Princess Eugenie is inviting 1200 random people to watch her October wedding

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

I really like the York princesses, and I’m looking forward to seeing the photos from Princess Eugenie’s October wedding. I don’t believe it will be televised in America, because… let’s be real, Princess Eugenie isn’t *that* popular. Which brings me to this new announcement about Eugenie and Jack’s wedding. We already knew that it will be happening at Windsor Castle, with many of the same vibes as Meghan and Harry’s wedding. Now it seems that Eugenie is copying something else as well: she’s inviting members of the public to come see the wedding procession route.

Princess Eugenie has invited 1,200 members of the public into the grounds of Windsor Castle for her wedding later this year. The 27-year-old, who is the Queen’s granddaughter, will marry her long-term boyfriend Jack Brooksbank in October. The royal wedding will take place at St George’s Chapel – where the Duke and Duchess of Sussex were married in May.

Like Prince Harry and Meghan, Princess Eugenie and her new husband will also ride through Windsor in a carriage. The princess, who is ninth in line to the throne, became engaged to Mr Brooksbank in January after the couple dated for seven years.

The Royal Family says people will be able to apply to watch the wedding from inside the grounds of Windsor Castle. To “share the experience of their special day”, members of the public must submit their details to a ballot by 8 August. Also invited to the event – on Friday, 12 October – will be representatives of charities supported by the couple, members of the community in Windsor, and children from schools that Princess Eugenie attended. The invitees will be able to watch guests arrive and a live broadcast of the service. Once married, Princess Eugenie and Mr Brooksbank will be taken on a short carriage procession along part of Windsor High Street.

[From BBC]

Well, at least she isn’t charging admission fees, I guess? But do you really think 1,200 eager royal-fans will want to join this lottery system to see who gets to… stand outside of a castle and wave to Eugenie in a carriage? The thing is, I’m sure they will be able to find 1200 people who want to do that. Royal weddings are big business in Britain, and I’m sure there’s an argument to be made that Eugenie’s wedding helps the local economy or something. Personally, I just think it feels a little bit like Eugenie thinks she’s as important as Harry? I don’t know.

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

Photos courtesy of WENN.

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

114 Responses to “Princess Eugenie is inviting 1200 random people to watch her October wedding”

Comments are Closed

We close comments on older posts to fight comment spam.

  1. Eliza says:

    Edward and Sophie did this too, right?

    So more like tradition and less like Keeping up with H&M.

    • magnoliarose says:

      Edward is the son of the monarch. Harry is the son of the future monarch and grandson of the monarch. So how is it that Eugenie’s wedding should be on the same scale of expense as theirs? She isn’t even a working royal.

      • Eliza says:

        Eug is still the grand-daughter of the monarch. And it will likely not be televised so not on the same scale. She’s a born princess, working or not. No one is forcing 1200 people to show up. It’s a gesture to a public and there are groups of people who would be interested to go.

        The security will cost what it costs because the entire family is present any way. I don’t see why there should the outrage.

      • magnoliarose says:

        No other grandchild that has been married has done this with so much PR. Zara and Peter didn’t. It doesn’t matter if it is televised the PR leading up to it is an attempt to drum up interest.
        Eugenie seems like a lovely person but this is overkill for her role in the BRF.

      • Nikki says:

        Agree with Magnolia Rose all the way: this is overkill for her relatively small role in the Royal Family. (I also like what a subsequent poster said about “literally making a spectacle of themselves”!)

      • babypeanut says:

        Fergie’s fingerprints?

      • perplexed says:

        To be honest, I don’t get who would be interested in going to this wedding.

        They can invite 1200 people if they want, but I’m wondering who would actually be THAT interested in attending — not unless it’s to just to something a bit oddball as a joke or to wear a Union Jack hat like Joey Tribiani did on Friends or to catch a glimpse of the higher-ranking royals (which you could probably do at some other event).

        I get the interest in Harry and Meghan’s wedding, but not this one. Even with Harry and Meghan’s wedding, didn’t they invite people from their charities or something to that effect? — there was an actual connection to garner some interest in attending.. But here…unless you’re mingling at a McDonald’s close by, I don’t know why anyone would have an interest in stopping by.

      • magnoliarose says:

        @perplexed
        LOL Mingling at a McDonald’s. I can’t stop giggling.

        @babypeanut
        I see Fergie and Andrew all over this.

        @Nikki
        Yep. I agree with that poster too.

    • Natalie S says:

      You’d think they would want their privacy instead of literally making a spectacle of themselves. And there’s still the cost of securing the carriage route. Harry and Meghan have very public roles so they needed to be engaged with the public.

      Zara didn’t do this because she is a private citizen and not a working royal. Eugenie is being foolish inviting people to gawk at her.

    • RBC says:

      @Jan90067: I noticed you called Andrew “pedo Andy” , I have noticed other posters inferring the same thing about him. What is the story there?

  2. Jane says:

    What’s wrong with her thinking she’s as important as Harry it wasn’t her choice not to be a working royal if harry can have 40 million pounds worth of security she can invite people to come and join in like the rest of them do her wedding will cost a lot less then William and Harry’s the double standards when it comes to men and woman in the royal family are ridiculous

    • Natalie S says:

      It’s not a male vs. female issue. If Charles’ had a daughter, she too would have been a working royal and given a big wedding.

      Where did you get the 40 million number from?

      Eugenie’s status and why she gets any of this is entirely based on the unfairness of monarchy. By their own rules, she’s not as important as Harry.

    • Jan90067 says:

      Jane, that 30-40 million pounds for security was a totally made up number by the tabloids to generate Meghan Hate. It was actually in the 2-3M pound range.

      • Nic919 says:

        This is what I am tired of. It’s one thing to point out the costs of things, as we all know that the BRF spends money like water, but the numbers for anything Meghan does or is linked to is always exaggerated. Same with the cost of her outfits.

      • KD says:

        What’s the source for the 2-3 million? Honestly, I expected the security number to be higher.
        Well, Meghan is wearing Couture, so the cost of her outfits are going to start at way above 5-6 thousand.

      • magnoliarose says:

        Well KD now we know why you are arguing so much about this. Meghan’s wardrobe and some weird leap you are making.

      • KD says:

        arguing? I’m trying to point out that this has happened before. It isn’t a *new* addition to BRF weddings. At the end of the day, if our government didn’t want Eugenie’s wedding to be this public, she would be having a quieter one without members of the public invited. I have no doubt Meghan and Harry’s wedding generated millions for the local economy. The Royal family’s popularity is quite high at the moment with all the new buzz surrounding Meghan and Harry. Can you blame them for trying to cash in once more whilst the public is still in a good Royal mood? Royal weddings are always a mix of business and great PR for the “firm”. This is precisely what the “Harry and Meghan wedding taxpayer funded” moaners failed to grasp.

        The cost of security will be high because every senior Royal attends. Not to mention the extra military/snipers they had at Windsor which is why I thought the cost would be much higher.

        As for Meghan’s wardrobe expenses, I don’t believe the media have the *exact* numbers…. but because she is wearing couture pieces, the estimations are probably somewhere near what they are reporting. Fashionistas know that if you have to ask for the price of couture…. well then you cant afford it in the first place haha. I honestly think most people don’t realise that couture costs a lot more than your average bespoke pieces so they assume the costs are skewed.

      • magnoliarose says:

        You make some good points KD. Sorry for being gruff.
        I am very aware of couture prices. My only defense for Kate and Meghan on that front is those pieces are collectibles and will go to costume museums or auctions.
        They have exaggerated her expenses because some of what they call couture isn’t true haute couture.
        I do hope though that she mixes it up. Only time will tell.

    • Scram says:

      Harry is not in the same position as the York sisters. They occupy the space that his children will be in.

      Whatever. I’m not going very invested in this. Hope she wears Vivienne Westwood too.

  3. anna says:

    no one is coping H&MM. This is what royals do quite often when they wed in Windsor.

  4. Diplomanatee says:

    Where is LAK? She hasn’t been around for a while. LAK, we miss you!!!

  5. KidV says:

    I wonder how much of this is Fergie’s input. Or even her dad, pushing a grand scale because, in his eyes, she’s just as popular at Harry.

    I’m sure it will be nice and gorgeous as royal weddings go. I can’t wait to see Charlotte steal the show. ;-)

  6. klutzy_girl says:

    If I wanted to hate myself, I’d check in on the racists who attacked Meghan for this to see if they’re doing the same thing here but something tells me they’re not.

  7. mtam says:

    She grew up in the British public, i’m sure there are at least 1.2k people emotionally invested in her life. Also, they could be there to see the other famous guests.

  8. Nicegirl says:

    Do you think we can watch it online? Afterward I guess

    I’d watch another wedding.

  9. Ty says:

    Her Dad is still a Royal Duke and as long as the queen lives, some of the old rules will be followed. She is a princess of blood royal in the male line of the monarch.

    Anne and her kids did not want the visibility and they don’t have a title. They also prefer to enjoy their luxuries without any accountability at all. I am sure they were offered public spectacles as well.

    It was really mean to say she thinks she is as important as Harry. Harry hasn’t done anything special to be accorded that importance, other than being born of the right brother.
    They all grew up together as cousins and are pretty close.

    How do we expect the Royal Family to be modern and then snark when duke of York’s daughter do not consider herself as less important than Prince of Wales’ son? Ultimately they are all laughable titles and Eugenie atleast has a proper job.

    Or modernization is only limited to give Harry and his wife a chance to whatever they wish?

    • magnoliarose says:

      She IS less important than Harry. That is just a fact. A lot less since she doesn’t work for the BRF. The reasons why are irrelevant. The fact is she doesn’t. She is the equivalent of Zara and Peter. Zara at least won an Olympic medal for the UK.
      Who is paying for this? Why should any tax money be used for Eugenie’s wedding? Charles has the Duchy of Cornwall so where is Pervy Andy getting the dosh? Fergie made a spectacle of herself stateside with her schemes and pandering so ??

      • Reese says:

        The fact is she isn’t as important as Harry and it has nothing to do with gender Ty

      • KD says:

        The Fact *is* they do this for all British Royal Family weddings. That’s the only fact here. Look it up. Nobody complained when Edward invited members of the public to watch his wedding. It’s hilarious that people are blaming this on Eugenie and Fergie.

      • magnoliarose says:

        Edward is the son of the monarch. Only grandchildren’s weddings are apt comparisons.

      • Addie says:

        @magnoliarose
        The Queen financially supports her children but whether that is her private money or from public funds, who knows… At best, the Queen is paying from her money; at worst, it is the taxpayer.

        The short and tall of it is that these weddings are great PR for the British Royal Family and that’s why they do it. The invited plebs provide a free backdrop but more important, give an impression that the monarchy is very popular with everyone in the UK whereas there’s apathy and no longer huge crowds come out to see royals at events.

        Comparisons with others from years back are not all that relevant. Times are different and austerity measures over years have been hard on all but the wealthy. It’s a genuine concern that public funding is used for private events, as this wedding is and as was Harry and Meghan’s. It’s bad enough that politicians struggled to find money for Grenfell victims but at the very same time had no worries finding £360M for the Queen’s Buck Palace repairs. That was money taken from the publicly owned Crown Estates used to fund all aspects of government eg NHS. No-one asked the Queen what she had done with the money allocated to BP repairs given to her since coronation as part of the Civil List later the Sovereign Grant but had re-purposed it for family members.

    • Nic919 says:

      I guess we have to go back to Lady Sarah Chatto’s wedding and compare because she was the granddaughter of the former monarch when she was married. But then again she was niece to the Queen. Again Eugenie hasn’t been one to seek the spotlight so I put this squarely on Andy and his ego. If it was Beatrice I could see it coming from her as she was more involved in being a public Royal for a while. And again that was because of her dad not wanting to. accept that his kids won’t be working royals.

    • magnoliarose says:

      I must say however I hope Charlotte’s wedding is off the charts glamorous. If she chooses to marry, I hope that person is as charming and lively as she.

    • notasugarhere says:

      She’s the first royal princess to marry since Anne, and for some that is a big deal. As I wrote upthread, 6,000 members of the public showed up outside Zara’s wedding. Better to do a controlled event like this.

  10. Eve says:

    This illustrates why a slimline monarchy should be the way forward when Charles is king. Andrew’s daughters shouldn’t have been made princesses, but rather Lady Eugenie/Beatrice like Edward’s kids. That way, they could be more like private citizens – still part of the extended royal family, but without public roles. Now, nobody knows what to do with them. They are princesses, so they get to have this big public wedding with carriages like William and Harry, but in reality most of the British public don’t give a toss about them. It’s all a bit cringey. If Eugenie was a Lady, the wedding would be more low-key. Some plebs would still show up outside the church to catch a glimpse of the royals, but it wouldn’t be by invitation. And no embarrassing carriage ride through a half empty Windsor.

    • Alix says:

      Their ‘princess’ title has nothing to do with the public role. They are granddaughters in the male (sigh) line of the sovereign; whether they are made full-time working members of the family is a totally separate issue. Personally, if I were Lady Louise, I’d be miffed that my parents ‘gave away’ my rightful title (although she remains, legally, a princess).

      • Eve says:

        You’re right, but I still think the Princess title was chosen for them with a public role in mind. I think Andrew wanted his daughters to be Princesses because he felt they should have a strong role within the institution. Whereas Edward chose a lesser title for his kids because he felt they would be better off being more “anonymous” and lead independent (yet very privileged) lives. I think Edward chose wisely. Being Lady Louise will be much easier in terms of work etc than being a Princess of the United Kingdom. She will be perceived as aristocratic, not a royal. Andrew’s daughters are in this awkward position of being royals, but without a clear purpose. William and Harry + wives and kids are the natural centre of public attention, and that will only increase when Charles ascends.

      • Nic919 says:

        Edward’s kids are technically prince and princess as per the letters patent under George V. They choose not to use the titles just as Camilla goes by Duchess of Cornwall when she is really Princess of Wales.

        But I agree that Edward and Sophie decided to do this because the kids weren’t going to be working royals.

    • notasugarhere says:

      At the time they were born, the expectation was they would be working royals. They are both likely to end up as Counsellors of State, which is a royal role required by law. It has only been in the last 10 years that we’ve seen the hints of a slimdown. Even with that, there are 14-16 working royals now. Adding Beatrice and Eugenie would eventually make it 8, which is a slimdown from the current number.

  11. Char says:

    I’m interested to see the photos and fashion from the event but I wouldn’t watch the full thing on tv or line up outside to clap.

  12. HK9 says:

    I thought it would be a private wedding with lots of press access. I like Eugenie but would I stand outside to watch her wedding-nope.

  13. Always Lurking says:

    I dont’ know much about Eugenie, never cared about her. I will just tune in to see the arrivals of Meghan + Harry, Kate + kids.

    Meghan and Harry’s wedding was so much fun, really enjoyed watching it.

    I wonder if the same people bitching about the costs of H&M wedding will be all over Eugenie’s wedding and whining about the costs? Somehow I think they won’t…

    • Natalie S says:

      Also no complaints about her place in the line of succession whereas how can we forget from the same people complaining about the expense that Harry is the unimportant sixth in line.

      • Jane says:

        For some reason harry gets treated differently by royal watchers if the york princesses had done half of what he did growing up they wouldn’t be able to show there faces in public but harry manages to go to a racist party where a swastika racially abuse a soldier spend most of his twenty partying and people praise him like he’s the second coming of jesus

      • Natalie S says:

        @Jane, is your point that the criticism over the cost of Harry’s wedding was justified because he wore the Nazi costume in 2005?

        Or did you do a what about ism pivot to a completely different topic?

        Harry and Meghan’s wedding was soundly criticized by posters because it was considered too extravagant for the sixth in line. Now those same posters are nowhere to be seen and a point being raised is the expense is justified because Eugene has a princess title. Interesting turn of events.

      • magnoliarose says:

        @Jane When Harry apologized and asked a rabbi for forgiveness and received it, I would like to know WHY YOU CAN’T. If Holocaust survivors and their offspring and their offspring can then again what is your problem?
        It is offensive to fling that out when you only use it as a smear and not because you actually give a damn.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Do you condemn William for picking out the costume and going dressed as an “African Native” Jane? Charles was reported to be furious with both sons, but only the spare was publicly required to apologize.

    • KD says:

      To be fair, Harry called his fellow soldiers “ragheads” and “pakis”. He even told a black british comedian that he spoke well for a black chap! If some people chose to forgive and forget those horrible incidences, that’s fine, but you cant expect every poc to dismiss his gross behaviour and shrug our shoulders. It’s good that people have forgiven him, but that doesn’t mean everyone is okay with what he did.
      I guess Jane was trying to say Harry’s faults are swept under the rug and not mentioned but if it was somebody else these incidents would come up time and time again.

      • Natalie S says:

        But what does have to do with criticism over the cost of Harry and Meghan’s wedding? That was the point being discussed. Where are all those people wringing their hands over Harry only being sixth in line?

        Harry’s an idiot for wearing the costume and he was deservedly criticized for that and his other dumb and racist behaviors. But the thread topic was how people seemed to feel so strongly about the cost of his wedding based on his ranking vs. seemingly having no problem with Eugenie. It came across as Jane changing the topic to a point she preferred to discuss rather the actual point.

      • Guest says:

        @KD ~ ….I think we all must forgive our younger selves for the stupid stuff we did when we were younger. We didn’t have perspective; we did stuff, and now, as grown up grown-ups, we see how horrible we were in those instances. I think we need to acknowledge that a 20 year old Harry did a stupid, thoughtless and hurtful thing. However, the now 33 year old Harry has created value in his role as a blood royal, hence, we do need to forgive. In terms of name-calling his fellow soldiers, Harry was in the army and the army culture is a little different from the day to day culture we live in. Men’s culture without women can generally be very different from men’s behaviour when women are around. My son speaks of this a lot…. he was raised in a matriarchal home and had a little trouble adjusting to the rough manners initially. I guess my point is that eventually, sometime soon, I hope, we can acknowledge that yes, he pulled some stupid stunts, and that yes, he has learnt from them, grown through them and they are now forever part of his past story. I don’t think it fair, though, to keep bringing up his past screw-ups and asserting because of that, this cannot be true …they can both be true

  14. Sam says:

    Who’s going to pay? I remember reading comments from people (some not even British) that were VERY concerned about tax payers money paying for Harry and Meghan’s wedding and even signed a petition against paying for it yet nothing so far for Eugenie…..

  15. Fluffy Princess says:

    I want to be excited for Eugenie’s wedding, but I just am not. The York sisters bore me. All that access and they can’t dress in something flattering 98% of the time. Eugenie is getting a smidge better, but Beatrice–no. That teal monstrosity she picked for H&Ms wedding — so heavy for a morning spring wedding. And Eugenie looked like a flight attendant in that too short, ill fitting dress. GAH! Ladies!

  16. ladida says:

    I’m excited and I hope it’s televised. I’m a sucker for weddings.

  17. Laura says:

    I think Eugenie is very pretty and seems sweet. I wonder if a grand wedding is her attempt to gain a larger audience or share of royal duties? Maybe she doesn’t want to be a minor royal anymore? I know she is far down the line of succesion but perhaps she could be assigned more duties since those higher up – such as the Cambridges – do very little.

  18. Vogue says:

    Are people finally accepting that there is an hierarchy where the royals are concerned? Some people take issue when it is mentioned that William & Kate are more important than Harry & Meghan. So is it now ok to mention that Harry & Meghan are more important than Eugenie & Jack!

    The whole concept of monarchy is elitist & unfair!

    • KD says:

      Whether people want to admit it or not, WK are more important than HM in the Royal world. WK will always take precedence over Harry and his wife. And the Yorkies are blood Princesses so they outrank Meghan Markle.

      • SandyBay says:

        @KD, your paragraph compares apples to oranges as you use the terms important and outranking interchangeably. As far as importance goes, there is Charles and Camilla, than William and Kate, than Harry and Meghan and then the Yorks. As far as ranking goes, the Yorks are “blood” Princesses so their titles outrank Camilla, Kate and Meghan; but I’d bet that those women never curtsey to the York sisters. And as far as the ranking logic goes, that would mean that when Kate entered a room without William, she would have to curtsey to Charlotte.

    • magnoliarose says:

      If your argument that whole thing is unfair then I am with you. It is.
      Again. William, Kate, Harry, and Meghan work for the BRF. William and Harry are sons and grandsons of the monarch and future monarch.
      Eugenie, Beatrice, Zara and Peter do not work for the firm. None of the aforementioned are children of the future monarch.
      There is no comparison.
      Andrew and Fergie had a big wedding. Edward and Sophie had a big wedding. I believe Anne had a big wedding. When the dumplings George, Charlotte, and Louis get married they will have big weddings. When Harry and Meghan’s children do the same, they should not.
      You are using your dislike of Meghan to be a hypocrite.

      • Vogue says:

        If you accept that there is an hierarchy in the monarchy, then people should not get agitated when this is pointed out. It seems to me that the hypocrisy lies with people who swear blindly that William & Kate are equal to Harry & Meghan, but are nevertheless happy to point out that Harry is above Eugenie. If we accept that Harry & Meghan’s role is more important than Eugenie & Jack, then we should also accept that William & Kate’ role is more important than H&M.

      • magnoliarose says:

        What? We are only discussing weddings. There are times when the hierarchy matters and there are times when it doesn’t. When it is used incorrectly to diminish H and M then there is pushback. When it is used to excuse poor behavior on the part of W and K there is pushback.
        So when those who claim it is so very important suddenly pretend it is not because they can’t stand Meghan then it is hypocritical.

      • Vogue says:

        So how is this different to people using hierarchy to explain why Eugenie shouldn’t have a similar wedding at Windsor like Harry by inviting members of the public to the grounds and going on a carriage ride? When people suggest that Eugenie does not deserve a similar wedding to H&M because of her position, you could argue that is also an attempt to diminish her on her big day.

        I’ve seen many H&M supporters suggest Eugenie & Jack shouldn’t have their wedding at Windsor because they’re not as important, and make fun that nobody cares about their wedding because Eugenie is not a senior royal. The insults goes both ways & we shouldn’t pretend that only W&K supporters are guilty of pulling rank.

      • Natalie S says:

        I think the carriage ride is dumb. I have no problem with the wedding being at Windsor.

      • notasugarhere says:

        Peter and Autumn had a carriage ride at Windsor, and he was 11th in line to the throne at the time.

  19. Mrs Bump says:

    Very true, i was surprised to see some of the comments from people who generally disagree about H&M importance vis à vis W&K, argue here that Eugenie is of lesser importance compared to Harry.
    In any case, i certainly hope her dad and grandparents are footing the bill for her wedding, it’s not like they spend a lot of their own money anyway. Why should the public even need to pay for their security for a private event?
    I’m happy not to be paying taxes in Britain anymore, it’s insane to think of your heard earned money going towards a paying for stranger’s wedding or their expensive clothes.

    • Addie says:

      Totally agree Mrs Bump. This is a private family wedding. Every aspect should be footed by the BRF, including security. This is not a work event. The BRF should be footing their own security for anything not categorised as work. It’s crazy what the public is expected to pay for.

      I am wondering whether having a certain number of people lining the way – the 1200 or so – automatically triggers a police/security presence that will be publicly funded, thus transferring costs?

  20. Molly says:

    OF COURSE there are going to be 12,000 people dying to sit outside the church. If nothing else, to get an up close look at the more popular royals. I’d sit through a morning on English grass outside a beautiful church watching a fancy wedding on tv before the royal family (and kids!) pour out and wave. Hell yeah!

  21. April May says:

    Eugenie does a lot of charity work that gets ignored by the press. Between people she’s met through it and the royalists Is it really that hard to imagine 1200 people out of 60 million would want to see it?

  22. Amelie says:

    Well to be fair she is the first blood princess since Princess Anne to get married… for the first time anyways (Mark Phillips is a shady dude). Which was back in 1973 so it’s been awhile! Even if no one cares about her and she isn’t exciting, that is a fact. Zara is not a royal so she doesn’t count. Let them make a big deal of it, I don’t feel like waiting for Princess Charlotte to grow up for a princess to marry, by then I’ll be an old lady!

  23. duchesschicana says:

    hahah I made my british friend apply , sadly wouldnt be able to afford it as I already went to the UK in 2017, yep choose the wrong year to go I just thought it would be cool to recieve an invite with all the fancy lettering. I’d go if I could

  24. vespernite says:

    Eugenie is lame and no one cares! Have several seats princess and just go to a justice of the peace to get this marriage over with.