20 February 2011

Sarah, Duchess of York not invited to the British Royal Wedding after all?

In January this year, the British tabloid Daily Mail claimed to know that Sarah, Duchess of York, the former wife of the Duke of York (Prince Andrew), was to receive an invitation to the wedding between Prince William and Kate Middleton. I wrote at the time that I would not be surprised if it was true (thankfully I made all the necessary reservations). Although the former duchess has no "right" to an invitation and has been an embarrassement to the British Royal Family too often, an invitation to the church ceremony would make the royal family look generous and one would avoid all the attention such a "non-invitation" would bring. Then again, I know that one should usually have other reasons for inviting someone to a wedding than to avoid negative press attention...

On Friday 18 February 2011 we were told by The Daily Telegraph that Sarah, Duchess of York has not been invited to the wedding, and the article - its source was a statement by a spokesman for the former wife of the Duke of York - seems more reliable than the Daily Mail's speculations last month. So now we have to live with headlines like "Princess Diana's close friend not invited to wedding" instead...

Earlier this month we were told by The Independent - which is not the most reliable newspaper in my opinion - that Princess Michael, wife of a cousin of Queen Elizabeth, was not going to be invited, on instruction by the Prince of Wales, even! If this is true, I would find it more strange than the possible decision not to invite Sarah, Duchess of York. Although Princess Michael is only the wife of Prince William's first cousin twice removed, she is after all a member of the royal family. I am still sceptical about the accuracy of the said article, though. There will surely be many speculations in the days and weeks ahead. I am looking forward to the day when the guest list is finally released by the court...

Updated on Monday 21 February 2011 at 12.15 (minor language mistake).


No comments:

Post a Comment

Post a Comment