Peter Phillips wedding — more twists and turns as Prince William goes AWOL
In the ancient annals of You Couldn’t Make It Up, the latest reports from what must be the weirdest wedding of the year are, true-to-form, jaw-droppingly inconceivable.
If in my piece yesterday I had speculated that Kate Middleton would go to Peter Phillips and Autumn Kelly’s nuptials tomorrow, but boyfriend Prince William would attend a Maasai ceremony in the African bush, you may have suspected my sanity.
Yet that’s what appears to be happening. Both the Mail and the Sun have brought out their top guns to hammer home the news. The Sun’s Duncan Larcombe actually filed his piece in Kenya, possibly undercover and dressed as a Maasai warrior. While the Mail’s Richard Kay and Rebecca English strut their stuff with serious quotes from inside sources.
On balance, and in the absence of more ducking and weaving, we must assume this is correct — provisionally. Where’s the fat lady when you need her?
The Mail has a senior Royal source revealing, “Prince William is going to be out of the country this weekend on a long standing prior engagement. It’s an unfortunate clash but he spoke to his cousin Peter and he is fine with the situation. His girlfriend [Kate Middleton] will be going in his absence.”
A friend of the Prince also said, “It was a difficult decision as Peter and William are very close but the two talked it through. William felt he had to go to Kenya because the Craigs asked him first and it was the fairest thing to do. That’s why William was so keen to go to Peter’s stag party last month.”
It all sounds authentic enough. However, the Sun is reporting that the decision has baffled William’s staff at Clarence House. I can believe that.
If the Maasai do is a long-standing arrangement, dating from before Peter’s announcement, why didn’t William make his excuses at the time and, crucially, let it be known in the public prints? That would have avoided the confused press headlines and pointless speculation of recent weeks.
Of course, it may be that William didn’t make up his mind until the last moment — perhaps pushed to it by the Hello! involvement, as we ourselves have suggested.
Worse, he may be taking advice from Prime Minister Gordon Brown. “Dinee decide until the last minute, laddie. That’s what I do, and look where it got me.”
Royal Anecdotes’s alternative advice is, “Never dither, never try to emulate politicians, if you’re going, go, if you’re not going, don’t. Tell the world, and stick to it.”
This business does not enhance your reputation, Sir.
One welcome enhancement, though, is Kate’s status within the Royal Family. It now seems clear that an official engagement is mapped out to upgrade the unofficial one that many of us have suspected for some time.
Updated 13.05 BST
We are hearing that there’s a lot of muttering about the private nature of tomorrow’s wedding. Many are complaining that to hold the event behind closed doors, while the only public view is through the pages of Hello! magazine, is simply not worthy of the Royal Family. This is unprecedented.
It seems that Peter and Autumn will not venture outside Windsor Castle walls. Only a small group of photographers will be allowed in to photograph them on the chapel steps. They will then take a carriage ride along a secluded route to the reception at Frogmore House, which is inside closed grounds.
This is a poor show all round. Even a “private” Royal wedding should always have an open public face, not one sold to the highest bidder.
This time CH was certainly at fault for not commenting right away when all the speculation started. In the end all the press speculation will fall back on William (though I have no doubt that he knew from the start whether he would attend the wedding and whether Kate would join him). He will look as if he changed his mind several times, though most of these reports were obviously the product of the vivid imagination of some gossip journalists.
CH needs to think its press policy over. I can understand that they do not comment on private matters but simply saying whether William would attend the wedding and if not why, wouldn’t have hurt.
By Isana on May 16th, 2008 at 11:20 am
I agree, Isana … unless, of course, William didn’t tell his staff what his intentions were.
Either way, it doesn’t reflect well on the press arrangements of Clarence House. It really looks as if William is snubbing Peter, perhaps wrongly.
By John on May 16th, 2008 at 11:28 am
Several have wondered why William is going to the Craig wedding. When William spent time in Kenya during his gap year, he was working with the rhino project– of which Batian Craig is the head. I’m not sure of timing, but I’d guess that Prince William may have worked directly with Batian then, and formed a close relationship with him.
William’s close relationship with Jecca has been more widely reported, because it’s more interesting to the media who the Prince’s girlfriend is, and more important to the UK in the long run who their future queen may be.
The Craigs have been very gracious to William over the years, as he’s visited many times since his gap year. The Mail reported that he considers them a “second family.” And the Craigs had specifically asked him to come for the wedding. I think it’s likely that they asked William a year in advance when he could attend, and set the wedding date based on his availability. If that’s the case, then it would have been difficult for William to back out.
By Evelyn on May 16th, 2008 at 12:02 pm
Oh dear, what a mess up this has all been!
By SuffolkSim on May 16th, 2008 at 12:06 pm
I’ve just added a footnote to the article about the criticism of the very private arrangements for tomorrow. It just gets worse and worse.
By John on May 16th, 2008 at 12:10 pm
Well I think we need to figure out what time is the wedding so we can watch the coverage on BBC Online. Somehow I’m not buying that William will miss this wedding but if so, then so be it. It don’t look that good but William is a person that gets things done his own way and if he want to send Kate to represent him then that is good too.
By Claudius on May 16th, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Claudius, I don’t think there will be much for the broadcasters to cover. It will all take place within the walls of the castle. We may just get one picture, like the Wessex Christening. The real pics will probably be in the next issue of Hello! magazine.
By John on May 16th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
Yes! Someone please let us know (if the info has been released) as to what time this wedding is to take place. I’m in the same time zone as Gigi is, so I’ll have to count backwards from there! I hate to say this…but all of this just makes me want to get this day done, so we can hopefully get on with any new engagement announcements that have had to wait to take place! *smile*
I must say, the fact that Kate will be “representing” the couple at the wedding speaks volumes. Any doubters left as to the nature of their relationship should now be silenced!
By Claire on May 16th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
Good grief. How has William been in Africa for a week with no one knowing? Is he really there?
John, I think you’re right about smokescreens. But couldn’t they have picked ONE? No doubt the Craig wedding will also be private, probably at an “undisclosed location.”
I think we’re being led down blind alleys and purposely kept off of William’s trail.
By Dan on May 16th, 2008 at 2:26 pm
Dan, I’m reasonably sure now that William is in Africa.
On reflection, I think he was probably trying to protect the privacy of the Craigs by holding back that he was going. Gentlemanly, certainly, but disastrous for him.
The “holiday” story was probably cover for that, and the late news that Kate will be going to the wedding alone, is possibly to avoid the appearance of “snubbing” Peter.
Oh, what a tangled web we weave …
By John on May 16th, 2008 at 2:43 pm
There’s a kind profile of Autumn Kelly in the Telegraph today (no allusions to the “new Princess Pushy” as in the Mail last week), but there is one slight against another recent addition to the Royal Family.
Andrew Pierce calls tomorrow’s wedding “the first significant royal wedding since that of the Earl of Wessex in 1999.” Um, hasn’t the heir to the throne married since then?? Perhaps Mr. Pierce doesn’t consider that significant.
Call me a romantic, but I think Peter and Autumn ought to be made an Earl and Countess of something. Then again, I suppose he can’t outrank his father.
By Dan on May 16th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Well spotted, Dan!
I wonder how Charles & Camilla will feel about having their wedding forgotten!
Then again, C&C may prefer not being mentioned rather than have the media focus on the latest mishap for the Queen Victoria ocean liner. You may recall that the bottle of champagne didn’t break when Camilla was christening the ship. Yesterday the QV hit a pier in Malta, causing damage that is resulting in a shortened trip for its passengers.
C&C must be glad that most of us are focused on P&A’s wedding!
By Evelyn on May 16th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
Andrew Pierce is not a Royal writer, much more of a political journalist. He probably forgot about Charles/Camilla, especially as they won’t have children.
By John on May 16th, 2008 at 3:03 pm
John silly same old question but given Kate representing william do you think they will announce before he goes on his next deployment or wait until christmas??? Thank goodness this riddle has been solved. It does make sense that he was trying to shield the Craigs from what would have been a freenze in Africa!!
By Jackie Mccoy on May 16th, 2008 at 3:26 pm
…And isn’t it a little unprecedented, at a gathering of the Royal Family, to have a member of the Family being represented by a non-royal??
By Dan on May 16th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
It’s not a State occasion, Dan, so “represented” is not used in an official sense. Kate is clearly regarded as “one of us” now.
By John on May 16th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Jackie, I think a summer announcement is very much in their interests, for a variety of reasons. It’s interesting that the Mail article thinks it may come “sooner rather than later”.
But, given the long history of this couple, you never know what might happen.
By John on May 16th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
Like everyone else following events from this side of the pond, I’ll be here bright and early tomorrow to see what finally came of all this.
Do we know where the honeymoon will be?
By Dan on May 16th, 2008 at 4:05 pm
Maybe the newlyweds will join William in Africa.
By Evelyn on May 16th, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Is it known when the ceremony in Windsor will start? I hope we’ll at least get some pics of the guests arriving for the service if we are deprived of pictures from the ceremony itself.
By Isana on May 16th, 2008 at 4:55 pm
Well guys we will be able to see alot more of the wedding because what the Royal website stated in the mailbox question & answer.
The forthcoming wedding of Peter Philips (son of The Princess Royal and Captain Mark Phillips) to Autumn Kelly will take place at St George’s Chapel in Windsor and will be a private, family event. No television cameras will be allowed inside the Chapel during the service. However, television cameras and photographers will witness, from outside the Chapel, the arrival of the Bride and Groom, and their departure with their attendants and immediate family, following the service.
So I do believe that there will be some coverage of the guest arriving and leaving. We just have to wait for the coverage to begin. I feel we all will be up very early in the morning.
By Claudius on May 16th, 2008 at 5:22 pm
Thanks, Claudius, for digging that out. It sounds like something for rolling news shows rather than TV specials, though.
I’ll check the schedules over here and let everyone know later.
By John on May 16th, 2008 at 5:30 pm
There’s no coverage of the wedding on mainstream TV. I suspect we may get a bit on the BBC rolling news channel tomorrow, but it won’t be much. The story has been sold to Hello!. It’s very disappointing.
Incidentally, Amanda Platell has now got a Royal Roundup in her Saturday Mail column. You might like to check it out later.
By John on May 16th, 2008 at 6:36 pm
What little coverage of the Phillips wedding will do is make so many people just that much feverish for the next Royal wedding.
I would guess that Peter is setting the pace for the non-HRH Royal Weddings, so Zara’s may not be much more accessible.
That means that William & Kate’s wedding will be as popular as the wedding of his parents– perhaps even more. I’d say it’s best to get on with it sooner, rather than later.
By Evelyn on May 16th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
I read that Peter’s and Autumn’s wedding ceremony at St. George’s Chapel is scheduled to begin at 4 PM. The best we can do is gather around our TV sets before then and hope to see something broadcast on BBC, even if it is only a snipet here and there.
Fortunately, for my fellow Royal Anecdotians here in the States, we will not have to get up at 5 AM to view a wedding that may or may not be on television.
By Arthur on May 16th, 2008 at 7:01 pm
Well maybe Hello! will have some coverage since they sometimes do that on their site.
By Claudius on May 16th, 2008 at 8:32 pm
I just decided to take a trip down memory lane and look at some of RA’s first post’s. Engagement rumours started (on RA) as early as 2006 with her visiting PW at Sandringham!!! Seeing all of the ups and downs that Chelsy and Kate have both been through it is a wonder that they haven’t packed their bags and run for the hills without a backward glance. The pressure must have been insane. I’m hoping that this will be the year just like many RA regulars. It was also very amusing to see that there were some real wackjobs on this site commenting in the early days!!! Looking forward to talking to everyone when I wake up PST tomorrow!!
By Jackie Mccoy on May 16th, 2008 at 9:38 pm
Oh and if anyone in the UK has any time tomorrow could they take a look at the express newspaper. I know it’s not the most reliable of newspapers but on the sky news website the front page of Saturdays paper says double royal engagment? with a picture of Chelsy and Kate. I know it is probably just more speculation of the when question but looks like an interesting read!
By Jackie Mccoy on May 16th, 2008 at 10:10 pm
Last post for today I promise, there is also another rehashed speculative piece on the DM website about photographs the queen and the 500,000. The article also paints Chelsy in a very nice light but gives Kate a bit of a rough time for being waity katy so to speak. She honestly can’t win and if they don’t put this on an official footing soon the tide may start to turn. I know John has previously said that the story will be very stale if it runs through to December/Jan/Feb .. Done no more I promise!
By Jackie Mccoy on May 16th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
The DM article follows their usual line. Kate and Chelsy shouldn’t be compared like that– they’re two different young women dating two princes with different personalities and different roles.
By Evelyn on May 16th, 2008 at 10:52 pm
They are just giving a boost to Chelsy image because she will meet the Queen tomorrow. If I remember correctly, they did the same thing to Kate when she was going to meet the Queen awhile back. But It’s bad to read someone talking so bad about the future king’s girlfriend. In the old days, people would hold on to their heads when they talked about the royals.
By Claudius on May 16th, 2008 at 11:04 pm
I don’t believe the Queen and the family will be photographed by anyone that they haven’t approved of beforehand. It’s not as though HM would allow a scrum of Hello! photographers to crash her first grandchild’s wedding.
However, I would not be surprised if she privately supported Peter’s use of a mag like Hello for financial gain. HM wants the family to be financially self-supporting.
The fact that he doesn’t have the HRH and the way they keep emphasizing that this is a PRIVATE (not a ROYAL) wedding gives the family some distance from the tawdry money-making.
I have a sense that this is all going according to a very elaborate plan. Would the Queen participate otherwise?
One other notion: Peter Phillips was a virtual unknown, certainly outside Britain, before these past weeks of publicity. I wouldn’t be surprised if he was being groomed to become a more active member of the Firm as the next generation takes its place, title or no title. The future King William will need family of his own generation around him.
By Dan on May 17th, 2008 at 1:41 am
Off topic: The Sun is reporting that Princess Beatrice will be moving into a 4-bedroom, 3-bath apartment at St James Palace.
By Evelyn on May 17th, 2008 at 3:55 am
Dan, that is the problem. They are calling this event “private”, but then selling access to it for money. Peter refuses a Royal title but then capitalizes on his Royal connections for commercial gain.
The public, who are entitled to witness Royal occasions, are being locked out. They are then asked to pay, via Hello!, for something that’s already paid for by the State.
This is not a good way of doing it. If Peter wanted it to be private, they should have staged it at the church in Balmoral, as Princess Anne did the second time around.
By John on May 17th, 2008 at 8:52 am
I also find it interesting that the media hasn’t taken the gloves off as yet regarding exactly that John the fact that the wedding has been sold to Hello and that the Royals are paid for by public funding…. Although I didn’t think the helicopter PW incident was a good idea even I have to admit that in the end it wasn’t as big of a deal as the press made it out to be & that they would have a much more valid point complaining about this. So far nothing negative……?????
By jackie Mccoy on May 17th, 2008 at 2:53 pm
Jackie, the DM has a short leader today criticizing Peter and Autumn for “selling the Queen to Hello!” It’s not just RA going after them
By John on May 17th, 2008 at 3:33 pm