Friday, February 18, 2011

Sarah not invited to royal wedding

What a surprise ... not.   Sarah, Duchess of York has confirmed that she has not been invited to the wedding of Prince William of Wales,

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/royal-wedding/8334160/Royal-Wedding-Dianas-friend-Sarah-Duchess-of-York-is-not-invited-by-Prince-William.html

10 comments:

Michelle said...

Good evening Marlene,
Two quick questions regarding the royal wedding. First, MSNBC's royal watcher is reporting that Fergie WAS invited as a formality but declined as she was expected to. Any thoughts?

Also, once Kate is married, what will her last name be? Or, rather, what will she use as one when it is required? Formally would it be whatever her & William are made Duke & Duchess of, or Windsor/Mountbatten-Windsor?

Marlene Eilers Koenig said...

Sarah was not invited to the wedding ... she did not decline an invitation.

Kate will not need the use of a last name when she marries ... she will sign her name as Catherine
and that is it. The marriage register may show a last name for William William Philip Arthur George Mountbatten-Windsor as this name was used on Anne, Andrew and Edward's marriage registers ... but Charles did not use the M-W name ... Windsor is for the male line descendants of George V who do not have titles ... M-W is for the male line descendants of Elizabeth II who do not have titles. Or rather who are not royal highnesses. Catherine will use her own name on the marriage register and sign Catherine Middleton for one last time ... after that it will be Catherine - regardless of her title ... which may be HRH Princess William of Wales -- but she will sign her name as Catherine - nothing else

Michelle said...

got it. thanks.

how do you get your information? i'm not asking specifics, just if it's a royal connection, common sense, years of study, all of the above... i find myself taking your word above what i read/hear elsewhere and it just has me wondering how you know so much not only about historical facts but current events as well.

Marlene Eilers Koenig said...

Read my profile. I am an acknowledged expert on royalty. I have written several books, numerous articles. I have a rather large library of books, and extensive clip files. I do some some connections. I also read several newspapers each day, magazines, etc. Years and years of study

Clara said...

I can't say I'm surprised albeit rather saddened--more at the whole mishegas than at the Royals' response which is perfectly understandable. I've always been a Fergie fan but this latest is completely indefensible and actually horrifying, just really cheapens the whole idea of the monarchy.

Love your blog, BTW.

Marlene Eilers Koenig said...

Why would it cheapen the monarchy. Mark Phillips was not invited. Sarah is the FORMER WIFE of Andrew. One does not usually invite the ex-wives or ex-husbands to the weddings or other family events ... they have ceased to be a member of the family. Sarah is also a constant embarrassment (her own fault) .. and if she had exited the family in another way without the adultery, without the spending problems - and had lived a quiet life -- things might be different. Her daughters are princesses because of their father. Andrew is an enabler --he needs to kick her out of the house and force her to get her life back on track

Clara said...

No, no, I meant what Sarah did in May cheapened the monarchy. Sorry, I should've been clearer. I agree with you. As I said, I am a Fergie fan but her conduct in May is indefensible. I have *no* idea why she cannot seem to get her spending under control. It's a shame, as she and Andrew have such a unique relationship, but she's completely unsuitable as any connection to the Royals.

Marlene Eilers Koenig said...

As Sarah is not a member of the royal family, her actions reflect only on herself - and the media concerned solely with scandal and not getting facts right. Her behavior does not affect the monarchy because she is not a member of the family ... legally, the monarchy is the Sovereign ... there are no constitutional roles for members of the royal family.

Clara said...

If it's such a non-story why did you bother to reprint stories that she hadn't been invited?

At any rate, I'm sorry for the embarrassment she's caused herself and her daughters and ex-husband. This seems to be a touchy subject so I'll bow out now.

Marlene Eilers Koenig said...

I put a link to an article for people to read ... as you can see, Royal Musings is a little bit of this, and a little bit of that.

You have nothing to be sorry about ... Sarah has only embarrassed herself ... no one else.