Kate Middleton back with Prince William
As Royal Anecdotes has forecast many times since the golden couple split up in April, Prince William has made up with his toothsome long-time girlfriend, Kate Middleton.
It seems the split was genuine at the time and not part of an elaborate charade to take media attention away from Kate. According to Katie Nicholl, in the Mail on Sunday, they have been secretly seeing each other for weeks, the story only breaking when William invited her to a saucy Army party at his barracks in Dorset. They are reported to have left the party for his quarters at an appropriate moment.
An observer at the party is reported as saying, “William was following her around like a lost puppy as she went around the room, chatting away and dancing. In the end, he just grabbed her and took her onto the dancefloor where they started doing some rather close dancing. They couldn’t keep their hands off each other but William didn’t care that people were looking. At about midnight he started kissing and smooching her. His friends were joking they should get a room, and it wasn’t long before William took Kate back to his quarters.”
Although it was William who broke the relationship off, he’s the one making all the running now. A friend says, “William hasn’t stopped pining for Kate since they split up. He keeps saying she’s an amazing girl and the best thing to happen to him. He’s definitely serious about getting back together.”
Kate, though, appears to be playing a canny game, injecting a little reluctance into the pas de deux. She is said to be considering whether this is what she really wants. She’s obviously a natural psychologist.
But this is going one way only now. Another “friend” said, “Kate’s not really a rebound sort of girl and William remained the great love of her life”. She also remained close to Prince Harry during the split and often talked to him and girlfriend Chelsy Davy.
Kate’s friend summed up the situation with astute precision, “… she know that if they do get together, there’ll be no turning back. There will have to be an engagement and then marriage.”
It’s make-your-mind-up time for the restless but lovelorn Prince.
If William really wants her back in his life – it is time for him to make up his mind once and for all. If he is not ready – let her go so she can get on with her own life. If he IS ready, then it’s time for the engagement and marriage.
I truly hope they will work out. I really like Kate very much – she and William have been together and it is obvious they have both the love AND the friendship – they must have both in order for this to work.
Keep us posted John!
By On The Outside on June 24th, 2007 at 1:27 pm
Excellent assessment. Yes keep us posted regularly John!!
By Positive on June 24th, 2007 at 1:37 pm
Well done, John! I have my fingers and toes crossed that this results in a Royal Wedding!
By Gigi on June 24th, 2007 at 2:46 pm
Well, he announced last week that he was leaving the Army early, at the beginning of 2009. Are we looking at a summer wedding a few months later?
Haven’t we been here before?
By John on June 24th, 2007 at 3:03 pm
I just hope that Kate does not relinquish her new found confidence and independence to be at William’s beck and call. William should keep his friends in check about mocking her and if she is truly the partner he wants he better step up to the plate and ensure history doesn’t repeat its self. Kate is truly worth having.
By Trudie on June 24th, 2007 at 3:12 pm
I remember I posted a comment here saying that Wills will marry Kate and it couldn’t be otherwise. It seems that we are on the right way to the wedding that we were expecting.
By Lilyfromfrance on June 24th, 2007 at 3:14 pm
You’re right, Trudie, and I’m sure he will have a word or freeze them out. Mind you, I think a lot of it was harmless ragging — agricultural students (as a lot of them are) are known to have an agricultural sense of humour.
By John on June 24th, 2007 at 3:16 pm
I think Kate is more intelligent than what she seems to be. As a Windsor man, Wills will never be loyal towards his wife and Kate seems to know it and as the opposite of Chelsy, she seems to accept it. Never mind Wills’ friends. Thats not important. I really hope that Wills has realised that she is the perfect partner and wont let her go. Indeed if they are back together it would end with a marriage. This time it couldnt be otherwise
By Lilyfromfrance on June 24th, 2007 at 3:20 pm
You’re right, Lily. We’ll have to get all the wedding paraphenalia out again. Oh, Gawd!
By John on June 24th, 2007 at 3:30 pm
Yes, there is a lot to do, but there is nothing more spectacular than a Royal Wedding, and this one is sure to be beautiful because Prince William will one day be King and Kate will be his Queen! The champagne is going to flow like the Tiber at high flood!!
By Gigi on June 24th, 2007 at 7:28 pm
I wonder if the wedding might not be summer 2008 instead of 2009.
John’s earlier piece on the shortening of William’s military time said that he’d finish his army commitments this fall, then spend a few months each with the RAF and the Royal Navy. It would seem possible that there might be a break between the two… with enough time for a wedding and honeymoon.
While William would have a few months of military duty remaining, it wouldn’t be a prolonged separation. Kate would undoubtedly have a million things to do following the wedding.
By Evelyn on June 24th, 2007 at 7:49 pm
Well John those vegetables William has for friends had better check themselves and start treating Kate with respect. Kate showed more class by not retaliating on them. Like Edward and Sophie I think this relationship will last if they are allowed to develop a private life.
By Trudie on June 25th, 2007 at 3:34 am
Great, we’ve already seen her crotch shots and her rabbit vibrator parties. What a great future Queen!
By Lucy on June 25th, 2007 at 5:47 am
Evidently if they are back, it’s under her terms. It seems to be that she is mature enough to understand that there is no turning back point and that if the reconcialiation is confirmed, the next move is the engagement.
I just read some information saying that both are “just friends”. I sincerely think Kate is a very clever woman who knows who she is and who respects herself. I don’t have the impression she would allow a “back-and-forth” relationship, even with the future king of England.
I think that somehow they (both) are being protected by their friends in order to avoid a papparazzi attack and in addition, to give them time to decide properly if this is what they want to do.
By Claudia on June 25th, 2007 at 7:42 am
Yep Lucy, it was Kate’s decision to show it
Gosh, we have seen it, so she is not able to be a queen consort!!! Too bad!!
As born as the future king of England, don’t you have nothing to say about Wills’ drunk parties? About his loyal flirts with strangers while he was dating Kate? About these pics where his face seems not to be very fresh at 4am? No ofcourse, here we go again, Wills is a man, Wills is a royal so he can do what he wants while this poor ambitious girl is bollocked because there are shots of her dirty feet, her bogeys or her knickers.
By Lilyfromfrance on June 25th, 2007 at 10:15 am
Lilly, I’d rather see a drunk person that a crotch shot! The extremes are on completely different levels. Also Kate has walked out of clubs bright red and looking wasted. His nearly 25, geez why the hell do people want him to marry at such a young age. Yes he is immature and that is why he needs to grow up first before he gets himself into a serious relationship, definately not with Kate who seems more of a socialite than a hardworker. If you look at other commoners that married into Royalty then you will see that they should speak a few languages fluently, stay out of the spotlight, especially celebrity hangouts, worked full-time jobs in more serious industries, and dress appropriately, not in really short skirts and dresses that make it easy for paps to take crotch shots, especially when one is drunk.
By Lucy on June 25th, 2007 at 2:57 pm
Women’s Lib aside, there has been a double standard of conduct for as long as I can remember. I don’t think that much can be done to change this, frankly. That said, if Prince William decides that Kate Middleton is to be his consort, she will be so as long as the Queen does not object. I have to wonder if some of these hi-junks aren’t a reaction to Prince William saying (at the time of the break-up) that he wanted to date someone who was more fun.
By Gigi on June 25th, 2007 at 3:22 pm
The limelight is created by the press, not by the person. If Kate is the right person for Wills, why still hoping for a dream hardworking girl who speaks 5 languages? As for the other commoners married into European Royalty today, where is this perfect consort that you have mentionned and the qualities she should have? All I can see is an ex junky in Norway, a depressed anorexic in Spain, a lazy divorcee in UK, a little actress without any interest with the Italian heir, and I surely have forgot the others.
By Lilyfromfrance on June 25th, 2007 at 3:25 pm
Yeah, Kate is a star compared to that lot. This is clearly not a done deal yet. William is still shy of total commitment, and Kate is reserving her position — for now. But it could kick off quite quickly, or collapse again, as it did before.
By John on June 25th, 2007 at 3:32 pm
Nobody is perfect, and what might be acceptable for one could be non-acceptable for others. All people are different and it would not be fair to compare or to judge for example, Letizia of Spain with Kate. Letizia is also a beautiful and decided woman who won journalism prizes and was very well known in Spain by her own before she decided to get married with Philip of Borbon. Kate is a very nice and decided woman who has different life experiences than others. What it counts are their human qualities. And this is something that at this moment is unknown for all of us.
Monarchy has evolved from the old times when marriages were arranged regarding economical and political interests, without taking in consideration the feelings of the involved people. Some of them were happy, others not. Men have had always the chance of looking for women outside the marriage without being stigmatizated, while women had to accept their circumstances and look for interests that could distract them. For many of these princesses, marriage meant a golden cage.
The difference is that now we do expect our partners to be loyal and faithful, and monarchy (until now) has not evolved in the same way. It is acceptable to the king to have mistresses while it is not moral if the queen had a lover. She may have dogs, pets, sports, charities, children and many other interests, but well… this is the way it is and I don’t think it will change in the medium term.
Although we are never to find the perfect bride for any prince, at least now they have the right of choosing their partner. If they did it correctly or not, this is just a personal issue… they are those who at the end are sharing the life with.
By Claudia on June 25th, 2007 at 6:07 pm
Gigi wrote:
“…if Prince William decides that Kate Middleton is to be his consort, she will be so as long as the Queen does not object.”
I thought that since William is now 25, he no longer needs the Queen’s permission to marry. No?
By Evelyn on June 25th, 2007 at 7:03 pm
Gigi: William at 25 does not require the Queens consent only that of ParliamentIf I am correct . I think after 25 they only consult her and let her make the announcement to the privy counsil. I have to disagree that a Princess should be required to speak several languages fluently after all the only King I can remember that spoke a foreign language was Edward VII and that was german and french and also HM is fluent in French none of the other royals posess theses skills and look at Diana she was a very successful POW despite her formal education. And HM has no real formal education so what is your point Lucy?
By Trudie on June 25th, 2007 at 7:23 pm
Queen Elizabeth II and her sister, the late Princess Margaret, were tudored at home privately. By her own admission and complaint, Princess Margaret received an inadequate education, while the Queen was tudored by language experts and constitutional experts. She speaks fluent French. If she speaks German, I have never heard this nor read it in any biography. Despite the German lineage of the Royal Family, the antipathy of King George V and King George VI for Germany was so unbending that I doubt either Princess Elizabeth or Princess Margaret were allowed to learn German. I agree with you, Trudie, that it is not necessary that a Queen Consort speak a variety of foreign languages. Regarding the Queen’s consent, I thought the age 25 proviso was merely for the other members of the Royal Family. I thought the Queen’s consent was necessary for the marriage of the Heir to the Throne at any age and that was why Charles was lobbying Buckingham Palace so that he could marry Camilla after Princess Diana died.
By Gigi on June 25th, 2007 at 8:20 pm
Oh good grief, another typo!!
I meant to type “tutored” not “tudored.” I am blaming this latest mishap on the fact that I watched “A Man For All Seasons” last night. 
That’s my story, anyway, and I am sticking to it!
By Gigi on June 25th, 2007 at 8:21 pm
Gigi, i think you are a kindred spirit! ‘A man for all Seasons’ is my favourite movie. well that and Casablanca!
By Eliza on June 25th, 2007 at 8:49 pm
We must be!
I own both of these splendid movies on VHS and I watch them many times during the course of a year. I think “A Man for All Seasons” is one of the most perfectly cast and set movies ever made. My husband claims that I can recite, word perfect, every line of dialogue in both movies. He may be right! 
By Gigi on June 25th, 2007 at 8:55 pm
if you are a Lion in Winter fan (the 60s one) there is no doubting it! I completely agree with you regarding A Man for all Seasons, Philip Scofield, is just stupendous and its great to pick out all the rising stars, leo mckern etc London is just so amazing in it, the way they used the river, you forget that it was used as a road
By Eliza on June 25th, 2007 at 9:09 pm
oh my God it’s Paul isn’t it?
By Eliza on June 25th, 2007 at 9:10 pm
It is Paul, but no matter, we all knew who you meant.
I am indeed also a huge fan of “The Lion In Winter” and think that Katharine Hepburn was brilliant as Eleanor of Aquitaine. It is interesting that Peter O’Toole played Henry II twice, brilliantly, within a four year period, in “Becket” in 1964 and in “The Lion In Winter” in 1968. I doubt that either of those performances could be equalled by others.
Regarding the use of the river in AMFAS, it is almost a framing element. used to splendid advantage. I love the scenes that show the Royal barge and Hampton Court.
By Gigi on June 25th, 2007 at 10:34 pm
“As a Windsor man, Wills will never be loyal towards his wife…”
I could be wrong, but I believe both George V and George VI were deeply loyal to their wives. Edward VIII, one might argue, was a tad too loyal.
By Aunt Pierre on June 26th, 2007 at 2:13 am
LOL Quite true. King George V and King George VI were blessed with happy marriages. Edward VII was a womanizer but he was not a Windsor man, rather of the House of Saxe Coburg Gotha. His Father, Prince Albert, was one of the best men who ever lived, and was a devoted husband and Father. Edward VII was said to have had a short attention span and I have read that Prince William has one, also. Let us hope that does not translate into womanizing after he marries. That way lies disaster.
By Gigi on June 26th, 2007 at 3:13 am
After 25 a Prince doesn’t need the explicit consent of the Queen to marry, but it would be inconceivable for William to do so if the Queen strongly objected to a match. There would obviously be a very good reason for her objection and the Prime Minister of the day would probably also object, as Baldwin did over Wallace Simpson.
On loyal Royals : as Prince Philip said, when you live in a goldfish bowl, accompanied at all times by protection officers, it’s not easy to do all the things the press thinks you’re doing.
By John on June 26th, 2007 at 9:21 am
Oh my God, Philip is the worst example.
As the protection officers say, there is a huge difference between protecting the Duke of Edinburgh and protecting the Queen’s husband. He can do what he wants in the bedroom as long as he goes out safely from it
By Lilyfromfrance on June 26th, 2007 at 9:33 am
Whoever William marries I hope he is faithful and I hope it is a strong marraige because i really do think that the life he is destined for is a lonely one and the best way to survive it is to have a good and fulfilling home life. Have reams of kids and be involved with them then i believe the rest of his life will slot into place and he will show us his potential. look how different Charles’ life would have been if he and Diana had been happy together, the world is your oyster.
By Eliza on June 26th, 2007 at 9:44 am
I’m sorry but I’m convinced that Wills will never be loyal towards his wife. Thats why I would like him to marry Kate, because she seems to know it and seems to accept it, so there wont be a divorce. Thats not because he won’t be loyal that does mean their marriage wont be strong. I know it’s awful, but things will work like that with Wills.
By Lilyfromfrance on June 26th, 2007 at 9:49 am
God that is so depressing. But Lily, if you are right even if she does think that she can accept it the actuality of it will probably be much harder to take and a divorce could easily be the result. She may love the idea and think being queen is worth it but she is middle class and being happy is a strangely middleclass ideal. Anyway Diana was an aristrocrat brought up on duty etc and she bolted because she was unhappy and couldn’t take anymore. I don’t see Kate and William’s marraige surviving if he is unfaithful.
By Eliza on June 26th, 2007 at 10:03 am
I think Lily is expressing the traditional French view that fresh meat is always needed for the table.
By John on June 26th, 2007 at 10:09 am
Well, I’m Irish and I’m afraid that reference is over my head!
By Eliza on June 26th, 2007 at 10:16 am
Well just look how she is acting. She takes her time. I hope Wills is not mocking her and doesnt give her fake hopes. I’m sure she knows that he wont be loyal his entire life and that she is thinking seriously about a future together, not just about an engagement and a wedding. The wedding is just about one day. The press presents her like a desperate princess in waiting but they seem to forget that she split twice with him before, and the reasons were about girls. So she knows. But she closes her eyes and thats what I like because Wills will need that kind of girl, not a girl who wants to try to change him and makes tantrums and announcements in the press like Chelsy does.
Ofcourse whoever will be Wills’ wife, he wont cheat on her everyday!
Anyway, I may be totally wrong. It’s obvious for certain people that Kate will be the mistress
By Lilyfromfrance on June 26th, 2007 at 10:16 am
John! You can’t say that!
There are more divorces in UK than in France.
By Lilyfromfrance on June 26th, 2007 at 10:17 am
True, the French stick it out whatever happens. That’s realistic in today’s world.
By John on June 26th, 2007 at 10:37 am
Well one can only hope that William unlike his father refuses to be the only Prince of Wales without a mistress. I still wonder where he got that idea because George V was a Prince of Wales and as far as anyone can tell he never had a mistress. William would be wise to look at his great great grandfather as a role model and his great grandfather as well.
By Trudie on June 26th, 2007 at 11:09 am
Charles makes up his own rules, he always has. Rarely does he take responsibility for his mistakes. If Prince William is wise he will not model his behavior after the fatally flawed Charles or, God forbid, Prince Phillip, neither of whom are appropriate role models for anyone. Since Prince William will, as King, one day be Defender of the Faith, I would pray that he follows the dictates of the Faith and be true to his Queen and the expectations of his people. The vows taken in marriage are equally as sacred as the Coronation Oath. I agree with Trudie that good role models for Prince William would be King George VI, King George V, and may I add, Albert the Prince Consort, of shining memory.
By Gigi on June 26th, 2007 at 3:59 pm
Why Wills should follow his ancestors instead of acting on his own? All these examples are so old, things work so differently today. I also doubt that George V is a so great model. He was brilliant thanks to his wife.
Well at least if he must follow his old ancestors then he should follow the legends. King Richard Coeur de Lion, Queen Victoria and the best ever, King Arthur. Lets build a new Camelot.
By Lilyfromfrance on June 26th, 2007 at 5:04 pm
Oh sorry, I meant king George VI! 6!
By Lilyfromfrance on June 26th, 2007 at 5:08 pm
Well, all the medieval Monarchs tried to be Arthur, without much success. You’re right, Lily, these are different times. So long as William puts the country before himself and cuts a decent figure, he’ll be all right.
By John on June 26th, 2007 at 5:13 pm
Lily you are so cute!
Those darn Roman numerals are the bain of our existence. 
I realize these modern times are different, but that does not mean that all must behave differently. There are, or should be, standards of conduct that do not shift with the times. Truth and constancy in relationships should remain so, not flucuate willy-nilly, to suit a modern whim. Goodness, kindness, honesty and faithfulness are necessary to the good of humanity, in whatever generation they live. I believe that one of the things that has made our modern times so tragic is that people have chosen to foresake standards they suddenly found inconvenient and demode. The pendulum swings back and forth, as it always does. Yet the collateral damage from lives lived irresponsibly is the negative gift that keeps on giving.
By Gigi on June 26th, 2007 at 5:32 pm
William will one day be head of the Church and as such should look to the teachings of the faith and not try to desecrate it to suit his own selfish whims like his father. The church and its teaching have stood the test of time good moral behavior never go out of vogue. Not that I’m a saint but totally realistic as to what a real mans character in such a unique position should be.
By Trudie on June 27th, 2007 at 12:31 am
Well said, Trudie!
By Gigi on June 27th, 2007 at 3:03 am
Lili’s version is quite interesting. Kate knows that many girls will try to be with Wills no matter if he is married or not. And let’s be honest, infidelity happens in both royal and commoner world.
I think that Kate might underestimate the consequences of infidelity in a high profile marriage. It would not be easy to read your husband’s infidelities in the tabloids and faking that everything is ok. I think that she might marry Wills by love (and also because it is nice for her ego to be a princess). “Princess” sounds nice… but could someone please explain to me what really means to be a prince in a constitutional monarchy, where the government and supreme decisions are not even made by the king or queen? What is the objective of monarchy under these conditions?
Note: I’m not trying to start a political conversation. It is just that I live in a country where nobilty does not exist. Thank you very much
By Claudia on June 28th, 2007 at 7:55 am
Claudia, a constitutional Monarchy will in all cases have evolved over centuries from an absolute Monarchy in the Middle Ages to a fully-franchised democracy in the 19th/20th century. Britain took the decision to have the best of both worlds, with power moving over time to Parliament.
However,the trappings of the Monarchy were retained to provide continuity with the past, PLUS putting a brake on the tendency of politicians to see themselves as monarchs of all they survey. Checks and balances, we call the process.
It’s a pragmatic solution that has worked well for us. Politicians take divisive decisions, while the Queen acts as a unifying force for the nation. On big occasions we have this central point that is non-political — something many countries envy.
The Queen also has powers to consult and warn the Prime Minister of the day, and she has a constitutional role in choosing the next Prime Minister. By convention, though, she always picks the person who commands the confidence of the House of Commons — usually the leader of the largest party.
By John on June 28th, 2007 at 8:56 am
Whomever marries Prince William will one day be Princess of Wales and, in the fullness of time, Queen Consort of the UK. Since the British Monarchy is the most significant royal position in the world, it is no doubt highly coveted. Some might find the fishbowl existence and the lack of privacy a drawback, but the privileges, the wealth and the pomp and circumstance appear to offset those negative aspects. In any event, if someone is contemplating entering the rarified realm of royalty, I believe they would be well-advised to do so only if they are very much in love with their spouse. A good and loving marriage can smooth over many a rough patch.
By Gigi on June 28th, 2007 at 4:02 pm
Gigi I have to disagree with you on this point Some might find the fishbowl existence and lack of privacy a drawback, but the privileges, the wealth and the pomp and circumstance appear to offset those negative aspects. Well for Diana even those privileges were not enough to make her stay and live a lie. I have more respect for her for doing that then just staying for the title and ultimately the title of Queen Consort.
By Trudie on June 28th, 2007 at 7:10 pm
I agree with you Trudie, that is why I said “some” might find the wealth and so on a compensation. Princess Diana did not have the comfort of a loving husband to see her through the rigors of life in the Royal Family. I am proud that she left him and struck out on her own. I am also furious that Charles’ lack of character and honesty made that necessary. The blame is and always will be his.
By Gigi on June 29th, 2007 at 3:32 am