Sunday 9 April 2023

A Windsor Easter for the Royal Family as Coronation Plans Unveiled

With less than a month to go until the Coronation, members of the Royal family were out in force for Easter Mattins at St George's Chapel at Windsor today.

It marks King Charles' first Easter as monarch and of course as "Defender of the Faith and Supreme Governor of the Church of England". We've seen Charles and Camilla attending church regularly at Sandringham and other locations. Indeed, during one of his first engagements after the late Queen passed, a reception for faith leaders at Buckingham Palace, the King promised to "protect the space for faith itself" and has been actively committed to ensuring inclusion will be a key element of the Coronation, vowing to uphold the "religions, cultures, traditions and beliefs to which our hearts and minds direct us". Lent, Holy Week and Easter are enormously significant times for the Church of England and have traditionally been a time when the monarch plays a visible role.

On Thursday, the King and Queen followed in Queen Elizabeth II's footsteps by distributing money on Maundy Thursday (the day on which Christians commemorate the last supper of Jesus). The couple travelled to York where the tradition originated centuries ago.

The royals arriving.

The Prince and Princess of Wales are understood to have been away from Windsor as the children enjoy a lengthy school break. We last saw Kate almost three weeks ago when she unveiled the early years business taskforce at NatWest's headquarters in the City of London.

It's very likely the family have been spending time at their Norfolk home, Anmer Hall, and possibly took the opportunity to jet away for a break. Term at Lambrook doesn't start for another ten days, and in the meantime I imagine the family are back in Windsor.

There was a large gathering which included the Edinburghs, Princess Anne and family and the Duke of York. Below Zara (in her signature pink), Peter, Princess Beatrice and her husband Edo making their way to church.

Princess Charlotte keeping a 'big sister' eye on Louis :)

Embed from Getty Images

It comes amid news Prince George will play a special role as one of the King's Pages of Honour. George will be joined by Lord Oliver Cholmondeley (son of the Marquess and Marchioness of Cholmondeley), Master Nicholas Barclay (son of the King's goddaughter Rose Troughton; Rose's mother is heir to the Colman's Mustard fortune), and Master Ralph Tollemache (Ralph's father Edward is another of the King's godchildren and he was also a Page of Honour to the late Queen from 1988 to 1990). The Queen Consort’s Pages of Honour will be her grandsons, Master Gus and Master Louis Lopes, Master Freddy Parker Bowles and Her late Majesty’s great-nephew, Master Arthur Elliot.

People reports:

'A Kensington Palace spokesperson says, "We're all very excited about Prince George's role in the coronation, it will be an incredibly special moment."

They are "cognizant that he is old enough to understand what's going on," a royal source told PEOPLE. But they're mindful that normal life resumes when George is back at school with his classmates the following week, where the weekend's events will likely be the talk of his classmates.

"His parents are very excited and delighted that he is a page," a spokesperson for the Prince and Princess of Wales tells PEOPLE. "It's something that his parents have thought long and hard about and are very much looking forward to — and I'm sure George is, too."'

The news followed the release of the official Coronation invitation which is being issued to some 2,000 guests. Buckingham Palace revealed: "Designed by Andrew Jamieson, a heraldic artist and manuscript illuminator whose work is inspired by the chivalric themes of Arthurian legend. Mr Jamieson is a Brother of the Art Workers’ Guild, of which The King is an Honorary Member.

"The original artwork for the invitation was hand-painted in watercolour and gouache, and the design will be reproduced and printed on recycled card, with gold foil detailing. Central to the design is the motif of the Green Man, an ancient figure from British folklore, symbolic of spring and rebirth, to celebrate the new reign. The shape of the Green Man, crowned in natural foliage, is formed of leaves of oak, ivy and hawthorn, and the emblematic flowers of the United Kingdom.

"The British wildflower meadow bordering the invitation features lily of the valley, cornflowers, wild strawberries, dog roses, bluebells, and a sprig of rosemary for remembrance, together with wildlife including a bee, a butterfly, a ladybird, a wren and a robin. Flowers appear in groupings of three, signifying The King becoming the third monarch of his name.

"A lion, a unicorn and a boar – taken from the coats of arms of the Monarch and Her Majesty’s father, Major Bruce Shand – can be seen amongst the flowers. Her Majesty’s arms are now enclosed by the Garter, following her installation as a Royal Lady of the Order of the Garter last summer."

It was accompanied by a new portrait of the King and Queen taken in the blue room at Buckingham Palace. I would expect we'll see similar new portraits of the Prince and Princess of Wales in the coming weeks.

There was a layer of poignancy across today's gathering. I imagine it's the first time so many members of the family have assembled at St George's since Queen Elizabeth II was laid to rest there last September.

St George's Chapel is a 14th century building located in the lower ward of Windsor Castle. The chapel is also home to the annual Order of the Garter ceremony held in June. Within the Chapel are the tombs of ten monarchs, including Henry VIII and his third wife Jane Seymour, and Charles I. Of course, Prince Philip was laid to rest in the Royal Vault beneath St George's Chapel.

The Wales family departing.

Embed from Getty Images

The Princess of Wales received a posy from eight-year-old Samuel.

Embed from Getty Images

A lovely photo of Kate and Charlotte leaving.

A video.

It's always fun to see Kate's sartorial Easter choices. In 2017 and 2018, the Duchess repeated classic Catherine Walker coats for Easter Sunday. In 2019, Kate repeated her dove grey Alexander McQueen coat, first worn for Easter Sunday service at St Andrew's Cathedral, Sydney, in 2014.

Last year's look was my favourite to date. Kate repeated a soft blue Emilia Wickstead coat with a Jane Taylor headband, Cassandra Goad Cavolfiore pearl earrings and Emmy London pumps.

Today, Kate was stylish in the cobalt blue Catherine Walker she wore for the Commonwealth Day service in March 2022.

For the service last year, Kate teamed the piece with a Sean Barrett pillbox hat, sapphire and diamond jewels, Rupert Sanderson pumps and a Jimmy Choo clutch.

Today, Kate's hat appears to be the Lock & Co Mayfair Pillbox hat (a very quick spot by Kate Middleton Style). The £825 piece is described as: "A classic, reinvented. This pillbox hat is light as a feather and incredibly comfortable. Wear this hat to winter weddings, special events, or simply out with the girls."

Below, Kate wearing the hat in green on St Patrick's Day 2022.

Kate's pretty earrings are by Carousel Jewels (with thanks to Kathryn Elizabeth). The £130 Stella earrings are described as "lapis and moonstone".

Kate carried the Emmy London Natasha clutch in cobalt blue...and take a look at those nails!

Kate completed the look with her Gianvito Rossi praline 105 pumps.

Wishing you all a very Happy Easter! I'm signing off with this treasure from the Royal Collection Trust -- an Easter card sent to Prince Edward of Wales (later King Edward VIII) from Paris in 1905. Fun fact: the first picture postcard appeared just over a decade earlier, leading to a national craze and a surge in deliveries for the postal system.

126 comments:

  1. Do we think King Charles has modernized the dress code with Princess Catherine's nail color? DWLee333 in Central Oregon

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think a lot of things published about dress code rules, just haven’t been true.

      Delete
    2. I don't think there ever was a dress code that prohibited colored nail polish. The new Duchess of Edinburgh has been wearing it for years, and other royal women have done so. I think the idea it was forbidden by the late Queen was at least partly a media invention.

      Delete
    3. I doubt King Charles cares one iota about nail polish. M.

      Delete
    4. I agree, Anon 20:09. I think some things were ‘rules’ because HM Elizabeth was raised and influenced by her mom and grandmother who were conservative and the rules were more of a throwback to early 1900’s when painted nails could be considered questionable. Not so much nowadays!

      Delete
    5. Bingo. Dress codes and protocols have always been a false narrative about the royal family. For any supposed “rule” you can easily find multiple examples of a range of members breaking it. They also seem to serve as a popular press device to punish or create controversy around certain family members.

      Delete
    6. These is no official dress code. The Queen did things a particular way e.g. no colored nail polish, and family members around her fell in suit so as not to offend. Just the same common curtesy and good manners most family members would show to their matriarch/patriarch.

      Delete
  2. Red nails!!! Never thought I’d see the day πŸ˜‰ Beautiful as always!

    ReplyDelete
  3. I have missed (Wales) royal watching over the last 3 weeks, although there were some lovely photos from the King and Queen's Germany tour. I like today's outfit although I think Kate's hat could have been worn at more of an angle. I didn't much like Louis' shorts. I'm very glad the Easter family tradition continued into Charles's reign. Really love the coronation invitation, it's very pretty and very personal to Charles.

    ReplyDelete
  4. The invitation is amazing. Really beautiful art work.
    Electric blue is definitely not a good shade against the other dresses. And it’s just too much. Love the red nail polish though. Same goes for Camilla, but she made it work a bit better because it was only in the details.
    My favourite was Anne today. Zara’s and Sophie’s pinks were nice but so didn’t like the specific pieces or hat(!).
    I get they like blue, but the Walses kind of morph into one blob.

    Wishing everyone a Happy Easter
    🐣🐰πŸ₯•πŸŒ·πŸž

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I had to look for a picture of The Princess Royal to comment. Yes she did look very good today, she really has her own style. For me the stand out look was Princess Beatrice. She was beautiful and has really come a long way with her fashion choices. I hope they had a lovely family lunch together and raised a glass to the late Great Queen Elizabeth. S.πŸ™‚.

      Delete
    2. Beatrice was gorgeous from head to toe. I didn't like the buttons and the neckline of the Princess Royal's coat. Nice shoes.

      Delete
  5. Susan in Florida9 April 2023 at 16:28

    Happy Easter Charlotte , and to all who celebrate. It was nice to see most of the Royal family together today. just as we gather in our own homes. I love the earrings and the nice nail polish on the Princess. And I believe I have said before that blue and green are my favorite colors for her. I’m enjoying the portrait of the King & Queen. It’s very rare to have two people look nice in the same color. Blue flatters both of them.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Louis’s outfit was my favorite! I love the light blue shorts. So great to see them all, and I love the photos of William and George at their soccer outing yesterday. Thank you Charlotte! I’m looking forward to the coronation festivities. Sue from IL. happy Easter!

    ReplyDelete
  7. I wasn’t a fan of this coatdress last year and that remains the same. With the strong V neck, buttons, and long hem, it is too “vertical” of a look for me. However, I love the red nails!! Very unexpected.

    That invitation is stunning. Such beautiful artwork. And the new portrait of Charles and Camilla is lovely. They both look great in blue and I like how their outfits complement each other.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't like the coat dress at all. She seems to be stuck on them.

      Delete
    2. Rachel - I agree completely about the design and proportions on this coat…they just don’t work.

      Delete
    3. A coat dress is only a coat dress, if there is nothing worn underneath but undergarments. Kate has worn what looks like a dress under this coat both times she has worn it--therefore, not a coat dress.

      Delete
    4. I thought too last year, too long, too vertical but interestingly I quite like the long lines this time! There is something simple and elegant and perhaps the family gathering gives charm and movement to a coat I thought was a bit stiff.

      Delete
    5. RM in PA - Kate always wears a matching slip dress under her coat dresses.

      Delete
    6. RM in PA, I disagree with your definition of a coatdress vs coat. A coat is an outer garment worn over a complete outfit and can be taken off inside. A coatdress is worn over a slip and is the outfit in itself and does not get taken off at all.

      Delete
    7. RachelZA, that's exactly what I said. Kate has worn coat dresses in the past, but this appears to have something underneath, unless as Anonymous 18:39 commented, it is only a matching slip underneath.

      Delete
    8. Looked like a dress to me, so a coat and dress not a coat dress.

      Delete
    9. Agree it was a coat and a dress.

      Delete
  8. Charlotte, I had hoped that you would be still on your break and enjoying Easter with your family, while tucking into a nice Easter egg. I would like to wish you and all your family a very happy Easter. Great to see all the family out today. I think it is a lovely touch to include the new King and Queen's Grandchildren in the coronation. All the Royal ladies looked beautiful today. I like this repeat on the Princess, she looked beautiful. I have to admit before I saw a better picture of the earrings, I had hoped for new sapphires or they were the Dubai sapphire earrings reworked. Not to be but these earrings look good on her. Happy Easter to all on here. S.πŸ™‚.

    ReplyDelete
  9. A question, are they now the Edinburghs and not the Wessexes?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Yes, they are now referred to as the Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh. It's a title for life and will eventually, at some point, be passed down yet again to another family member. Edward became Duke on his birthday this year after the death of both of his parents and after Charles became King.

      Delete
    2. Yes, Edward and Sophie are now the Duke and Duchess of Edinburgh and their son James now has the title of Earl of Wessex.

      Delete
    3. Yes they are the Edinburgh family but I'm wondering is Prince Edward still Earl of Sussex as well. People seem to be referring to James as The Earl of Forward.

      Delete
    4. James, like other eldest or only sons of peers, may use his father's secondary title or titles "by courtesy" (meaning that he is not a peer himself). In Scotland, he is the Earl of Forfar; elsewhere in the UK, he is the Earl of Wessex.

      Delete
  10. Lovely Wales family.I loved Charlotte 's dress and Luis mischievous smile!

    ReplyDelete
  11. I love Carousel Jewellery and have a couple pairs of their earrings. Women owned, affordable, and a nice sustainable story.

    Border Terrier lover

    ReplyDelete
  12. Kate looks smart and the 'first family' looks coordinated and in sync in their shades of blue. The King and Queen in particular look wonderful in their blue pictures. I hate the red nails though - I think the late Queen was right - they do look unpleasant and garish. Not sure if it's the colour clash or the length but neutral would definitely look classier. While I hate this nail look, I do appreciate that the King has relaxed the draconian rules. Hopefully in time she'll find a better balance with experimentation, otherwise she should stick to neutral.

    Charlotte's hair is so cute and pretty and the picture of mum and daughter was sweet - we don't see that pairing muc especially when Kate has to corral the littlest one so often.
    All the Royal ladies look wonderful today's; the colours looking splendid in the spring sunshine.

    The new Earl of Wessex has shot up within the last year hasn't he! I hope he's finding the royal gatherings OK without his sister - I always felt slightly sorry for them, as they were sort of on their own in terms of their in-between ages; too young to properly bond with any of their cousins yet too old for the younger Royal generation too. I hope in time they will bond more with the Cambridge kids once they (the Cambridges) are into their 20s... It's so valuable for George to have a senior brother figure when his parents die and he is King. If they foster that relationship, it'll be such a source of strength and support for him in his reign.

    ReplyDelete
  13. I saw an early picture and noticed the red polish, and thought it must have been an optical illusion so kept checking this site for confirmation. Have we ever seen Kate with dark polish on her fingernails? I mean, good for her to shake stuff up.

    Honestly I never believed that the Queen had a rule about that. Surely she was busy with other things and wouldn’t take the time to make pronouncements about what Royal women could do with their nails? I don’t think Diana sported dark polish until she was single, but she was a notorious nail biter so assumed she needed to kick that habit before she went “wild” with the nail polish.

    Anyway, I’m happy to see a repeat of that beautiful coat, with a more whimsical hat. Love those earrings but I’m thumbs down on the shoes. Of course they’re neutral enough to work with the outfit, but wish she’d try something more interesting with her footwear.

    Happy Easter all!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. She's worn red polish on her toes but has preferred nude or clear polish for her fingers. Diana did wear colored polish both before and after her separation from Charles, and the new Duchess of Edinburgh often wears it now. Princess Margaret did, too.

      As I've commented before, all these "royal rules" of dress and personal adornment that some people insist exist can easily be shown not to do so. I suspect some people simply like to imagine a monarchy that is very, very rarefied and formal, quite removed from the concerns and interests of other people's daily lives and demanding a whole course of "princess training" for the women who marry into it. Otherwise, they think, what is the point?

      Delete
    2. Well said Vittoria. We know from Meghan’s experience that those marrying into the family absolutely do not get princess lessons!

      Delete
    3. Vittoria, you are correct in saying that people insist the Queen had rules and a dress code concerning many things. It has clearly been stated that Her Majesty did not micro manage her family and certainly had little time to check up on things like nails, or shoes. But the Queen did have preferences and many family members respected those preferences. M

      Delete
    4. @Anonymous- while I think there is certainly no How to Princess 101 course, I don’t think we should take one person’s experience as true for the others. I would think an institution puts way more effort into the preparation of a future main role than a supporting gig way down the line. Especially if there are however vague plans to cut down on cast members. I wouldn’t be surprised to see resources and attention distributed very differently. It’s quite rational.

      Delete
    5. Perhaps, but as I pointed out, the new Duchess of Edinburgh has long worn colored nail polish. She is said to have been quite close to the late Queen. If that is true, and had she thought that the Queen had strong preferences on the matter, she would probably have eschewed colored polish.

      Delete
  14. Everyone looked great, with two misses: Kate’s nails looked garish and Louis’ outfit looked mismatched. I hope they all have a lovely Easter afternoon!

    ReplyDelete
  15. I LOVE the invitation. Seems King Charles is a romantic! The invite shows his love of nature and history and Camilla and that he’s a romantic. It’s lovely. Catherine looks incredible and red nails! Wow! Also the Wale’s were far behind in the casual procession are they loosening those rules as well?

    ReplyDelete
  16. I hate to say it, and maybe I'm having a bad day, but how much blue can people wear? Blue is my very favorite color, but today Beatrice is looking really good to me. And, actually, her outfits have been beautiful in the last year or so.

    The invitation is beautiful -- an extension on the 1953, which seems to be quite a leap forward from previous ones. I absolutely love it. But I am not loving the whole coronation. I'm not loving the "family issues" at all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Allison I agree, Princess Beatrice has really come into her own since she got married and became a Mother. In regard to family issues. My late Mother used to say, show me a family who hasn't got some kind of problems and if they say they haven't they are telling lies. Clouds pass. I'm looking forward to the coronation and hopefully it will be a time for coming together. S.πŸ™‚.

      Delete
  17. The dove grey coat is the winner for me!

    ReplyDelete
  18. Lovely pictures on a sunny Easter Sunday. For me, Beatrice was the clear fashion "winner" by looking very slim and stylish. The coat-dress styling at last year's Commonwealth service was more attractive, to my eye. I think Catherine's nails are too short to look good in red. With the bold blue coat and hat, I didn't think the nude shoes worked. Is it just me, or do others find the price tag of all these very similar hats to be a shocking waste of money?!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I wish Beatrice had skipped the bow. Otherwise, she looked lovely.
      GA

      Delete
    2. I agree. Beatrice looks wonderful.

      Delete
  19. Happy Easter to all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Tedi! And to you! Zora from Prague

      Delete
  20. Well, this is a perfectly-tailored Catherine Walker coat such as we've seen before and very Easter-suitable, if a little predictable. However, if I didn't say so the last time the Princess wore it, I have to comment now that that is one eye-watering shade of cobalt. I feel rather as though I'm being irradiated by it. I would vanish in that color myself. It takes someone with fairly strong coloring of her own to pull it off, and that's not me.

    I love pillbox hats, but I do tend to prefer them to be worn at the back of the crown, as they were worn in their 1960s heyday. And I think the nude shoes were the wrong choice for this electrifying shade of blue. They look a little anemic with the coat.

    I see that some people dislike the red polish; someone called it "garish". I don't agree with that assessment. I like a strong red polish but rarely wear it, since I can never apply it without mishaps. Even my local manicurists have a problem with that. Brightly-colored nails look fine to me, especially with a brightly-colored outfit, but they have to be very neatly polished, unsmeared and also unchipped. This is a skill I have yet to acquire.

    Before I close, I wanted to note that Princess Beatrice looked quite nice in her black and white, while Lady Sarah Chatto's full skirts and cardigans, wide-brimmed hats and pearls always make me smile. There's a lady who's found a look she loves and that suits her perfectly. Kudos to her for her elegant retro chic.

    Oops, I forgot to mention the coronation invitation, which I find really charming, the kerfuffle over the Green Man notwithstanding. I think it strikes a nice balance between traditional design (it actually calls to mind 16th-century, late-Renaissance decorative painting) and modern taste. What a souvenir it will make for the lucky guests!

    ReplyDelete
  21. Love the nail polish! And Camilla & Kate wearing similar blue shades. Weren’t these banned, according to Meghan? Modernizing the monarchy! Missouri Girl

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The late Queen herself wore coloured nail polish in her younger years, so no, it was not banned. Most of the 'rules' people go on about never existed!
      Regarding people wearing similar colours, there's a story about the former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher once asking the Queen's staff what colour her Majesty would be wearing at a function they would both be attending, so as to avoid either clashing or being too similar, and the response was, "The Queen never notices what other people are wearing." So I don't believe that was ever 'banned' either.

      Delete
    2. We have had several occasions every year with one or two female family members wearing the same colour, even the same as HMTQ. This was never a thing. Maybe they did this for extremely important engagements including official portraits like weddings and similar. Actually, I am sure they did this- many families do this.

      Delete
  22. The Princess Royal looked immaculately groomed. Loved her coat and Navy accessories. She was the pick for me today.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Agreed! I have always considered Navy a spring color - especially paired with white or cream. Very chic! Elle

      Delete
  23. This may be a repeat, I did not see my prior comment come through. Love everyone's looks. All the kids look great and so relaxed and happy. Catherine and William look wonderful. The invitation is fantastic, so much symbolism and so beautifully done. Ali

    ReplyDelete
  24. George is catching up with his dad, he’s getting so tall and grown up

    ReplyDelete
  25. I wonder if Kate’s nail polish is because she had a fun day with Charlotte. I remember my daughter was around 8 or 9 when we painted each other’s nails for fun.

    ReplyDelete
  26. What’s with the shorts?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Standard British upper class clothes for young boys. George only went into long trousers quite recently.

      Delete
    2. Little gentlemen in the UK, under a certain age, wear short pants for formal occasions. Prince George wore them up until not long ago. It's a British tradition.

      Delete
    3. I believe eight years is the limit.

      Delete
  27. Lovely to see all the family together this Easter although Lady Louse appears to be missing for the service. All the ladies looked lovely but my favourite was Beatrice followed by Zara. Kate looked lovely too but wearing what we’ve come to expect. I’m wondering if Bea’s dress is a Wickstead? I thought Anne looked lovely so did Lady Sarah but she doesn’t steer away from the cardigan and skirt combo it would be nice to see her in something different. It’s so nice to see the children being included as they get older. I bet they all had a fabulous Easter and ate lots of chocolate as I have done😊 Sue in WA

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I forgot to mention the beautiful Coronation Invitation the lucky people who will be getting one of them.

      Delete
  28. I like Sarah Chatto's style. And Princess Anne looks good too. It impresses me no end that she can still wear clothes from 40 years ago.

    ReplyDelete
  29. I actually really don’t like this colour on Catherine — I don’t think it suits her — and I don’t think it suits the occasion either. For me, Easter evokes pastelly spring colours, not petrol blue. But looking back at the photos of past Easter’s I don’t really like Catherine’s outfit choices in any of them (& I often think she looks amazing) so I guess she and I have quite different views on Easter dressing.

    Bryony

    ReplyDelete
  30. The same still holds true for upper-class children in the US; no long pants on boys under the age of eight during formal occasions.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have never seen this on little boys in the US. Who counts as upper class in America? Even when it was more pronounced 100 years ago Americans never had as rigid a class and dress system as the British and whatever is left of it today is nowhere near as formal as the British. Would the Kennedy's be closest? Their youngest male members are certainly not in short pants - they look like any other child regardless of class.

      Delete
    2. I live in the USA. My sons when that age wore formal shorts for certain occasions.

      Delete
    3. I think it looks like little John Kennedy at his father's funeral (the famous salute photo) has bare legs. I wonder if it was a trend until 1960's USA. GA

      Delete
    4. In fact, short pants for small boys used to be quite common in the US. If you look at old pictures of, say, John F. Kennedy, Jr. as a child, you'll see him in short pants. This custom gradually disappeared through the 70s even among the upper classes. I was attending a well-known prep school in that decade, and I saw various standard forms of dress go by the wayside among affluent Americans even as they persisted in the UK.

      Remember that the photo below was taken in November, and yet JFK Jr. was in short pants.

      https://www.politico.com/blogs/politico-now/2013/11/story-behind-the-salute-178248

      Delete
    5. Here's an essay on the subject of short pants (in the US) that may be of interest:

      https://www.phillytrib.com/commentary/backintheday/back-in-the-day-a-short-take-on-short-pants/article_0c4f0ab9-5c16-5b33-bd28-84f99b0a39d6.html

      Delete
    6. I've never seen this in the US either. Maybe in the south where it is warm?? Most of the US would be FAR too cold to wear shorts in the winter.

      Delete
    7. I am in the US and my boys when young wore shorts for some special occasions. Ali

      Delete
    8. Susan in Florida12 April 2023 at 17:42

      I haven’t seen shorts on upper-class boys in the US. Not in real life or in photos of events since the 1940s . It’s considered outdated. Boys wear pants to church and for formal occasions like weddings.

      Delete
    9. I commented above that my boys wore shorts for special occasions and I can promise it was not that long ago:). Like most things clothing wise choices can vary. Ali

      Delete
    10. Wearing shorts is not confined to upper class boys in England and are also seen in many Commonwealth countries. In Aotearoa New Zealand shorts are normally required as part of school uniforms and it is unusual to see school boys wearing long trousers. unless they are in mufti. It is certainly not just an upper class custom and lots of men wear shorts in the street anyway so I can't see why it is regarded as out of the ordinary.

      Delete
    11. Same in Australia as some schools. Boys wear shorts with long socks until and certain age. My boys wear shorts even when it’s cold. They hate trouser’s. The comments on the nail polish crack me up. Anyone would think she had committed a crime. I don’t have time to keep my nails painted and perfect but occasionally it’s just a nice thing to do. Especially around spring. The color I choose depends very much on my mood at the time.
      Dd

      Delete
    12. I decided to throw my hat in the ring of the discussion, of "Little Boys Dress Shorts". We still do it in my family & my little grandsons still wear hand me down outfits from their fathers, except the ones where the coordinating shirt was monogramed. There are many websites like Florence Eiseman & Kelly Kids (even on Zulilly) that still sell a nice collection, but of late my daughter & daughters-in-law have liked the clothing I've purchased on my many work trips to the UK. I always spend some time in London, if not already there, to do a spot of shopping. I/we buy a lot from "Trotters", which is one of our favorites.

      In fact, my daughter is in charge of picking the flower girls & page boy/ring bearer outfits for my son/her brother's wedding, & the bride agreed that they weren't finding selections of dresses & short outfits over here, like they could find in the UK.

      We always had them around for the boys when they were little, mostly for attending Holiday Events at either The Union League Club of Chicago or The Country Club. The boys wore/wear the shorts outfit/suits until about age 3-4yrs, when they advance up to wearing a Blue Blazer & Khaki pants from Brooks Brothers. I still have about Every Size of Blue Brooks Brothers Blazers, from Age 5 to Adult. They have been passed round the family for various cousins to use & they will eventually be used by my grandsons... they are timeless. :)

      Delete
  31. Everyone looked great its surprising the princess of wales nail polish its was bold here to see like that the coronation invitation was classic design

    ReplyDelete
  32. As somebody who doesn’t like the look and feel of nail polish on my fingers, I am always surprised that so few people consider that not wearing coloured nail polish might be Kate’s personal preference and not the late Queen’s.

    I am predicting while we might see the odd coloured nail polish it will be the exception rather than the rule.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Like you, Rachel, I can't stand wearing nail polish. I do my toe nails during sandal wearing, but never my finger nails. The minute it chips it looks so unkempt. Also, I play the cello which requires very short finger nails. I just make sure they are clean...and that's it. M.

      Delete
  33. All the ladies looked lovely! And I love princess Charlotte's sweet smile. As for the coronation invitation, what an incredible piece of art, with all the details! Zora from Prague

    ReplyDelete
  34. I actually love this look. The blue is bright and cheerful and it's a color the family likes wearing. Perhaps it has some special meaning to them. I know Easter fashion is generally represented by pastels, but it's not a rule.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Ha ha, all the nail color conversation. I have always assumed that there is not a rule about nail polish for the Royal Family. Always assumed wearing polish for Catherine was just a personal preference. With the red she was wearing I thought she put it on for another event and just did not bother to remove yet. I do not wear polish myself as I prefer the look of my nails bare and when the kids were younger I really preferred short and bare nails as the upkeep was easier. Ali

    ReplyDelete
  36. Kate was elegant and beautiful but the children stole the show, they are so cute!

    ReplyDelete
  37. Love how the whole family coordinated blues & pinks. Wonder if they got a big family picture? Lovely tradition going to church together. Seems like all there respect each other.

    ReplyDelete
  38. That lovely invitation makes me want to whip out my colour pencils and have fun!

    Cobalt blue is a stunning colour on Kate - but I found this look a bit mumsy or heavy for this particular occasion. Maybe it's just that spring is upon us!

    Heidi

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The design portion of the invitation with the birds and flowers would be lovely wallpaper in a small powder room. I really love the strawberry motif.

      Delete
  39. It has almost been 4 weeks since Kate has worked, or even William. I don't count Easter since all they did was wave and walk to church. It was 30 seconds and just a chore of living on tax payer money. This is a problem. They are the Prince and Princess of Wales now and seem more lazy than ever.
    They took 6 week off at Christmas.
    Then "worked" 4 weeks
    Then took 10 days off
    Then "worked 4 weeks"
    Then took 4 weeks and counting off.
    We are part way into April and they have already taken half the year off. And when they do work it is only for 1 or 2 days a weeks for a few hours. Please don't say they do stuff behind the scenes because they count everything with the court circular, even a phone call!
    The problem is Kate and Will are coming across so lazy. They don't have the work ethic of the older royals. They work the bare minimum and think that's okay. Well it's not. This is not modernizing the royals family but taking it back a few hundred years where the royals lived in excess without doing anything.
    I know people will say they are prioritizing their kids. Which is great. However, the kids are all in school, and they have plenty of staff to help around the house so they aren't doing anything! Also, it is ridiculous to say you need to take this much time off to prioritize your children. Most of us prioritize our kids, work 40 hours a week and only get a few weeks off. The kids are an excuse at this point not to work. If they worked a TON during those weeks on it would may different. But they don't amd therfore they don't deserve all the vacation unlike those who serve on the front line, etc.
    To me, Kate seems like a gentleman farmer/Socialite who dabbles in charity work. Not a civil servant which is how the queen saw it.
    I am younger then Kate but this lack of work ethic from her and Will makes me sick. I feel like more than ever they want the privilege without the duties. Kate never really worked before marriage, other than part time. But I hoped she would change with the "job". Sadly she and Will seems to only want to coast along while not doing much. Yet they get praised for doing barely anything. I have been a Kate follower for a while but I am so frustrated with the lack of care and work from Kate or even Will. Their bare minimum attitude while living on the tax payers dollars can't last in this day and age. That isn't modernizing the royals at all. I just feel like there are no excuses anymore. They aren't the young royals now, or getting acclimated or putting family first. Most people put family first and still work a full time job and their kids turn out fine. The excuses don't work any more and they need to step up to their titles. No more phoning it in.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. NC, I don't have the same opinion about K&W, but it would be too long to argue. I certainly won't begrudge them whatever way they have found to remain sane under unimaginable pressure.
      But you should be aware that there is a lot of parent-shaming around and statements like children are an excuse not to work are very hurtful.
      How would you feel about another hurtful sweeping statement, a mother who works 40 hours a week and only takes a few weeks holidays cares more about her career than about her children?

      Delete
    2. It probably is not popular but I agree with you.
      They could work one or two days a week (at a minimum) and diminish some of the comments about laziness.
      I like these two and their adorable children, but it would not hurt to do single engagements while the other parent was there for the children. How many parents have the luxury of both parents being home this much.
      I almost think it is getting worse. His brother is no longer a working royal and it almost seems like they are taking advantage of the fact they are the only royals of their generation.
      I truly say this as a longtime supporter of this couple. I think they are taking advantage of their status and the situation.
      Kate claims (per the palace) that her fashion choices this last several months are based on wanting to be taken seriously. I would take them both more seriously if they worked with some regularity. GA

      Delete
    3. Natacha, being a parent, I am well aware of parent shaming. And this was far from it. Rather your comment is just a way to try and shut down criticism of them. They are public figures and need to be held accountable. I didn't say anything about them as parents. I didn't say anything personal about the kids. Rather, I commented on something Kate said and the way it now appears. Kate herself said her priority is her children. And I said that is great. However, you don't have to take off every break with them to make them a priority. You can still work and have them as a priority. It does seem like that is an excuse not to work. It doesn't mean I think they are bad parents. Rather, I think all they want to do is live in excess, travel with the kids and only dabble in charity work here and there. It is bad optics at this point and does make them look lazy. That lifestyle cannot work in the modern world of Royals.

      Anon @ 21:00 I totally agree. I have always been a supporter of Will and Kate, but sadly my opinion is starting to change with the less they seem to do. I think your comment about Harry being gone is very astute. I had not thought about it that way, but I agree that Will and Kate seem to be taking advantage. I know people like to say give them time to get used to their roles. However, they have been working royals as a couple for 12 years. That was the time to be preparing to step up as Princes and Princess of Wales. I just haven't seen it yet. I sadly doubt we will see much more after the Coronation since summer will be coming up and they take several more months off. Hopefully something will change in the fall, but I am not holding my breath.

      Delete
    4. NC. This is not about shutting down criticism of the Wales. You can state that in their position they should be publicly seen regularly and even constantly. That it is unfair that they can take time off when others can't. That it is unfair that they are so rich when others aren't. That they are accountable to the public and that their life is not their own. That their personal wishes should always come after those of the nation. I may or not agree with your arguments. But when you state "However, you don't have to take off every break with the children to make them a priority. You can still work and have them as a priority. It does seem like that is an excuse not to work.", this is exactly the kind of comment a snarky mother-in-law or that single so concerned about you friend would make. Plain parent shaming. No, for some parents you cannot work and make your children a priority. There are even parents who chose not to work at all, not even dabble in charity, lazy them! because for them it is the way they prioritise their children. For them, and indeed I believe for all parents, children are never an excuse not to work. Or would you say work is an excuse to get rid of the children?
      Let's us discuss the Wales by all means but let's not assume that there is only a valid way to be a parent.

      Delete
    5. Natacha I am not even fully going to respond to your comment. You are putting words in my mouth and clearly not really listening to what I am saying. I think Vittoria summed it up perfectly to your response below about commenting on their lives. The only thing I will say since you keep bringing it up is saying they are using their children as an excuse not to work is parent shaming. It is not!. It is how it appears because every time the kids have time off they say they have to take time off too. Hence, why it appears they are saying they can't work because of their kids. I never said they aren't spending time with them or love spending time with them. I am sure they really do want to spend that time with them. But it does make the perfect excuse not work because they figure no one will criticize them where the children are involved. So if they don't want to work, which seems to be the pattern, then this is one way that no one can say anything bad about them. Again, there is no more point trying to discuss this with you because you are reading what you want to into my comment (like the unfair stuff you put, and i never said). There is nothing wrong with fair criticism as opposed to rose colored glasses. Take Care :).

      Delete
    6. Becca in Colorado18 April 2023 at 20:59

      Just wanted to say that I agree with you entirely, NC.

      Delete
    7. Well, NC, that's another way of shutting down all conversation. Remember you started it out of the blue with your 15:55 comment, using negative and derogatory language. Nobody is putting words in your mouth.

      Delete
    8. I certainly wouldn’t say the comments were derogatory. Just because you think the comments were negative- theres nothing wrong with having a negative opinion of William and Kate’s work ethic .

      Delete
    9. Oh Natacha you are just proving my point. Thank you. I'm sorry you are taking this so personally.

      Delete
    10. NC, you are welcome. I am a bit lost about what it was about, but I am glad you feel you have made your point.

      Delete
  40. While I won't attempt to argue against your central point regarding a lack of work ethic, I do have to point out that the monarchy is not supported by tax monies. The Waleses are now receiving the Cornwall income, and even before the Queen's death, their official expenses were paid by then Prince Charles. They also have private money of their own. The Sovereign Grant, which funds the monarchy, does not represent tax monies but rather a minority percentage of the Crown Estate income, of which the state gets the majority percentage. The taxpayer is actually getting the better end of the deal. The major public expense is security coverage, but the hundreds of millions of pounds the state gets from the CE income compensates for that.

    I think that if the King feels his son and daughter-in-law are not pulling their weight, he will make that clear. We're in a transitional period now, between the last monarch's death and the coronation of the new one, and I suspect that everyone, royals and staffers alike, is still feeling their way, trying to figure out new roles and new duties and focusing on the upcoming big event, which frankly needs to take precedence over all else. Give them time to make the transition and to get past the coronation, when they can settle more firmly into their new lives.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you πŸ™ Vittoria for your wonderfully written response. Nobody knows what’s happening behind the scenes and there has been so many major changes recently of course things are busy behind the scenes. Also if Catherine can have time off to spend with her children on holidays then I congratulate her. Perhaps people need to realize she is raising the future King but all that aside I commend her for spending as much time with her children as she can.
      Dd

      Delete
    2. About the sovereign grant, not quite correct, see Sovereign Grant Act 2011. In the end, it is the tax payer's money.

      Delete
  41. I totally agree with you as you say even when the children are at school they do the odd engagement that lasts a couple of hours maximum. The odd meeting . It really isn’t acceptable. Many people raise children when both parents are working full time and then come home to help with homework, bath their children , and read stories . These children grow up with a good working ethic - surely all George , Charlotte and Louis see is their parents undertaking lots of holidays and the odd bit of work . The never ending new clothes ,hats and shoes is unacceptable and shows how out of touch they are with people struggling in this financial crisis . Honestly they need to buck their ideas up and get working in my opinion their are the very workshy Waleses

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Again, I think this is very judgmental. I would never dare say things like that about any parents.

      Delete
  42. Well said NC, I agree with you. As a result they are not showing a great example to their kids. As Kate well knows early years matter. What you show your kids, they 'll end up doing. If you don't show them how to work and how to be a hard worker why should they particularly when there are no needs to do so ?
    I wonder what Will and Kate saw their parents do when they were in their early years.. Unless they missed their hardworking parents a great deal when young and as a result are adamant at being there for them. A lot of people in their 30's take this stand. The other explanation of course si that they are busy with the coronation preparations.
    Well what do you think ?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Can't we discuss the Wales without making assumptions about their children and their parenting?

      Delete
    2. Natacha, I'm not quite sure how you can genuinely "discuss" any public figure without being free to comment on any aspects of their lives that interest or concern you. There's a perfectly good argument that since we mostly don't observe them engaged in parenting, we're not in a position to make observations on how good or bad at it they are, but the comments here really aren't talking about their private lives as parents but rather their public lives and what sort of public example they are setting for their children and others. The Waleses are in a unique position, enjoying great privilege. In return for it, they do have some obligations, not least because they will one day be the king and queen consort.

      I don't agree fully with some of the comments on their working lives at the moment, partly because, as I said, I think this must be regarded as an unusual transition period, but there is nothing wrong with people having made them. Part and parcel of being the vastly privileged Prince and Princess of Wales is having to put up with public criticism, most of which doesn't take the form of vicious vitriol but is reasoned and intelligent. I actually find myself wishing sometimes that the Prince and Princess and their staffers would read the comments sections of blogs like these, because I feel that they could learn a few things from them, such as how they are actually coming across to the public. They'd be much better off doing that than engaging with (and stooping to the level of) the sleazy tabloids, which aren't interested in reasoned discussion but rather in how they can attack, foment conflict, and sensationalize in order to sell more papers and ads.

      Delete
  43. NC, I have to say credit where due. In regards to Easter, yes I know it wasn't a long walk but a lot of time and effort goes into that. Especially for The Princess with her whole family stepping out in front of the world. Example, it can be hard work selection something to wear for a event, then you have the Princesses who would need hair and makeup done. Also jewellery has to be chosen for each look. They don't really have much staff compared to the late Queen and former Prince of Wales. They live in a small four bedroom house, with no live in staff. I just surprised they manage to keep on top of everything. S.πŸ™‚.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Whilst they do not have live in staff they do have a nanny , chef and housekeeper so should have plenty of time to work and be with their children . Even if it took 1/2 a day to get ready for Easter that’s a very small amount of time .
      Natacha with regards to your comment about working 40 hours a week and only spending a few weeks with children - this is what most people have to do to be able to afford to live and is what most employees give as holiday

      Delete
  44. I'm a big Kate fan but I, too, have been so surprised by how frequently she's off the scene during school holidays. I think it's a terrible image for the monarchy moving forward, the idea that just because the children are on extended "half term" breaks, their parents are off the scene, as well. Of course I don't begrudge them family holidays, but this seems extreme. And also hands anti-monarchists an argument on a silver platter. The late Queen famously said "I have to be seen to be believed" - wise words which would serve the Waleses well to remember.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. So true AP. I always think of that comment from the Queen. She knew how important the visibility was. And sadly you're right. This hands anti-monarchists something more to use. Things are already becoming more strained and this is the time to show why the monarchy is important and their role as Prince and Princess of Wales as well.

      Delete
  45. I think what you are all failing to factor into your calculus, is (as we learned/& it was confirmed in Harry's book) Charles does NOT like the spotlight on Anyone but himself & Camilla!! Especially at a time like this (the lead up to the Coronation)!

    There have been several times (in the book & that we've witnessed in real time) where it has been shown, that William & Cathrine are Completely at the Will & Whim of what Charles wants them to do!! Harry & Meghan could not live like that, with their wings being clipped because they might take away the limelight from a more Senior Royal.... I think this is a Very Real thing that William & Catherine are having & have had to contend with!

    Remember all those polls over the years that said that the country would rather have William as their next King, rather than Charles!??? I think the Last thing Charles wants right now, is a popular Will & Kate, just when he is trying his darnedest to get everyone onboard for him & "Queen Camilla"!!

    I think he is very sensitive (& I think quite selfish, insecure & immature in this way) but just like we can all agree that H&M were not given free reign to do things..... I think/know the same thing has happened to & I just bet is currently happening to Will & Kate right now!

    Once Charles & Camilla feel more secure in their roles & popularity, then we will see an increase in Will & Kate's public work..... in the mean time.... less is more, re: their visibility & popularity.... Just my 2 cents.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Becca USA, I think you are so correct! I do think Kate would prefer to focus just on her family but she is very creative and artistic. I think a lot of people would prefer a lifestyle where they had resources and didn't have to do outside work. Definitely not everyone but I don't think it's a fault.

      However, I have noticed a lot of ugly stories about both K&W and it seems really unusual and intense. And unchecked, not corrected! Yet nothing ugly is ever printed about Camilla or her children; indeed, Camilla is "honoring" Diana at the coronation.

      I know Harry is driven by emotion but I believe him, and I think you are correct that W&K are not to be a focus right now.

      Delete
    2. You have a good point about Charles expecting/wanting the spotlight on him. I believe this may have been one of his issues with Diana.
      If William and Kate had a stronger work history, I would believe this 100%, but I think with W&K it is a combination of factors.
      I am from the U.S. and find the funding of the royals confusing. As a whole, I think it looks better to see many of the family members supporting organizations and U.K. business ventures as a plus for them all. I think Charles should see this makes him look like a supported and strong leader. GA

      Delete
    3. Well said! I agree 100%.

      Delete
    4. Anon 19:22 - I actually think this is part of the "narrative" that was created for Will & Kate. I think there was Charles, insecure as all heck by the polls (going back to Will's School Days) saying the country would rather have the crown skip Charles's head & go right to William, especially in the years following Diana's death.

      My hunch, (& some of this was referenced in Harry's book & matches themes we saw play out in the media) was that Charles has always seen William & his popularity as a threat. So I believe that once Will & Kate married, they set out on the life we saw. This served multiple purposes.

      A) It was agreeable to Will & Kate, that's not to say that they would not have stepped up if asked & needed.

      B) I think it was what The Queen wanted for Will & Kate, for them to have a slow roll into their life of service. It has been much referenced that she wanted Will & Kate to have more years than she had (HM & PP in Malta) before she became Queen. I think she also thought that having the childhood Will & Kate wanted to give their children, would possibly make for a better more balanced Monarchy in future.... hopefully this next generation would not have similar problems to her own children.

      C) Finally.... I think all of the above were the things to help the "medicine" go down easier... that The Last thing Charles wanted, was a popular Will & Kate!!!

      I truly believe the narrative that Will & Kate are inherently "Work Shy", is one that was cognitively decided on by "The Institution". I believe William has been a "good soldier", but if Harry is to believed (& considering how he treated William in his book, I don't think he would go out of his way to help his brother...) William expressed intense exasperation that he was being held back & that stories appeared in the media, that painted himself & Kate in a less than flattering light. (I don't know if this was in the book......?) but I recall reading somewhere, that Kate had a tennis event (I think it possibly was to Andy Murray's Mom's Tennis Program) & once Charles found out about this, he was quite upset & there was an urgent instruction to Kate's Team that she was NOT to be photographed with a racket in her hand!! (eyeroll)

      All this is to say, that I do not believe we should jump the gun & believe the narrative we've been fed, that Will & Kate are "Work Shy".... just because that's what's played out. If we've all learned Anything...... there is a LOT that goes into Who is supposed to Get The Attention & When!!..... Again, just my 2 cents.

      Delete
    5. Susan in Florida18 April 2023 at 02:49

      I like your assessment, Becca. I’m also sad that the RF seems so dependent on the press to be popular and considered worthy to exist.

      Delete
  46. Charles has never had a problem with supporting UK organizations and business ventures. On the contrary, he's been extremely good about that over the years, founding many British charitable organizations and even turning the Duchy of Cornwall into a profitable business. In fact, after Diana's death, when she was being painted as Lady Bountiful by certain media, I thought it interesting to note that she hadn't founded a single charity (or even left any money to charities in her will), but that Charles had founded many and was patron of hundreds. If it's true that he resented not receiving full recognition for that, well, he had a point.

    Not knowing him personally and not trusting the books and articles of so-called "royal experts," I am not prepared to claim now that he's somehow resentful of attention being paid to the Waleses. My own, admittedly superficial impression, based purely on his demeanor and words since his mother's death, is that he's calmer, more relaxed, far happier, and less insecure than he's ever been, and also that he's happy to have a son and daughter-in-law who can assume the roles he and his queen consort have had to abandon. Just an observation but not, I think, a naive or ignorant one.

    I will admit that I was deeply distressed to see that the Queen Consort was involved in any way with Jeremy Clarkson and Piers Morgan. I won't say here what I think of either of those undereducated, filthy little hacks. It wouldn't be printable.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Vittoria, as always you make some valid & valued points, & as a wise man once said to me..... "The future chapters have not been written". I have found this humbling & true. xoxo

    ReplyDelete
  48. I don’t think Charles is resentful of the Waleses getting more attention . I would agree he seems more relaxed in his new role .
    William and Kate have never worked full time in their lives .
    I have no doubt Kate would like to spend all her time with her children . She has always been aware what her role and duty would be . They have both been given plenty of leeway and plenty of time without pressure to work .
    There’s no reason why even in the holidays they couldn’t work a couple of days a week - undertaking individual engagements whilst the other looks after the children .
    As they are they are not instilling a good work ethic to their children.
    Ultimately they have a duty to serve their subjects and at the moment they are just showing contempt for the public. GT

    ReplyDelete
  49. I have to say...I'm amazed and disappointed that anyone would think that the only time they're "working" is when we see them. Honestly? Does no one understand that both meetings and planning go on behind the scenes?? We aren't privy to every day in their lives, good heavens. I'm obviously not a royal, but I work for my office job most days from home, which entails zoom meetings, planning, research, consultation....and I might be seen on-site twice a month. If anyone thinks those are the only two days a month I'm working because im visible, they're spectacularly incorrect.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Meetings are detailed in the Court Circular often there’s only one engagement and 2 meetings per week

      Delete
    2. Ah. Well. I'm in the US, and don't know what a court circular is. I still find it difficult to believe that every aspect of their day and every person they speak with regarding their jobs, and every bit of consultation with their staff would be detailed in this circular. If that's the case, then God bless 'em. Royal or not, they have my sympathy for the excruciating surveillance.

      Delete
    3. They should be subject to people scrutiny and questioning the work they undertake or don’t . I’m surprised they now seem to have joint days so much . Appreciate they can travel together but why not undertake solo engagements when they are somewhere then double the charities / organisations benefit?

      Delete
  50. Well, it certainly seems that they DO get plenty of "scrutiny and questioning", so there's that. The ones that believe that William and Catherine should be scrutinized relentlessly are definitely getting their wish. As I said before, God bless them and I wish them nothing but the best. Looking forward to seeing what the lovely Princess of Wales wears for the Coronation!

    ReplyDelete

Comments are most welcome! Constructive discussion is always encouraged but off topic or hateful remarks will not be published.

We ask you use a name when posting (a pseudonym such as the name of a royal you like or anything you wish). If you do not wish to use the sign in options, simply select the "Name/URL" option on the drop down menu and insert your name, and if you wish the country/state you're from. You can leave the URL blank.

If there are a large number of comments, it is necessary to click the 'Load More' button at the end of the comments section to see the latest additions.