@MyNewtBoobs We’re waiting for the prime time coverage tonight, but I did catch a glimpse of Kate’s dress. I shouted to my Mom that the dress looked very similar to hers (from the late 50’s) which I absolutely love! It’s still very feminine, but it’s sleek. Diana’s dress was awesomely over the top, but the 80’s poofiness is just not my style. Diana’s dress (at that moment in time) needed to be a fairy princess dress. I think everyone will be happily thrilled with Kate’s lovely dress, which is also more like Queen Elizabeth’s wedding dress.
I too am a huge British history fan and the weddings are a major part of British history. They actually had to change history for Prince Charles to be able to ascend to the throne, not only because he married a divorcee, but because he, himself, is a divorcee. That’s what caused all the hub-bub in the 30’s when Edward wanted to marry a divorcee. He abdicated because he would not have been allowed (at that time) to keep the throne and marry a divorcee. They changed those rules for Charles and Camilla. But unlike Diana, who would have been called The Queen (if she had stayed married to Charles when he ascended the throne) they will not (at this time) allow Camilla to take that title.
If not for all the hub-bub in the 30’s with Edward and Wallis Simpson, Prince Charles would probably have married Camilla in the first place (and never have married Diana at all). The reason he didn’t was because he wasn’t ready to get married, when Camilla was young and un-married, and by the time he was ready to get married, Camilla had already been married to someone else and then divorced. The whole situation for Charles and Diana and Camilla is horribly tragic. The only good things to come out of it were William and Harry and the fact that the laws were changed so that now Charles and Camilla are allowed to be married at all, without Charles losing the throne.