Major received invitations because they’re both Knights of the Garter, unlike Blair and Brown. Major also was appointed a guardian to William and Harry after Diana’s death.

The wedding caps a nearly decade-long relationship for William and Kate, who met in 2001 as students at the University of St Andrew’s in Scotland, and began dating a year or so later. Aside from a brief reported split in 2007, they appear to have been an item ever since. William proposed during a vacation in Africa last October.

The pair’s lengthy buildup contrasts with that of Prince Charles and Princess Diana, who were estimated to have spent just 21 hours together before marrying. That famously troubled union ended in divorce in 1996, after a long estrangement. Diana died in a car accident in Paris the following year.

The wedding comes at a pivotal time for the House of Windsor. Though she appears to remain in good health, the 85-year-old Queen reportedly has begun planning for her funeral. Charles, the heir to the throne, is seen by much of the public as stiff and out of touch, prompting concern that his accession could undermine the monarchy’s standing with the public. Polls indicate that upon the Queen’s death, most Britons would like to see the throne skip straight to William, though that currently appears unlikely.

In addition to being given the titles of Duke and Duchess of Cambridge, the couple will also become the Earl and Countess of Strathearn, as well as Baron and Baroness Carrickfergus.


By MICHAEL ELLIOTT Michael Elliott – 1 hr 44 mins ago

In Britain, all is not as it seems, nor ever has been. As they viewed the preparations for the royal wedding, with all its pomp and circumstance, the non-British seemed to willingly buy into the idea that the monarchy – and popular reverence for it – has been a fixed point in the British firmament for centuries, a source of stability however the nation’s fortunes may have ebbed and flowed.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The monarchy does not symbolize some deep sense of tradition; on the contrary, it has long been a contested element of what it means to be British. In the 17th century, revolutionaries turned the world upside down and deprived Charles I of his head more than 100 years before the French did the same to Louis XVI. The Crown was restored in 1660, but 28 years later another King was sent packing into exile. By the early 19th century, the scandal-stained Hanoverian dynasty was widely loathed. In his great sonnet “England in 1819,” the poet Percy Bysshe Shelley described George III and his sons as “An old, mad, blind, despised and dying king, – / Princes, the dregs of their dull race, who flow/ Through public scorn – mud from a muddy spring.” (See pictures of Prince William and Kate Middleton’s wedding day.)

The monarchy was saved and re-invented by the sense of duty of Victoria – just 18 when she ascended to the throne in 1837 – and her remarkable German husband Prince Albert. During Britain’s period of high imperialism and global economic dominance, it suited both the old landed grandees and those enriched by the world’s first modern economy to elevate the Crown into a symbol of changelessness in a society that was changing at breakneck speed.

Victoria’s halo sanctified the reigns of her son Edward VII and grandson George V, a man whose principal pastimes were stamp collecting and slaughtering game birds on his Norfolk estate. But such splendid dullness could not be maintained. Though the reassuring presence of Elizabeth II, who was 9 when her grandfather died in 1936, has indeed been a stabilizing constant in British life, the years since George V’s demise have seen regular eruptions in British attitudes toward the monarchy – all taking place against a backdrop of quiet, but continual and profound, constitutional change.

Not the Wedding They Wanted

On June 3, 1937, at a chÁteau in france, the Duke of Windsor – who had reigned for 10 months as Edward VIII before abdicating in favor of his brother – married the woman he loved, Wallis Simpson, an American from Baltimore and, in 1936, the first woman to be named Time’s Person of the Year. (The piece was distinctly catty; Simpson was said to have “resolved early to make men her career, and in 40 years reached the top – or nearly.”) The wedding was a low-key affair, and after the ceremony one guest described the duke as having “tears running down his face,” perhaps out of relief that the whole squalid business was over. If so, it was a sentiment his people shared. A vain, self-centered man who – to put it at its most charitable – was far too prepared to be used by Nazi sympathizers, Edward would have been a disastrous monarch as Britain fought for its survival in World War II.

Relief from Hard Times

Instead of Edward, the nation was blessed to have on the throne George VI, a man of palpable decency, whose wife Elizabeth was widely popular.

On Nov. 20, 1947, their daughter Elizabeth, the heiress to the Crown, married her distant cousin Philip Mountbatten in Westminster Abbey. In the run-up to the wedding, its expense – shades of 2011 – was highly controversial. Exhausted and broke after six years of war, Britain was going through a period of penny-pinching austerity and food rationing, which made the question of a sugary wedding cake politically sensitive. Gifts piled in, from diamond-encrusted wreaths to a piece of cloth that Mohandas Gandhi had spun himself. (Elizabeth’s grandmother thought it was a loincloth; she was not amused.)

Perhaps because it offered a welcome relief from hard times, the wedding was enormously popular. Less than five years later, while in Kenya, Elizabeth was told that her father had died, aged just 56. TIME named her Person of the Year in 1952, with a tone quite different from the one it had used for her aunt. Elizabeth’s significance, we said, was “that of a fresh young blossom on roots that had weathered many a season of wintry doubt.”

It’s for historians to judge whether the Queen has lived up to such promise, but there is little doubt that, partly by assiduously avoiding any controversy, she did much to restore the monarchy’s luster. Then along came a young, wounded, starstruck, beautiful girl from Norfolk. She changed everything. Again.

See pictures of British royal weddings.

See pictures Westminster Abbey.

A Shaft of Light and Gaiety

If you weren’t there, it’s hard to imagine just how grim a place Britain was in the summer of 1981. Race riots convulsed its cities. The economy was in ruins, with large parts of the industrial north of England and the Midlands reduced to rusted wasteland. The government of Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher was not just disliked by half the population; with a vehemence that still seems shocking 30 years on, it was positively loathed.

Into this desperate gloom, the wedding of Prince Charles, the heir to the throne, to Diana Spencer, just 20 – and a very innocent 20 at that – projected a shaft of light and gaiety. (That endless train behind her dress! Kiri Te Kanawa’s voice!) Whatever happened in the half soap opera, half tragedy that followed, the sheer glamour of the wedding endowed Diana with a genuine popularity – no, love – that she never lost. (See pictures of Princess Diana.)

The point about Diana that the royal family did not understand when she was selected for the Prince’s hand was that, like everyone else, she would grow up. The ingenue fairy-tale princess became a confident (albeit devious) young woman, comfortable with the happily mixed-up, multicultural, undeferential society that Britain had become, passionate about controversial causes such as the fights against AIDS and land mines and – in the end – openly contemptuous of the serial indignities to which the family into which she had married subjected her. Even had she lived, Diana’s story would have changed attitudes to the monarchy. The revelation that her husband had continued an affair with his true love (and now second wife) Camilla Parker Bowles while married to Diana – coupled with a rash of royal divorces – replaced the allure and mystery of the monarchy with something much more tawdry. And then Diana died.

The Long Week of Grief

Nobody – nobody – was ready for what happened to Britain in the week after Diana was killed in a Paris car crash. A nation that was supposed to be emotionally stunted, with stiff backbones and stiffer upper lips, descended into the sort of public grief normally reserved for the last act of second-rate Italian operas – except that it was genuine. Stuck at their home in Scotland, the royals seemed woefully out of touch with the sentiments of their people. Only at the last minute did the Queen walk into the crowds that were mourning Diana outside Buckingham Palace and show that she shared the national sense of loss.

The criticism of the royal family that week did not lead to a sustained increase in republican sentiment in Britain. To the contrary: once the Queen returned to London, the numbers of those saying they wanted to ditch her dropped to historic lows. But that extraordinary week changed the nature of the relationship between Crown and people forever. The crowds mourning Diana were not subjects. In a way that the revolutionaries of the 17th century would have understood, they were defining for themselves what they expected of a family, one of whose members was their head of state, and compelling that family to act accordingly. It was as if modern Britain were saying, “We get it. We’re more than happy to have you around. But you do the job on our terms.”

A Link to the Past Is Broken

Before that sentiment could solidify into a modern conception of the monarchy, however, there was one more sad piece of business to attend to. On March 30, 2002, aged 101, George VI’s wife and Elizabeth II’s mother – the Queen Mum – died. Hundreds of thousands of people lined the streets of London to see her coffin. The Queen Mum was a direct link to the tumultuous days of the abdication, to “the war.” (There is only one war in British speech.) But she was a link, also, to a Britain, and monarchy, that is long gone. Deeply conservative, she was a blue-blooded member of the aristocratic class that had once provided wives for royal males. No more. There have been eight weddings in the Queen’s immediate family since 1947, but in only one case – that of Prince Charles – did the royal marry into a titled family. The Windsors have become middle class.

Along with that social transformation has come a constitutional one. Since 348 people signed a document demanding reform called Charter 88 (I was one of them, I am very proud to say), Britain has gone through more constitutional change than in any other period in the past 300 years. Subnational parliaments have been established in Wales and Scotland, London has an elected mayor, a charter of human rights has been constitutionally protected, a new Supreme Court has been set up, taxpayer support for the royals has been reduced, and soon, Parliaments will sit for a fixed term. The Queen remains head of state, but in any real sense, she is the least powerful monarch Britain has ever had. You won’t have heard that among the hushed voices of the global TV commentators who prattle on about Britain’s wonderful sense of tradition, but it is true.

Watch a video on the Royals through history.

See pictures of the courtship of Kate and William.

View this article on Time.com


If you looked away from the screen for a moment, you probably missed it. It was a quick smooch. Kate turned to her groom, said something with a smile, and the prince reached over, rather hurriedly, and gave her a very quick kiss.

Maybe that’s why he kissed her again.

The second kiss came just before the Royal Air Force flyover. Another first on a historic day: two kisses on the Buckingham Palace balcony by a newly married royal couple.

Photos: Images from the Royal Wedding Ceremony
All eyes were on Prince William and Kate as they emerged from the palace onto the balcony. Many among the boisterous gathered crowd and those watching around the world surely had one defining image in their minds: Princess Diana and PrinceCharles’ memorable wedding kiss.

It wasn’t traditional for royal couples to kiss in public following their weddings before the summer of 1981. And Prince Charles reportedly resisted breaking tradition when the crowds outside Buckingham Palace that historic July morning called out for them to kiss.

“I am not going to do that caper. They are trying to get us to kiss,” he said to Diana.

Diana’s reported response: “Well, how about it?” The prince hesitated, then said “Why ever not?”

And this image lives on as proof.

Sadly, the marriage did not live up to the sweetness of that first public kiss. And because of that, there is a lifetime of hope wrapped up in today’s royal smooch. The world wishes so much better for this young couple. They have come to marriage older, wiser, and by all accounts, truly in love.

The grand balcony has been the stage for vaulted royal appearances since 1851, when Queen Victoria stepped out onto it during celebrations for the Great Exhibition in Hyde Park, London. The Great Exhibition was the first in a series of World’s Fair displays of culture and industry and attended by the likes of Charles Darwin and Charlotte Bront.

Princess Anne was the first of Queen Elizabeth’s newly wed children to appear on the balcony with her new spouse, Captain Mark Phillips, in 1973. But they did not kiss.

Neither did Prince Edward and Sophie Wessex on their 1999 wedding day, though Prince Andrew did follow his elder brother’s lead when he kissed the Duchess of York on the balcony on their wedding day in 1986.

A new iconic royal kiss image is born. Long live the marriage.

Why William won’t kiss the bride


LONDON–Even being the future king of England and the co-star of one of the most viewed weddings in history will not spare Prince William the frustration of being denied one typical marriage custom.

Sorry, William, you may not kiss the bride.

As he watches Kate Middleton walk down the aisle at Westminster Abbey on April 29, William will have the traditional groom’s checklist stashed in his memory. He will surely mentally admire Kate’s dress, nervously go over his vows one final time in his head, and prepare to listen to the solemn words of the archbishop of Canterbury in his final seconds as a bachelor.

[ Related: How Prince William is breaking a royal tradition ]

But once the ceremony is complete and the rings have been exchanged, there will be no royal smooch at the abbey altar for the benefit of the 1,900 guests in attendance. Church of England protocol expressly forbids such behavior, especially in a hallowed site such as Westminster Abbey, one of the world’s most famous churches.

“There will be no kiss during the wedding ceremony,” explained the Very Reverend Dr. John Hall, the dean of Westminster and the man responsible for overseeing the spiritual life of Westminster Abbey. “We don’t do that in the Church of England. That’s sort of a Hollywood thing: ‘ You may now kiss the bride.’ It doesn’t happen here.”

[ Video: Kate’s changes to the wedding vows ]

For the royal family, too, kissing, it seems, is serious business and must be undertaken only in appropriate situations. When William’s mother, Princess Diana, wed Prince Charles in 1981, the pair also did not kiss in church. Instead they produced an iconic moment on the balcony of Buckingham Palace. As thousands of well-wishers screamed for the newlyweds to pucker up, Diana said to Charles: “Well, what about it?”

Photographs of the resulting kiss were splashed across the front page of every British newspaper and seen around the world. That balcony moment is due to be repeated by William and Kate, although this time it will be scripted and part of the carefully planned event.

Follow Shine on Facebook for the latest royal wedding updates and enter to win a vacation for two.

There is even an allocated time for the kiss, 1:25 p.m. London time. Several publications reported this week that William and Kate have gone so far as to practice the act to ensure the camera angles are right for the international press.

Perhaps it is just as well there is to be no kiss in the abbey to distract William and Kate from the procedure of their big occasion. With eight days to go, the archbishop–the principal leader of the Church of England–added some welcome words of wisdom as they prepare for a day where every move will be scrutinized in minute detail.

“William and Catherine are making this commitment very much in the public eye, and they are sensible, realistic young people,” said Archbishop Rowan Williams. “They know what the cost of that might be. They have thought that through. And because of that they will need the support, the solidarity, and the prayers of all those who are watching.

“I wish them every richest blessing in their life together and the courage and clarity they will need to live out this big commitment in the full glare–to live it out for the rest of us.”

%d bloggers like this: