To wonder why Prince Louis isn't in this photo ?

[runsmidgeOMG]

Sorry if this has been done already but did anyone else wonder where baby prince Louis was in this photo ?

I get probably didn't want a baby present during the ceremony or around the crowds etc but I feel it would have been a nice touch for Louis to be included in the family photo. It feels as though he doesn't exist.

There are probably reasons that I've missed !!

Hmm i was half saying that in jest

I do think charlotte was perhaps a bit bored and fed up by this picture and that is why shes on kates knee

However i do think kate should be on the picture

NO ONE WANTS BABIES OR KIDS AT WEDDINGS. Also at family reunions people really don't want their partners if they can't socially swim alone. I get tired of seeing cousins after so long who say 'must dash, have to rescue husband'............ way to go on your choices if he can't handle some sandwiches and being bored by uncle john. My cousins wedding the baby belted through all the vows, I was surprised the parents didn't whisk it off...... I couldn't hear it. No worries, husband went off and had an affair after 9 years..... Leaving 2 kids. Responsible adulting??????? I don't think so.

Uh? Catherine is the future queen and wife & mother of the heirs, bit odd if she's chucked out of an official photo with her husband and children!

And Louis is a tiny baby at this stage, it was clear he very sensibly wouldn't be at the wedding, so why would you expect him to be in the photos? I'm sure this isn't the only family photo that exists!

I respect them much more for not using him for the cute factor. I also think the Cambridge's were very aware that this was not their family unit's day and they were in a supporting role.

If there was no reason for the Duchess of Cambridge to be there, then neither should the Duchess of Cornwall.

Louis was probably in the hands of a part time nanny- as the one we know the name of, Maria Barallo, was at the chapel.

He wouidn't be in this picture, as it is a photo of the wedding party (plus the HMQ, who is an exception to prove every rule).

They have released only 3 photos. Not every single grouping.

I get tired of seeing cousins after so long who say 'must dash, have to rescue husband'
Actually this is normally a way of ending a conversation with someone. They are using the husband who probably doesn't need 'rescuing' as an excuse to make a get away!

ivegot i was only sayimg that yesterday, its funny, the ones outside the chapel its George thats clearly tired and fed up, while Charalotte really enjoys waving to the press and the crowd, much the same as when she met her baby brother, in the photos George is the more comfortable one, very excited to grin next to uncle Harry, while Charalotte's face is please can i go amd watch peppa pig now?!

Many of the wedding photos ive seen include brother and sister in laws as well as siblings so im not sure why thetes a problem with Catherine being there.

I guess its people judging by their wedding pictures

Why are people getting worked up about who is int he wedding photo of some people they don;t know? They can have whoever the hell they like in their wedding photos.

Kate is the wife of the best man - Harry's brother, with whom he has a very close relationship, he has always been close to his brother's whole family. Kate has two small children there, one of whom was getting a bit fractious at various points - so good job she was there to do a bit of child wrangling.

If Harry's Dad's wife is in the picture, why the hell shouldn't his brother's wife also be in it ?
I really cannot understand why people give a toss who a strangers family decides they should have in their wedding photos. Madness.

Having mentioned Camilla - good on her for wearing a crazy hat, that's what we all want to see

I think it is completely fine that Kate is in the photo, just pointing out that there is some inconsistency in saying that Louis is not in the photo because he is not part of the wedding party when his mother, who is also not part of the "official" wedding party, is in the photo

Slightly off topic but same subject but Princess Charlotte IS far too cute. Couldn't you just put her on a butty and eat her all up

Because he's a tiny baby. It's hot. His mum had to wrangle two others and she was lucky enough to have childcare sorted.
Big. Deal.

Because he is 3 weeks old and at home with the nanny.

it was a wedding party photo not all grandkids photo

I’ve only seen about 3 wedding photographs. I have no idea of the configuration of the other eleventy zillion.

So what about Camilla? She only married Charles in 2005, by which time Harry was 21, and hasn't therefore been a step-parent in the sense of bringing him up.*

As a step child i'd be absolutely honoured to have my step father in any of my formal occassion puctures. Im older than harry, and my step father made the special effort to go out of his way for me the other week, one of the best things about my christmas a few years ago was hearing him tell some one my daughters are home.

My father was very much involved in my life my awesome mum made damn sure he was, but my step father is amazing and i wouldn't exclude him from my family.

Heres a probably unpopular thpught but maybe harry and william only care that camilla makes their father happy and have a really good relationship with her and regard her as an important family member

Is it as if every person not in the wedding party photo (because they weren’t at the wedding) doesn’t exist? .

It's just the couple and their bridesmaids and pageboys - why would another child - who isn't a pageboy - be brought into it?

are 90's curtain haircuts back in fashion??

Ignore my previous comment - I hadn't looked carefully and thought it was the couple and kids photo.

I'm still of the view that as he wasn't at the wedding, it's pointless to bring him over just for a photo.

BTW with all those little kids and a long, hot, boring day I am impressed that they got even half of them smiling and looking in the right direction!

Let little Louis be a new-born in peace!

I've read too many threads on MN the last couple of weeks critiquing all aspects of the wedding, some of which seem to be started by DailyFail-bots to get the bitching going.

Can't we leave Harry and Meghan and their friends and family alone and wish them a long and happy life together.

...as for "Kate shouldn't be in the picture" well why the hell not!

My 5 year old wasn't invited to a family wedding a few weeks ago. Oddly she wasn't in the photos either

As a step child i'd be absolutely honoured to have my step father in any of my formal occassion puctures.

I completely agree with you, Naught, and to clarify I don't think that step-parents should be excluded from family wedding portraits. I was applying the (fallacious IMHO) logic that Kate should not have been included, and pointing out that this therefore would also apply to Camilla. I think it absolutely appropriate that they should both have been there. Marriages are about joining two families together and are therefore also an opportunity to celebrate the others who have 'married in' beforehand.

Is there any relevance to the queen, prince Phil and Kate sitting on chairs?

If Kate is breastfeeding (big if, but I'm sure they reported that she fed the other two for a while, do she may well be), I'll bet Louis is there, just off camera, and Kate kept dashing off to feed (or to sit down and put her feet up, using the "need to feed the baby" excuse )

Louis hasn't been seen since leaving the hospital. A photo with him in would be big news for all the wrong reasons. It's not about him, it's about Harry and Meghan.