Princess Eugenie has asked Charlotte & George to be in her bridal party

The Summer Party 2018 presented by Serpentine Galleries and Chanel - Arrivals

Princess Eugenie of York will marry Jack Brooksbank in October, at Windsor Castle. The wedding will probably look a bit like Prince Harry and Meghan’s wedding, at least in photos. I sort of expect that Eugenie will ride in a carriage to and from the chapel, and that the Queen will make a special effort to make this a fun and fancy day for one of her favorite granddaughters. I hope Eugenie gets to wear a tiara!

Anyway, there’s been some news about the wedding, even though it is months away. Eugenie has announced her “bridesmaids.” If you remember, the Windsors do the whole wedding-party thing differently – a bride isn’t expected to have a party of adult bridesmaids. Bridesmaids are usually children, and maybe there will be some kind of adult maid of honor or matron of honor whose job it is to “handle” the kids. It will be the same for Eugenie – her bridal party involves six children (bridesmaids and groomsmen), including Prince George and Princess Charlotte.

Princess Eugenie is including the children of her cousin Prince William in her upcoming wedding ceremony in a special way. The royal bride-to-be has selected Princess Charlotte, 3, to lead the flower girls and Prince George, 4, to be a page boy for her nuptials to Jack Brooksbank in October, the Express reports.

Charlotte has previously served as a bridesmaid for Meghan Markle’s and Pippa Middleton’s weddings, but considering her nuptial experience, we’re sure her transition to flower girl will be no sweat. This will mark Prince George’s third time being a page boy.

The bridesmaids were also announced for Eugenie’s wedding. They include: Theordora Rose Williams, 5, daughter of singer Robbie Williams, who is a friend of the couple; Maud Windsor, 4, daughter of Lord Freddie Windsor and actress Sophie Winkleman; and Ines de Givenchy, 2, daughter of JP Morgan exec Olivier de Givenchy, according to the Express. Ines’ brother, Louis, is expected to join Prince George as a page boy.

[From Harper’s Bazaar]

It wasn’t that long ago – just two years ago, actually - that royal reporters were still noting that there was a long-standing iciness between the Duchess of Cambridge and the York princesses. There were years of petty grudges, one-upmanships, petty girl drama and more between the York princesses and the Middleton sisters. But… I do think there has been some thawing over the past few years especially. And I think Eugenie was the one to make more of an effort, like an adult. So Kate allowing George and Charlotte to be part of Eugenie’s bridal party is an interesting book-end to years of royal beef, I think. Also: do you think Kate will wear white to Eugenie’s wedding too?


Royal Wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle

Photos courtesy of WENN, PCN.

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

140 Responses to “Princess Eugenie has asked Charlotte & George to be in her bridal party”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. homeslice says:

    Yay! Any chance to see Charlotte doing her thing is good!

  2. My Hiddles says:

    Of course Eugenie will wear a tiara, she’s a princess of the blood.

  3. Noodles says:

    They’re friends with Robbie Williams! That’s not only awesome news but I’m so happy we will get to see him at a Royal wedding, attempting to behave himself.

  4. SympathyRage says:

    The color of her coat was yellow.

  5. Saucypop says:

    Kate didn’t wear white to Harry and Meghan’s wedding. She wore a yellow coat dress.

  6. Jane says:

    Before anyone else says it…

    Kate did not wear white to H&M’s wedding.

    Just a pale yellow dress coat that looks white in person and in pictures and who cares anyway about wearing white to a wedding it’s the 20th century.

    • Derriere says:

      The same coat dress was worn to Charlotte’s christening and was white. Why are we parsing this?

    • Lizabeth says:

      I think it’s the 21st century now @Jane. As to who cares about wearing white to a wedding, apparently the couple did. It was reported the extensive protocol instructions sent to guests said women guest should refrain from wearing white or cream. Now I’ll admit none of the reports about those instructions said anything about wearing other colors that looked white in person and looked white in photographs but even “America’s Queen” Oprah was able to figure that part out on her own.

      • homeslice says:

        So NOW protocol instructions are important…lol. I thought we determined with Meg, that protocol isn’t binding and they can do their own thing? Hmmm.

      • Nic919 says:

        Kate had a blue dress in the exact same style that fit and she could have worn that. She chose not to. Keen defenders can try to minimize it all they want but it’s still rude and violates a basic rule of etiquette that everyone is aware of on both sides of the ocean.

      • Wowsers says:

        Lol there was no protocol sent to guests about not wearing white. Where did you read that nonsense?

      • Lizabeth says:

        @Homeslice…I have never seen any written protocol instructions that Meghan has violated. In contrast, the wedding attire instructions were written. That’s a huge difference. If you can provide a link to official written protocols Meghan has violated I’d love to see it. Official protocol, not opinions. Instead all I’ve seen are opinions like Meghan violated protocol by crossing her legs. Oops, there are photos of Kate, Diana, Camilla, and even the Queen herself sitting in exactly the same way. Never mind. Or bare shoulders violate protocol and sleeves have to be to the elbow at the Trooping. Oops, one of the Yorks wore a sleeveless dress to a Trooping. Others have worn sleeves that don’t reach the elbow. Well, bare shoulders still aren’t ok because they are not ok at the Ascot. Hardly convincing. Or Meghan didn’t curtsy to the Queen after the wedding. Oops, she did but it wasn’t on camera. (If people could blame her for the camera missing it, I’m convinced some probably would!) Or Meghan and Harry violate protocol when they hold hands. Oops. Charles and Camilla and Edward and Sophie hold hands too. Or Meghan violated protocol by wearing navy to the RAF ceremony. Oops, Anne wore a brown dress, the Queen’s cousins wore dark colors, as did guests at the church service. Or..or…or… It’s fine not to like Meghan’s clothes. It’s quite another to refer to (apparently) non-existent royal protocol to criticize her choices.

      • Bridget says:

        This is getting excessive.

      • Sarah says:

        I always find colour themes for weddings strange wearing white supposed to be because the bride s a virgin most people are not on wedding days so if others wear white why the he’ll does it matter if someone else does

      • notasugarhere says:

        Oprah had a new dress made overnight because she was worried the other one photographed too white. At least she payed attention.

      • Mac says:

        I believe the wedding invitation had instructions for women to wear hats and men to wear morning or lounge suits. I don’t recall seeing a color palate attached to the invite.

    • Milla says:

      It wasn’t white. Also, she had post baby figure, so maybe she didn’t get to wear what she wanted.

      Kate didn’t not do a thing wrong at the wedding. She looked like someone who gave birth. She literally took take of her kids, otherwise we would see even less of her.

    • Becks1 says:

      I don’t care that she wore white, I care that we are treated as stupid for thinking the dress was an off-white/cream. If it was yellow, it was such a pale yellow as to show white/cream… every picture, video, etc. Her hat was yellow. The hat and dress are clearly different shades.

      If Kate did have a custom McQueen made, that looks exactly like one she already owns, that is only one shade slightly different, and that’s okay/seems reasonable….then no one can complain about Meghan’s couture ever again.

      She wore the same dress yesterday in a visibly different color that would have worked perfectly at the wedding.

  7. DavidBowie says:

    “And I think Eugenie was the one to make more of an effort, like an adult.” This statement is based on what???

    “Also: do you think Kate will wear white to Eugenie’s wedding too?” It was yellow.

    • Mellie says:

      Agree…how in the world does one know this sort of inside scoop and if so, give the deets! This site sure doesn’t care for Kate. I know she doesn’t kill herself at her “job”, but do any of these people have it that rough? I mean let’s be realistic here.

    • jan90067 says:

      Really? And who has the memo they were cc on about it? Maybe it was Pippa who extended the branch, inviting them to her wedding? Or before that, just over time, as George and Char were born, and they all bonded a bit over the kids? WHO KNOWS… it’s just nice that they’re civil to each other.

      Why do people have to create drama between women? I would hope they ALL would’ve matured and grown up some since that roller-derby incident a decade ago!

    • perplexed says:

      I didn’t get that statement either. I wouldn’t mind it if there was proof. But none is provided and then it makes the statement seem empty. And then wonder where I have to go to find actual gossip where at least a “source” can be quoted, even if it’s from US magazine. It’s frustrating to read….no actual gossip or even a story to back up what’s being said.

  8. Jadedone says:

    Why are we assuming Eugenie made the effort to reconcile?

  9. Eleonor says:

    I think the York princesses are more linked to their “royal status” and all this kind of crap for them Cate will always be “working class”. I can see why Eugenie would want the future King to her wedding . It’s not a conciliatory gesture to me.

  10. Merrit says:

    Coming to note (like many others), that she wore yellow to MM and Harry’s wedding. The blatant misleading in posts is getting really tasteless.

  11. Evie says:

    For some reason I feel a bit sorry for Eugenie. Meghan and Harry had this amazing wedding at the same venue just a few months ago, and no one really seems to care about Eugenie’s upcoming wedding. I even forgot it was happening. The York sisters may be blood princesses but they are far down the pecking order and they haven’t got the looks or style to generate any substantial public interest.

    But maybe I’m wrong and they are happy to let Meghan and Kate steal all of the thunder.

    • homeslice says:

      I don’t feel bad for Eugenie, but I do think it would be nice to see both sisters working for the family. They would add something, I think. Eugenie, seems to be the more mature of the two.

      As for her wedding, I’m looking forward to it. I think now that we saw minimalist bride, Meg, it will be nice to see Eugenie take it in another direction. I think the wedding will be completely different, from the dress to the ceremony.

      And remember they are blood princesses!! lol.

      • Evie says:

        I agree Eugenie seems like a mature girl and would probably be a perfectly competent working royal.

        But the thing is, the BRF is very big. There are already a number of working royals – Charles and Camilla, Will and Kate, Meghan and Harry, Anne, Andrew, Edward and Sophie. Even some of the Queen’s cousins (the Kents) are doing engagements. That’s more working royals than in any other European royal family. Eugenie and Bea aren’t really needed, adding more minor royals to the royal gravy train will rub the public the wrong way. They need to make their own money.

        I think Eugenie and Beatrice are much better off being pragmatic about it and start embracing their lives as basically private citizens. They are blessed with great privilege and connections, they should make use of this and build good careers for themselves. They will only be pushed to the royal periphery, and their kids will be non-royals. It will be all about Charles and his direct line in the future. Pecking order beats competence in the RF.

      • jan90067 says:

        Evie, the only thing is that the Royals you mentioned (Anne, Kents, etc) are that they are aging. In the not to distant future, they will die (some are getting pretty old!)/cut down on engagements/retire… Then who is carrying the load? W,K,H, &M? Their kids won’t be old enough to be doing this for another 20-30 years or so.

        So who is going on the tours, opening hospitals, be patrons of the all charities etc.? I don’t think Charles’ “vision” for a pared down Monarchy is feasible really (Only him/Cam, W,K,H, &M and the kids). I know we’ve read/heard W,K,H, &M want to have fewer patronages, “umbrella-ed” under the Foundation, but would that really work? Would all be “covered” that needs to/should be?

      • Addie says:

        Charles and sons intend to cut down the activities carried out by the BRF so replacing the older ones with the younger ones will be unnecessary. The charity patronages are relatively new and were established as a means of making the monarchy visible and to appear relevant. In other words, it was about their own survival. Who know what will happen in the future…

        Better for the York girls to carve out their own lives independent of the family business. They will still be supported by family money as well as tax money from various pots the Queen controls. There is nothing stopping them from continuing or doing more charity work should they desire. Many, many people who are ordinary citizens do so much more than the royals and don’t get paid for it. Why should the Windsor’s get paid for it?

    • Evie says:

      Edward and Sophie are a little over 50, they won’t die anytime soon, and royals usually work well into their 80′s. Harry and Meghan will probably be expected to do many engagements (Harry did relatively few a year as a single man), and they can also do them separately when needed. I expect Will and Kate will be told to step up their game when Charles becomes king. In about 20-30 years there will be a new wave of young royals. If Harry and Meghan have two kids, there will be 5 young working royals + partners by then.

      Most countries have a small number of working royals. In Spain, which is also a populous country, there’s basically only Felipe and Letizia. Felipe’s parents do a few engagements, and occasionally Felipe’s sisters (who have been very unpopular with the press due to scandals, fraud etc.). I think Charles is wise to slimline the BRF. The public are paying much closer attention to the cost of the monarchy these days, and there can’t be too many minor royals being paid from the public purse. Even if they do good work. It’s about optics.

      • jan90067 says:

        Charles has said that Andrew and Edward will not be part of his slimmed down Monarchy, only his sons and their families. Yorks and Wessexes are out. So again, WHO will be doing all the heavy lifting?

      • Evie says:

        Maybe the total amount of engagements will be scaled down? Maybe Charles wants fewer patronages to suit the modern era, and for the monarchy to consist of a few, senior royals who the public know and care for.

        Again, a slimline monarchy is the norm in all of the European monarchies. There are usually 4-8 adult working royals per country, that’s it. The press has been relatively kind to the BRF because of the Queen’s immense popularity, but once she dies, they will be vulnerable to criticism. And the main criticism is the cost of the RF and whether they are still relevant enough to make up for that.

        Charles will not want to be seen as a monarch who gives out “jobs” within the institution to distant family members who are far from the throne, just to give them a purpose and an income. That era is over. Very few Brits feel connected to Eugenie and Bea, compared to Will and Harry, and keeping them on the dole will not go down well.

      • notasugarhere says:

        There has been no public announcement about any of this. It is all speculation.

        Charles cannot off Andrew completely, because by law Andrew is a Counsellor of State. Beatrice will likely be one too.

      • Lizabeth says:

        @Evie–You are correct members of the BRF have worked well into what anyone would call “old age.” But I don’t think that means Edward and Sophie will. We can’t know about anyone’s future health, especially decades down the road. Plus, they may not have the same loyalty to Charles (or heaven forbid to Will if Charles dies relatively early) that they have to The Queen. So if Charles does downsize, alot of things likely won’t get done. And maybe no one cares. From across the pond it seems to me though if the bread and butter ribbon-cuttings are given up, and people don’t see members of the BRF out and involved in charity and civic events, the monarchy will seem less important and less worthy of support. And while downsizing sounds like it should save the taxpayer money, hasn’t Charles tried to pull a few fast ones recently to take personal control of assets that are considered “Crown” assets that belong to the country? Not to the BRF?

      • AmyLue says:

        @nota – I’m not British – Could you say more about the Counselor of State role of Andrew and why Beatrice will also be one. I’m interested and know nothing about that role.

    • Scram says:

      Maybe the public and media aren’t as interested, but I’m sure their friends and family are and those are the people who really matter. Her wedding will be an amazing, happy day for her as it should be.

      As for the slimmed down monarchy, doesn’t the BRF have more territory to cover than the European royals?

      • Addie says:

        They are largely irrelevant to the Commonwealth as these countries live independently. The BRF is always made welcome as they are seen as more of a novelty but we are not dependent on the UK. The BRF is a fixture in the UK; that’s their real turf and it’s those people who pay for the royals’ lives. We only pay for their tours which still come to millions and are essentially holidays with a few ceremonies thrown in. They have no tangible benefits to the country vs the cost of the tours. Some smaller Commonwealth jurisdictions simply can’t afford to host them; too much of a financial burden.

  12. Loopy says:

    Doesnt Kate have to actually courtsey to them? Lol I have never seen it done between the younger royals only to the Queen.

    • Original Jenns says:

      If she is not with William, yes she does.

      • Dixiebells says:

        I wonder if that will end once TQ dies. Everyone moves up a rung in seniority yes? It seems a bit crazy to have the Princess of Wales curtsying to her husband’s cousins? Maybe Diana did this? I don’t remember. And then what happens once they are the King and Queen? I mean you can’t get any more senior and certainly not if your simply the King’s cousin? I don’t mean to minimize them as people but the hierarchy as it exists now I would imagine will eventually change. Even if Kate is without William. I’m not sure any of the younger ones take this all that seriously amongst each other tbh. But that’s just a guess.

    • perplexed says:

      I’ve never seen the younger royals do it either. I assume they do it once when they first meet (which is probably inside where there are no cameras).

    • Cers says:

      HM changed the rules after Charles married Camillla because the “blood” princesses didn’t want to curtsey to her. Historically, the wife of the prince of Wales is the second lady in the land. The wives of the Monarch’s other sons and their offspring are next followed by the monarch’s daughters. If the rules hadn’t been changed it would be HM, Camilla, Kate, Charlotte, Meghan, etc. Diana and Sarah were not required to curtsey to Anne.

  13. Snap Happy says:

    This is petty, but having G & C in the bridal party will bring more press.

  14. aquarius64 says:

    I am wondering if Eugenie and Jack are trying to get buzz on their wedding. Eugenie is ninth in line to the throne, not a working royal, her wedding is not historic like Harry and Meghan’s, and her fashion choices are not sold out. No announcement that their wedding Wii be televised either. If Jack gets a title he better be required to give up his career like the women do.

  15. Bridget says:

    She will wear her mother’s tiara. It would be weird if she didn’t.

    Unless Fergie sold it.

  16. Natalia says:

    This Royal pecking order thing is sometimes ridiculous. In this case, the girls should be curtsying to her. She’s the future Queen Consort. Who are they? Didnt Andrew even have to pressure the Royal family to give them the princess title?

    I’m a fan of Fergie but their perv father (the purported favorite of the Queen?) and these girls are really just window dressing – and they’re the ones with the royal blood, not Fergie.

    • Lizabeth says:

      Kate becomes Queen Consort only if she stays married to William. I’m not saying they won’t stay married but that’s why Kate’s need to curtsy often depends on whether she is with William or not. Her status is dependent on him whereas that isn’t true for blood princesses.

    • jan90067 says:

      Actually, it was Anne that brought the “Blood Princess” thing about. She refused to have to curtsey to Camilla. So TQ changed the curtsey pecking order to having “Blood Princesses” only have to curtsey to her IF Charles is with her, otherwise Cam has to curtsey to them. Same with Kate and now Meghan. If with their husband’s they all curtsey to K & M. If K & M are alone, K & M must curtsey to Anne, Eugenie and Bea. So silly really.

    • Nic919 says:

      Beatrice and Eugenie were born Princesses because they are grandchildren of a son of the monarch. Just like Queen Elizabeth was when she was born. Edward’s kids are also Prince and Princess but choose not to use it. The only ones who didn’t get that title upon birth are Anne’s kids.

    • Lyla says:

      Um, no. Andrew didn’t have to pressure the royal family to give them princess titles. They are the monarch’s grandchildren from the male line, they automatically get the princess title. Just like Charles’ and Edward’s kids (but not Anne’s because she’s female), although Edward chooses to not to style his kids as prince and princess (but he could if he wanted to).

    • notasugarhere says:

      Kate and Meghan are royal by association, Beatrice and Eugenie are royal by birth. When they are without their husbands, Kate and Meghan have no “rank” while B&E will always be royals by birth and in the line of succession.

  17. magnoliarose says:

    I am wondering where the Windsor Castle security is far too costly brigade? I am waiting for Eugenie isn’t an heir? While H and M were supposedly too expensive to secure it seems that “no where in the succession line” Eugenie is more important. She’s not even the daughter of the heir’s heir. Yet she gets married in the very same castle.
    Who pray tell is paying for all this? We all know Andy and Fergie are skint (a little Brit slang) so we need some names and accounts. Andy does not work for the BRF and is a walking scandal.
    While H and M should have married quietly and shamefaced in a Waffle House parking lot, Eugenie and this guy are worthy. Where are the keyboard finance ministers now? I hope she hand sews her dress because Andy and Fergie didn’t grab enough from their shady business dealings to afford anything but a couple of bolts of muslin and thread. OR will it all be gratis?

    THIS is why people say the undercurrent of criticism against Meghan has the tinge of racism to it.

  18. Cerys says:

    I’m sure the wedding will be lovely. It’s nice that she has asked G&C to be attendants but it seems little Mia Tindall has been overlooked again. But then she wouldn’t generate the same level of publicity.

    • YankLynn says:

      It’s like George and Charlotte’s job now, they’re so good at this wedding stuff :) I do wonder why Mia Tindall wasn’t included, again. So perhaps Zara and Mike aren’t confident she can “perform” or they don’t want the stress. I’ve been a parent of tiny attendants and you’re a wreck until they get down the aisle.

  19. xena says:

    I love that she included Maud Windsor in her bridal party and whilst thinking that through am wondering why Isla and Savannah or Mia aren’t part of any bridesmaid group.

  20. audfhauio says:

    wow, I honestly had no idea that there was ever bad blood between Kate and the York sisters? weird!

  21. Coz' says:

    Isn’t it costumary in the UK to have children in the bridal party?
    I know it is in my (European) country or at least it was when I was a child.
    It’s changing now, and there are more and more adult bride’s maid but I really think it’s the influence of American movies and TV shows.

  22. Jessica says:

    As if William would allow G&C to NOT be in Eugenie’s wedding; it gives them another opportunity to shine. Also Kate didn’t wear white to Meghan’s wedding just like Meghan didn’t wear black to the RAF ceremony.

  23. Cee says:

    Eugenie seems close-ish to Pippa. They’ve been photographed together at multiple events, having attended together even with The King of Marshmallows, and Pippa invited her to the wedding, which she attended with her now fiancée.
    So I don’t find it strange for her to include George and Charlotte. The Philips girls are too old, she’s included Maud Windsor. She could have also included Mia Tindall, though.

    • magnoliarose says:

      Maybe Zara said No? G and C will bring the attention and from all the press releases it seems they want some attention.

    • Lizabeth says:

      The couple can ask whoever they want but neither one of the Phillips girls is “too old” to be asked @Cee. They are 6 and 7 yrs old. At Will and Kate’s wedding two of the girls were 7 and 8. Two of the boys were 8 and 10. I don’t think things have changed so much since 2011 that 6 and 7 are now considered too old to participate in a wedding. Maybe the Yorks and the Phillips weren’t ever very close though.

  24. burdzeyeview says:

    I hope Charlotte doesn’t tell the press to f…off lol. She’s dissed them already at the christening…..wonder where she gets that from!!

  25. Ellie says:

    Not a Kate fan (or non-fan for that matter, just neutral), but what’s with the implied dig about acting “like an adult”? I would consider myself fairly well-versed on royal gossip, but it wasn’t my understanding that Kate had a reputation for being particularly immature or petty, whatever her faults may be. If I’m wrong I’m happy to read up on it – but at the moment I’m wondering if that assessment is based on any legitimate sources?

  26. Brittany says:

    I wish my wife and I could have been near Windsor Castle for Harry and Meghan’s wedding. I’m excited for Eugenie’s wedding I guess but I love me some Harry and Meghan (and William and Kate). We said that when one of William and Kate’s get married 20+ years from now we are heading overseas to enjoy the festivities!

  27. Purrrr says:

    How come Mia, Savannah, or Isla are never asked to be bridesmaids? Are they not that close with Peter or Zara?

  28. Mego says:

    In defence of Beatrice, one of the stories I read is that back pre marriage Kate hosted a charity event which Beatrice attended and Kate ignored her/wouldn’t speak to her the entire evening. If it’s true then I’m not surprised there is a rift.

    • notasugarhere says:

      Kate was one of 12 people who worked on that charity night at the roller disco. She didn’t tell Beatrice the theme, Kate screamed obscenities at Beatrice (bartender admitted it) when B questioned why she wasn’t told, reporters caught and reported on Beatrice in the ladies crying. Remember Beatrice is 7 years younger than Kate.