Prince Harry & Meghan Markle’s bridesmaids & groomsmen are all children

Harry Meghan Northern Ireland

It’s my hope now that Kensington Palace just gets back to business-as-usual in the final days of the royal-wedding preparations. Thomas Markle took up too many headlines and he sucked all of the air out of the room. It was awful, and an awful thing to do to his daughter. A source even told People Magazine that all of the family drama has been really difficult and “I can’t imagine how hard all of this has been for Meghan…She doesn’t deserve all this drama the week of her wedding.” It’s true. Planning a wedding is stressful enough, but to have all of this bullsh-t dumped in her lap… well, it’s not great. Anyway, the palace did return to business as usual – they announced Meghan and Harry’s “wedding party,” all of the little bridesmaids and groomsmen:

Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will have the cutest group of bridesmaids and page boys on their royal wedding day — 10 of them, in fact! Leading the pack are royal siblings Prince George, 4, and Princess Charlotte, 3, Kensington Palace announced on Wednesday. Harry’s royal nephew and niece will reprise their roles from their aunt Pippa Middleton’s wedding last May.

Several of Harry and Meghan’s godchildren and children of their friends will also serve in the bridal party. Here’s who will be joining George and Charlotte in their bridal party duties: Miss Florence van Cutsem, 3, daughter of Alice van Cutsem and Major Nicholas van Cutsem, and a goddaughter of Harry. Florence is also the cousin of one of Prince William and Kate’s most memorable bridesmaids, Grace van Custem.

Miss Remi Litt, 6, and her sister Rylan, 7, daughters of Benita Litt, LA-based brand curator and bag designer, and Darren Litt. Both girls are Meghan’s goddaughters. Miss Ivy Mulroney, 4, the daughter of Jessica Mulroney, a stylist and friend who has been helping Meghan, and Benedict Mulroney, who is the son of former Canadian Prime Minister Brian Mulroney. Miss Zalie Warren, 2, daughter of Zoe Warren and Jake Warren, and a goddaughter of Harry. Jasper Dyer, 6, son of Harry’s old friend and mentor Mark Dyer and his American wife Amanda. Twins Brian and John Mulroney, 7, the brothers of Ivy and son of the Mulroneys.

[From People]

Meghan isn’t having a maid or matron of honor because “she has a very close-knit circle of friends and she didn’t want to choose one over another.” Which I understand, except… who is going to be in charge of wrangling all of these children?!? Say what you will about Pippa Middleton’s thunder-stealing ass of lies at her sister’s wedding, but Pippa was actually “in charge” of making sure that the kids behaved and did everything according to plan. There are some very small kids who will need their hands held before and during the wedding. It’s going to be shambolic.

Middleton Matthews wedding

Maid of Honour Pippa Middleton

Photos courtesy of WENN.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

180 Responses to “Prince Harry & Meghan Markle’s bridesmaids & groomsmen are all children”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Mariposa says:

    Maybe Poor Jason will get the job?

  2. Astrid says:

    Good point. I forgot Pippa wrangled all that cuteness under control.

  3. klutzy_girl says:

    Why are there so few pageboys compared to bridesmaids?

    Um, excluding William and Kate’s, I’m pretty sure there wasn’t any adult bridesmaid wrangling the kids at previous royal weddings? I think they’ll be fine.

  4. Betsy says:

    I know it’s traditional, but it’s boring! I actually enjoyed Pippa’s “thunder-stealing a$$ of lies” dress and self. She just looked like a human version of one of the hens from Chicken Run (and back then I didn’t know it was an a$$ of lies!)

  5. Goats on the Roof says:

    I might eat my words, but I’m fairly sure it will be fine. I doubt near a dozen young children are going to be set loose to run amok. They will have someone watching, I’m sure. Just not an official maid/matron.

    • Carrie1 says:

      Yeah I seem to recall this same issue in run up to Pippa’s wedding. I thought there was no official maid of honour and Kate just acted as helper and big sister. I’m half expecting Kate to do the same here but more for Harry’s sake than Meghan’s as she doesn’t know Meghan well. If not Kate, Jessica Mulroney then as all her kids are in the wedding party.

      Also Brian Mulroney is probably beside himself with glee about this. The man was such an attention hog this is making me smile on his behalf.

  6. Jay says:

    This is a really dumb idea.

    Sit all your girlfriends down, be an adult, tell them you love them and you made the agonizing decision to pick X as MoH because of her Y qualifications. Accept that they’re adults who can handle it and if they can’t, cut ‘em loose. Release a presser with mini bio of joe great each one is to smooth any minority’s ruffled feathers. If they’re your closest girlfriends and they’re adults, they’ll get it. This is just dumb if it’s truly going to be a bunch of little kids up there. But hey what do I know, plus I only have a passing interest in this. I hope it turns out great and super adorable but I personally would not take this risk.

  7. Lala says:

    I’d rather deal with a gaggle of children hopped up on sugar than have to deal with ANY of the Bridesmaid drama that I’ve dealt with in the past…so I WHOLLY approve!

    • Erinn says:

      Plus how sweet are the photos with the kids like that? All dolled up and excited and bursting with energy. I’d prefer it too – one of my bridesmaids was a GIANT pain in the butt to everyone. I only found out half the issues the others had with her after the wedding because they tried to keep it seeming more smooth than it actual was for my benefit ahah.

      I love that photo of Pippa with the kids. It’s just cute.

  8. whatever1 says:

    Some of the kids are SO young, its going to be like hearding cats except there is going to be nobody in the bridal party to do the hearding!!. And the Mulroney children only arrived in the UK today so they only have a maximum of three days to practise as a group! Yes, this has all the ingredients of being shambolic.

  9. Steph says:

    Her butt was meh…I don’t even know how that became news

  10. Ninks says:

    We had a family wedding recently with a bunch of two and three year old flower girls and page boys, who were all incredibly adorable, but hilariously terrible at their jobs. It was a small wedding, with family, I can’t imagine asking a bunch of smallies to perform in front of hundreds of strangers without at least one adult to shepherd them along.

  11. midigo says:

    “Say what you will.. but Pippa was actually “in charge”of …”.
    I would add that all the Middletons have always been there for Kate and hands-on on every aspect from the “waity period” to the wedding preparation and ceremony, and to the post-wedding. And they still are supportive. Many criticize the Middletons but I would always take them over the Markles.

  12. aaa says:

    Best man William can be a wrangler when they are exiting.

    Isn’t there only going to be one carriage? Dang that means that we won’t get to see William in a carriage with a bunch of kiddies. :(

    • LAK says:

      The kids always travel in a separate carriage. As they are unimportant, no need to publicise their designated carriage.

      At WK’s wedding, Pippa travelled with half the kids in her carriage and Harry travelled with the other half in his own carriage.

      • aaa says:

        I know that for the weddings in London there were multiple carriages and if they follow that model then I will get my wish and see best man William in a carriage with kiddies, a la Harry at William and Kate’s wedding. I recently read, or perhaps I misunderstood, that there will not be multiple carriages at Harry and Meghan’s wedding in Windsor, just the bride and groom carriage.

        Will there be one carriage or multiple carriages?

    • Ninks says:

      The kiddies traveled in other carriages at WK’s wedding and I imagine they’ll do the same this time. Some of them traveled with Harry and Pippa, and one of them was Camilla’s granddaughter (I think), she said afterwards that Harry had given the girl a little toy he’d been carrying in his pocket while they were in the carriage, to help distract her from the crowds cheering. She was so enamored with it, she refused to let go of it for the official photographs, and you can see her holding it in them. It’s such a sweet and thoughtful little gesture, that Harry knew in advance how scary it would be and on such a huge occasion, remembered to bring a toy with him to help keep a little child calm. It really elevated him in my eyes.

      • aaa says:

        Yeah I know that there were multiple carriages at William and Kate’s wedding and that the both Harry and Pippa rode in carriages with the kiddies. My initial comment was me lamenting that there will not be multiple carriages at Harry and Meghan’s wedding, just one for the bride and groom, so we will miss out on William riding in a carriage with kiddies. However if my understanding is incorrect, then that’s a good thing because then we will get to see William riding in a carriage with kiddies.

  13. Peg says:

    Chances are, Jessica Mulroney will be herding the children (sheep) where one go the others will follow.
    I thought Mia Tindall was going to be in the wedding party.
    This wedding could do with a laugh, and if the children provide it all the better, instead of the Markles behaving like mouthy children.
    So Thomas is getting a procedure done today, we all have to live with the choices we make.

  14. Louise177 says:

    Except for who the kids are, this was announced a few weeks ago that the bridal party would be only children. There were adults around when the bridal party were kids. It’s not that big of a deal.

  15. Other Renee says:

    I had trouble enough wrangling my own daughter let alone ten of them! And boys included! Omg! I can’t even go there!

    I used to volunteer for all my daughter’s school field trips on the condition that I only be responsible for a group of girls. Until one time I got a mixed group of boys and girls and of course one of the boys couldn’t stop touching everything IN A MUSEUM. Drove me crazy! Then again he was the only one who thanked me at the end of the day. Sigh.

  16. Merritt says:

    I’m surprised they didn’t ask Lady Margarita and Lady Louise, they are old enough to wrangle the kids. I don’t think the 7 year olds will be able to do it.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Given today’s social media environment? I wouldn’t subject teenagers to that kind of global scrutiny at an age where they’d be online and running into it all the time. Lady Sarah Chatto has to live with the photos of the awful meringue bridesmaids dress from Charles and Diana’s wedding, but at least people weren’t online attacking her about her appearance.

      Maybe Louise, in consultation with her parents, gently made it known she didn’t want to be in the limelight like that again. Given all of the nasty comments about her during the last wedding, I wouldn’t blame her (or her parents) for not wanting her to go through that again.

      • Nic919 says:

        There are enough royal cousins that Louise doesn’t need to do this twice. I am sure at this age she had no interest in being a part of it again.

      • whatever1 says:

        The online teasing will be much worse if one of the younger kids ends up tripping up because of nerves or something like that (very possible). He or she will never live that embarrassment down. The older person doesn’t have to be Lady Louise but someone who is capable of providing the really, really young bridesmaids and pageboys some comfort, support and guidance as they go up and down the aisle in front of hundreds of stangers (and billions eyes worldwide).

      • notasugarhere says:

        The smaller attendants aren’t of an age to be online, which is the point I made whatever1. Any mistakes they make in this wedding will be put down to them being little kids. Any mistake Louise makes at 14 would be endlessly attacked, including social media platforms where she might have accounts (hopefully under an assumed ID). Whether Lady Louise or Lady Margarita Armstrong-Jones – the teens would suffer more than little kids.

  17. C. Remm says:

    Yay, sweet little Charlotte is a part of the wedding. I love her so much. Who cares about Thomas Sr. Markle if you can have these kiddies. :D I’m dancing a happy dance!

  18. DavidBowie says:

    Cute. The kids will probably be better behaved than the brides family. So the Mulroney’s must be one of Lainey’s sources.

  19. equalitygadfly says:

    This will surely ruffle some feathers, but I’ll say it: I hope some of those kids are non-white.

    • Petty Riperton says:

      Don’t hold your breath. She doesn’t associate with her mother’s family either. She doesn’t have any non white friends.

    • Sza says:

      As a non white person what difference does it make exactly ?

      • equalitygadfly says:

        We can pretend race doesn’t matter; and we can pretend that visuals don’t matter — but both have a cultural impact. And, quite frankly, it would be nice for the millions of children of color, who will likely be watching this wedding, to have a diverse cast of characters represented…even in the “bridal party.”

        Michelle Obama explains why “pop culture representation” matters in this article: — and this is certainly a “pop culture” event.

      • Sza says:

        I think you’re really overthinking this. I have young kids in my family and while they’re fascinated by the princess aspect of this, they really don’t care about one or two kids in the wedding party being non-white. We want equal opportunity, political participation, economic prosperity not token gestures.

      • equalitygadfly says:

        Sza, yes, economic prosperity is important — paramount, even — but it’s all connected. It’s all a domino effect. So, the small things are also important — including representation.

        And I suppose every family is different. I know my little niece will be a bit sad. Nothing major, but a little sads. :-)

    • Merritt says:

      It looks like at least two are.

    • milky says:

      I’m sure she meant black kids. Meghan’s maternal family isn’t invited, so I wasn’t expecting that anyway. Not sure why Meghan isn’t close to Doria’s side. Seems odd.

    • All About Eve says:

      I believe two of the siblings (the Litt girls) are half white/half indian. The rest of the bridal party are all white.

      Meghan doesn’t have many black friends. I think this is one of the reasons they’ve brought in a black choir & a black bishop to balance it out.

    • Iknowwhatboyslike says:

      I stand corrected about there not being any non-white children. As has been mentioned, Benit Litts children half Indian and white. My conversation with my friend was about black women who are lauding Meghan and calling her black princess not facing the fact that Meghan, perhaps, doesn’t want that label.

      • NewKay says:

        @iknowwhatboyslike – yes I think that’s one of the saddest things about Meghan to be honest. Particularly as she is so close to her mother, the refusal or inability to identify and lean into ones black heritage really is historic. Meghan is essentially white passing. If she identified more as Black she definitely wouldn’t have the friends she has- certainly not the Mulroney ‘s and she likely would not have climbed so far. This is not a knock on her- just an observation.

      • NewKay says:

        All that said- of Meghan’s mom walks her down the aisle I will cry real tears. And if her mom is wearing her locs loud and proud I will be ecstatic.

      • Tonya says:

        I’m a non-white proud woman who celebrates my heritage (all of it) & most of my friends are white.
        Friendships for me are not determined by race.
        Meghan has many friends of various races like many people in the world…

      • mel says:

        Do you think the Mulroneys are racists?

      • mel says:

        FYI – my comment is in response to #45 by NewKay: “… If she identified more as Black she definitely wouldn’t have the friends she has- certainly not the Mulroney ‘s …”

      • Linda says:

        I dont know if the Mulroneys are racist but they are elitist and full of themselves and completely annoying.

      • candice says:

        Yet Jessica seems to have a huge following on IG with many recognizable “big” names among them and as Ben often boasts, ETalk is the top entertainment show in Canada. I don’t the appeal being based on name recognition as Brian Mulroney was among the least popular of all Cdn. PM’s.

      • homeslice says:

        +1, I would also add tacky…

      • Violet says:

        @NewKay – I’m trying to understand why Meghan “should” lean more into one heritage than another. She can’t help which set of chromosomes she landed with from her parents, and how can she be held responsible for not identifying more with the half that, tbh, she doesn’t see in the mirror? So many people, including me, with no familiarity with the show or her name, when seeing the first photos of her as Harry’s GF, went, Oh – Latina? My instant response when I saw the first photos was not “white”, but it wasn’t “black”, either. She seems to me to be not so much “white passing” as “not obviously black”. I am guessing that Meghan’s life was shaped by a combination of happenstance (her genes) and her conscious choices. But the choices were probably pushed by the happenstance, if you know what I mean. I think “refusal” re her black heritage is a little harsh – we all are profoundly affected by what we see in the mirror. I guess all I mean to say is that she seems to have done her best straddling her heritages. Forgive me if the following question is inappropriate but, given how light Meghan is, if she had leaned more heavily into her black heritage, would she have come in for resentment because of the “colorism” issue that the black community wrestles with? I ask not to be rude, but to suggest that Meghan might be a “no win” situation here. I do not doubt at all that what you say is true about the friends she has and who she is marrying are all made easier by the way she looks. I’m just trying to find out if it would have been realistic to expect her to try to be someone she didn’t feel like she was.

      • Tonya says:

        ‘ Black’ comes in many shades…

        Black will be represented at this British Royal Wedding- the first time in modern history…

        I have watched (too) many royal wedding & the only weddings I noticed that had a few non-whites with significant roles were the Swedish royal weddings…

    • Violet says:

      @equalitygadfly – as it happens, the Litt children have a white father and look ethnic as opposed to white, very much as Meghan herself does – they have straight hair and could be Italian, Spanish, Greek, or Native American, as you’re interested in visuals (link below).

      This is why splicing and dicing race and visuals is so unproductive sometimes. Yes, they are technically “nonwhite” and practically speaking, don’t look very “nonwhite”. Does that mean they aren’t?

      It is true that most of Meghan’s circle seems to be white, she is on her second white husband, and the only POC at her first wedding was her mother. But these are her choices of people and does she have to answer for them within a narrow parameter all the time? Does her heritage have to be a box?

      • equalitygadfly says:

        Hi Violet.

        I guess my basic point is that I hope there is visible diversity. I used the word “non-white” to convey that. We can pick at it, sure. But the bottom line is that I think it’s a bit of a shame if it’s a sea of white…

        As for the “box” question…I, too, am biracial. And when I was a kid I would crow about the box stuff. Now that I am an adult who has had to make my way through this world, I understand the importance of representation. And no matter what we do, other people are going to put us in a box. Removing all “boxes” is a lovely, quixotic notion…but in the real world it isn’t yet anywhere near reality.

      • Violet says:

        @equalitygadfly – I appreciate your point of view and taking the time to explain your feelings to me. I think the “sea of white” given the social environment Meghan is stepping into is somewhat inevitable: people invite the existing social circle. However, it seems to me that Meghan and Harry have taken as much pains as possible to lessen that, with the young cellist, the gospel choir, and the black American Anglican bishop who will give the address. So I think there will be visible diversity, but there’s no question that the BRF and its social environs are mostly white. But then, so has Meghan’s circle been for the most part, and that may be due to where her career took her.

        I’m not suggesting that people should pretend a diverse heritage is meaningless, but there’s a danger to becoming imprisoned in too much meaning, don’t you think? I’m sure the fine line there is not easy to walk. The two little girls in question are adorable and I suppose I felt a twinge of, why should they be appreciated there because of how they look?

        But you did explain yourself very civilly, which I appreciate, and I do understand that the world isn’t nearly where most of us would like it to be.

      • Olenna says:

        Just for the record, the bishop is Episcopalian. This is an interesting article on the division between Anglican and Episcopal churches over canonical language that defines marriage.

      • equalitygadfly says:

        I explained myself civilly? Interesting.

        “but there’s a danger to becoming imprisoned in too much meaning, don’t you think?”

        No, I don’t think. Because we live in a society with very deep-rooted biases. So, pretending like we don’t, and not doing the uncomfortable work to correct it (like minding representation), everything will continue as is — and “as is” only works well for white people. Trying to strip meaning is a form of brushing the issue under the proverbial carpet, and only serves to maintain institutional racism.

        Your use of the word “civilly” in this discussion is a giant red flag. I strongly suggest you digest this infographic:

        Also, as for the “two little girls” — never once did a I disparage them. Or say they shouldn’t be there. I think it’s great. But your tactic here is another problematic one. You’re trying to move the goal posts.

    • violet says:

      @equalitygadfly – in re the “civilly” – I haven’t been on this blog very long but long enough to see that people get really heated and angry and are really quick to take offense. Not everyone gives the poster they are responding to the benefit of the doubt. That was why I thanked you for responding to a delicate issue with civility. I can’t imagine what else you thought I meant by your use of the word “interesting”.

    • violet says:

      @equalitygadfly – again in re the “civilly” – I haven’t been on this blog long but long enough to see that people get really heated and angry and are quick to assume offense, especially where Meghan is concerned. Not everyone gives the poster they are responding to the benefit of the doubt. That was why I thanked you for responding to a delicate issue with civility. I can’t imagine what else you thought I meant but your qualifying it as a “giant red flag” is a case in point. I had my head taken off once for trying to guess at the royal family’s attitude toward Meghan in private, and then someone assumed those were my attitudes, and I found myself accused of having something against divorced people. Why would appreciating courtesy on a blog where, especially where Meghan is concerned, things can get so heated so quickly, be some sort of “giant red flag”?

      I never suggested Meghan should pretend to be something she isn’t: I suggested that she may have gone with the portion of her identity she felt closest to in reality because it was what she saw in the mirror – how is that pretense? Isn’t how she looks a reality?

      I also stated that I have never seen her pretend to be anything but biracial. I never suggested stripping all meaning from a diverse identity: I suggested that finding the line between embracing a diverse heritage being one part of identity, and being boxed in by that identity, was difficult. Perhaps the term “boxed in” wasn’t well chosen. This is what my post said:

      “I’m not suggesting that people should pretend a diverse heritage is meaningless, but there’s a danger to becoming imprisoned in too much meaning, don’t you think? I’m sure the fine line there is not easy to walk.”

      How do those statement translate into moving the goal pasts and suggesting stripping meaning altogether? I said “too much”, not “altogether”.

      I haven’t moved any goal posts: I’m relating to you how Meghan seems to me and seems to have handled her life through how she perceives herself. As this has been admittedly from a great distance through the lens of the media, I’m perfectly willing to admit – I could be wrong.

      One of my favorite movies of recent years was “A Price Above Rubies”, a film about a woman born into and entrenched in a deeply Orthodox Jewish community in Brooklyn (spoiler alert for anyone who hasn’t seen it – and I recommend it it is a wonderful film with terrific performances) and who comes to grief because within herself she knows she just doesn’t belong there. She eventually frees herself but at a terrible cost. It’s a good film about how identity can be both a refuge and a prison.

      I am sorry you were offended.

    • Violet says:

      @equalitygadfly: Like most people, I respond badly to condescension.

    • Violet says:

      @equalitygadfly: “Also, you’re not fooling most people with your “Sorry you were offended.” That is not a genuine expression of regret. That is passive aggressive phoniness. It’s also another form of moving the goal post.”

      Good lord, this is gossip site.

      • equalitygadfly says:

        Again, moving that goal post. It’s a gossip site when I say something with cultural impact, but when you do, a-ok? Pfft.

        And just so you know, we do get into non-gossip conversations in the threads here. You may want to go back and do a little research.

        And for the record, I said the “sorry” thing after you posted that passive aggressive nonsense. I was in no way condescending before. Just calling out your obvious gaslighting / goal-post moving. But interesting that’s what you immediately clung to, considering that calling people of color “uppity” and “condescending” is a go-to move for people with serious casual racism and implicit bias racism issues.

  20. Honey says:

    I wish them well on their wedding day but here is my but, not literally, but . . . in trying to United Nations—full inclusion—Kumbaya this wedding out I hope it won’t turn into clusterf*ck of a hot mess for them and ripe for ridicule by others.

    I hope the sun will be shining high and bright in the sky and the flowers will be beautiful and the bride and groom will be surrounded by the people they love best. If those things line up, then the drama will cease being the drama. It’s just a ceremony. Real life happens after that.

  21. Sza says:

    They should have chosen Edward and Sophie’s daughter. She is old enough.

  22. Cerys says:

    I can never quite understand the upper-class tradition of only having very tiny children as attendants at weddings. It always seems like a recipe for disaster. Most people have a combination of adult bridesmaids and little ones.

  23. feral child says:

    What if Meghan doesn’t know which friend she could trust because of the messiness of her family? Yes, she has her circle of friends but is she able to trust enough to lean on them to share her emotional burden?

    I just feel like she’s alone marrying into her opposite. As an actress, she has to be emotional, know emotions, be a feeling person. That is not the family that she is marrying into. That is barely her own fiancee.

    I want her to make the great escape that Princess Charlene couldn’t so she can be free. Sometimes love just isn’t enough.

  24. YankLynn says:

    The little ones usually steal the show at weddings even if they’re not perfect. I did raise a grandmotherly eyebrow at a 2 yr old in the party because 2 yr olds are pretty baby-ish still and can balk at the last second. I’m surprised not to see Mia Tindall in that list. I thought both William and Harry were close to Zara and didn’t Mike say a long time ago that they’d met Meghan early on in the dating ?

  25. LAK says:

    The little blonde boy in WK’s wedding was so excited and happy to be there. It was adorable to watch. He could barely contain his excitement.

  26. Sarah says:

    I want to delete my comment. Thank you

  27. MrsBump says:

    She probably didn’t want anyone stealing her thunder à la Pippa Middleton. Meh, her wedding, her choice.
    Her father already pulled all focus on him, so it’s probably for the best not to have someone with a shapely derrière in the wedding party

  28. lobbit says:

    I wonder what all the kiddies will wear. And as curious as I am about Meghan’s dress, I’m DYING to know if Harry will wear military uniform or mourning dress. Despite his recent appoint as Captain General Royal Marines, I’m thinking it will be mourning dress and I’m so damned sad about it lol.

  29. Amelie says:

    I’m surprised Mia Tindall isn’t one of the little bridesmaids since I thought Zara was close to William and Harry.

    I could see Kate or Jessica Mulroney wrangling the kids. Someone will do it, unless the older kids will be the ones in charge.

    • SmalltownGirl says:

      I doubt it will be Kate because she has a newborn, but probably Jessica.

      • notasugarhere says:

        I doubt they’d bring an infant to a wedding. He’ll be home with the invisible other nannies while main Nanny Maria is quietly slipped into the church. Although we might get PR stories about Granny Carole taking care of him.

      • SmalltownGirl says:

        I know the baby won’t be there but I feel like Kate will make a minimum appearance and not spend the morning wrangling 10 children, most of whom aren’t hers. I think she will make a very brief appearance with minimum involvement outside of whatever is expected of her as a member of the groom’s family.

      • notasugarhere says:

        She had a baby a month ago, has loads of help, and isn’t infirm. But people will keep infantilising her #because.

      • Danielle says:

        Seriously?! I get it. She should work more for sure. Her style isn’t trendy and she has lots of help, etc. etc. She JUST had a baby; not even a month ago. No matter who is helping her, her body just went through the wringer. And if she’s nursing, it’s even more pressure and strain. She gets a pass. Even if she takes the entire summer off, she gets a pass. Maternity leave is crucial. Even if you have night nurses, day nurses, live-in-moms, someone just to bring you ice chips, etc. They don’t prevent your organs from shifting back into place, heal stitches/tears/diastasis or give you the energy to nurse on demand. She doesn’t need to be infantalized – she’s a new mom. She should be allowed to determine her role and responsibility during her leave.

        Now, should she hit the ground hard and fast once her leave is over……….ABSOLUTELY.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Did you read what Amelie wrote? All she put forward was the idea that Kate, who is already attending the wedding, might be able to Mom Eye or wrangle her two kids into behaving during the wedding.

        Is even that supposed to be too much for her now?

    • Merritt says:

      Isn’t Zara close to her own due date right now? She may not have wanted to commit Mia to a role in the wedding because of that.

  30. Linda says:

    Thats too many children. And 1 adult William. I may watch just to see the chaos of the children. This wedding is starting to look like a comedy of errors.

  31. notasugarhere says:

    At Sophie and Edward’s wedding, the wedding dress designer and one of the parents wrangled the kids. I think the dress designer made their outfits too, including the mini Garter robes.

  32. Muprhy says:

    They should have had Lady Louise be a head bridesmaid aka child wrangler.

  33. JA says:

    I had 6 sisters and 2 besties in my wedding and I still had one maid of honor! People put way to much emphasis on the title and what it means. I obviously love them all if I asked them to be in my wedding but logistically it made sense that one was going to be the one to lead the group and coordinate. I also knew my other sisters would have opportunities to be a maid of honor in the future! Please with the diplomacy because all it does it makes it seem like your girlfriends aren’t mature enough to accept that only 1 of them can be maid of honor… it’s the brides day, get over yourself ladies!!

    • Lizabeth says:

      But from what I think you are saying JA you had your 6 sisters and 2 best friends in your wedding with 1 serving at the maid/matron of honor. That wasn’t the choice Meghan would have had to make if her wedding was to be in the British style. She’d have had to choose only 1 to be in the wedding, period. So it wasn’t whether her friends could deal with being in the wedding but not having the top “honor” billing, it was whether she was comfortable choosing only one to be in the wedding at all. Meghan’s decision makes perfect sense to me.

      I agree 2 yr olds are a bit young to be in weddings. Princess Charlotte was only a few weeks past her second birthday when she was in Pippa’s wedding. But she did fine and IMO would have done fine without Kate hovering over her. (The other child her age didn’t get attention from Kate and she also did fine.)

    • Amelie says:

      The bridal party tradition of having several bridesmaids and grooms is very American. A lot of countries don’t do it. None of my French cousins had them and they didn’t even have maids of honor or best men. They had instead “witnesses” who had some kind of role in the ceremony but I truly can’t remember what because it’s been awhile. The most important being the witnesses who witnessed their civil ceremony (you cannot get legally married in France if you only have a religious ceremony it is not recognized. You have to make an appointment at the local City Hall to have a civil ceremony first).

      • Tommy says:

        If I recall correctly, the whole concept of a bride having “maids” at her wedding stems from pagan times. The maidens wore identical ( or close to it ) dresses to the bride’s ……the idea being that it would throw off and confuse any “evil” spirits seeking to harm the young woman on her wedding day. It’s also where the concept of the “veil” came in, disguising the bride from the unwanted eyes of…you guessed it….those pesky evil spirits.

  34. lili says:

    I think Lindsay Roth, her best friend since Northwestern, was originally tapped. It’s possible that Lindsay decided she didn’t want the pressure and spotlight and Meghan couldn’t choose between the others. Whomever would have been chosen, would be hounded by the British press for months after the wedding.

  35. Mumbles says:

    My guess is that Mulroney woman ends up as the wrangler. Three of them are hers, and she seems super-thirsty to begin with.

  36. Keepitreal says:

    A 2 year old included in this! Yes, shambles and kitty herding!

  37. Violet says:

    So, no kids from Doria’s family? Perhaps there are no small children that side?

  38. Michelle says:

    They are just breaking with tradition all over the place, which is fine, but I feel like she needs to have at least ONE adult female up there. Not to keep up with the kiddies, but I always thought that the best man/MoH were considered ‘witnesses’ to the marriage. How is a child supposed to do that? She does not peg me to be the type with a lot of girl friends.

  39. Brittany says:

    I am so excited about this wedding! i need to see something happy, I’m so depressed at the state of the world. Aside from Meghan’s a-hole dad, I really hope this is a nice day for Harry and Meghan. When my wife and I were considering a big wedding we didn’t want a big wedding party. We wanted 1 person each. I have 3 sisters plus a sister-in-law and a cousin I’m super close to. There was no way I could choose between any of them so I chose my best friend. My sisters flipped out about it (figured they would) but whatever. I think it makes sense to have just children especially if its so hard to choose. This is going to be adorable. Mostly because I’ll be cracking up watching people try to wrangle them LOL

  40. Nic919 says:

    Not that it really matters but the listing of the ages of the children is a bit deceptive. For instance, the Mulroney boys were born in August 2010 are are close to being 8. Their sister is born in June 2013 and she is very close to 5. So the other kids may be older than they seem.

  41. TheOriginalMia says:

    It’ll be fine. My cousin had the groom’s 3 yo niece as flower girl, 4 yo nephew and the bride’s 5 yo cousin. The boys checked out halfway down the aisle. The flower girl refused to throw the petals. She decided to wait until the ceremony started and placed each petal behind the bride and groom while they exchanged vows. It was adorable and no one freaked out grabbing at her.

  42. tearose11 says:

    OMG Ben Mulroney’s kid is going to part of this bridal party? I can’t wait to see HIS smug face…meaning I don’t want to see it at all, Mr. Gloaty My Dad Was PM Ughghghhhhhhjudsh

  43. tearose11 says:

    I’m not black, but a brown, and most of the people I’m friends with are non-desi. Friendship doesn’t have to be contained within your race, does it? Unless you grow up in homogenous country.
    Even if you grow up in certain ethnic communities, you will make friends outside of that community while at school, college & work, social media etc.

  44. TheOriginalMia says:

    So…to identify as black, Meghan has to have more black friends. In whose book is that rule? Meghan is a proud black woman and have a mixture of friends. And yes, Black women are lauding Meghan as a black American princess. She identifies as black. She’s never tried to play on words to deny her black roots.

    I’m looking forward to what the kiddies are going to wear. I’m glad she chose not to have bridesmaids. I had visions of Prinyanka trying to upstage her a la Pippa.

  45. courtney says:

    well considering Harry & Meghan are getting married at a smaller venue than William & Kate did means their wedding party will be smaller

  46. tearose11 says:

    The Mulroneys are thirsty AF and I highly doubt if Lainey didn’t work with him, she would have ripped him a new one about his privilege.

    No doubt the Mulroneys are invited bc Meghan worked in Toronto, and that entertainment show had Ben as a host. JFC he is so grossly cringeworthy, I have no idea nor do I care to know or see his wife and kids, I can’t imagine how giant his head is from landing an invite to this wedding.

  47. Racer1 says:

    Does anyone know if the niece she’s close to and supported her against the family will be attending the wedding? Also, how are they connected to the preacher from Chicago or is that an extension of obama?