Royal Gossip
November 23, 2017, 09:10:46 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  

Pages: [1]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: A resplendent State ceremony  (Read 346 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
FrederickLouis
Baroness
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 583



« on: March 31, 2017, 10:59:58 pm »

Princess Elizabeth of Great Britain and Prince Philip were married in a State ceremony in Westminster Abbey in November 1947.   
Why was the wedding a State ceremony?
Logged

Really A Baron
Rosella
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3096


« Reply #1 on: March 31, 2017, 11:38:30 pm »

^ Princess Elizabeth and Prince Philip's wedding was a State occasion because she was heir to the British throne. Charles's wedding to Lady Diana Spencer was also a State occasion because as POW he was heir to the throne. All first marriages of monarchs and heirs are on that scale. Because William was second in line, his and Kate's nuptials was only regarded as semi-State, though Commonwealth leaders and royals were present.
Logged
meememe
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2278



« Reply #2 on: March 31, 2017, 11:46:55 pm »

Elizabeth was the first 'first in line' to the British throne to marry since 1863. The marriage was only a few years after the war. Churchill wanted a 'grand occasion' to life the people's spirits and so it became a 'State Occasion'.

In 1863 the then Prince of Wales married at St George's Chapel at Windsor and there were complaints that the occasion wasn't 'grand enough' but Victoria was in mourning and so it wasn't such a grand occasion as it would have been had Albert been alive but would probably still have been at Windsor.

The idea of grand state occasions for weddings was a new one after WWI with the weddings of the King's children being the grand public spectacles we see today (although Edward's was a return to the pre-WWI style of wedding).

Logged
Tatiana
Countess
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1730


I come from a long line of Monarchists.


« Reply #3 on: March 31, 2017, 11:49:21 pm »

 Her eldest son and his second wife marrying was NOT a State Occasion ... It was a hole in the wall marriage with a CoE "Blessing" .. because of who he was ..  It is basically a morganic marriage.
Logged

Rosella
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3096


« Reply #4 on: March 31, 2017, 11:55:24 pm »

^ I said in my post that all FIRST weddings of monarchs and heirs were and are State occasions. Charles's second wedding consisted of a civil ceremony.
Logged
meememe
Duchess
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2278



« Reply #5 on: April 01, 2017, 03:36:59 am »

Britain does not recognise morganatic marriages. That point was made clear to Edward VIII in 1936 when he suggested that he and Wallis have such a marriage.

If it is a morganatic marriage then Camilla wouldn't be using the title Duchess of Cornwall - the title Charles has held for the longest time (other than Prince of course) as he became Duke of Cornwall on the 6th February, 1952 along with Duke of Rothesay etc.

The only title Camilla doesn't use is Princess of Wales. When Charles was created Prince of Wales he was also created Earl of Chester and she does use Countess of Chester. If this was a morganatic marriage she wouldn't be able to use one of those two titles and not the other.

The PM at the time made it clear that she was the Princess of Wales but wasn't going to use that title.

The decision over the civil ceremony was due to CoE rules regarding the marriage of divorced persons - that if the officiating minister believed that either new partner was involved in the break-up of the previous marriage then he/she shouldn't marry them. It is the decision of the individual minister. Had they asked around rather than having the Archbishop of Canterbury carry out the blessing they would have found many CoE ministers who would have married them (my own minister for one would have done so and even wrote to BP offering to perform such a full CoE service for them if they wanted one. They wrote back to thank him and said they were going with having the Archbishop perform a full blessing - which was virtually a CoE wedding service anyway.) Other than declaring them 'man and wife' and exchanging rings the service is pretty much a wedding service with an exchange of vows etc.

They are not in a morganatic marriage with all that means e.g. Camilla wouldn't be attending State occasions with Charles, or sitting with him in public carriage rides, etc etc. Think of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand of Austria and his wife Sophie - that was a morganatic marriage. She couldn't attend State occasions with him at all and if she did attend them she didn't sit with him but elsewhere.
Logged
FrederickLouis
Baroness
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 583



« Reply #6 on: April 02, 2017, 01:43:54 am »

Princess Elizabeth rode with her father in the Irish State Coach to the Abbey.   
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a4VvmFui0mw
Logged

Really A Baron
Pages: [1]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines | Imprint Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!