Prince William named the Hottest Royal
The influential American business magazine Forbes, has named Prince William the world’s hottest Royal.
Prince William and Chelsy Davy at Prince Harry’s medal ceremony
The future Monarch of all he surveys easily edged out his brother Prince Harry and cousins Zara Phillips and Princess Beatrice to lead the field at forbes.com.
The magazine, which is famous for compiling rich lists, believes the top 20 Royals reign over nearly $60 billion in wealth and 15 Royal lineages.
Forbes assessed the international web and media presence of the contenders, as well as family wealth. It’s interesting that all 20 are single and under the age of 35 and have also become “successful in their chosen career paths”.
Princess Beatrice though, 4th, is only just finishing her gap year. One wonders which “career path” Forbes had in mind : international party-goer?
Nevertheless, the top four (all British) are certainly talented and destined for great things.
We are told that “The 20 Hottest Young Royals” — presumably a TV show — will premiere on Friday on the E! Entertainment network.
Forbes.com’s top five are:
1. Prince William
2. Prince Harry
3. Zara Phillips
4. Princess Beatrice
5. Charlotte Casiraghi
Jolly well done to them all.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Nonetheles, Prince Harry will top my list!!
By Marilyn on May 29th, 2008 at 12:01 pm
This wasn’t a beauty contest, it was a bit more than that. It’s Forbes after all.
I think William deserves the top ranking, he is in a very special position.
By dagga on May 29th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
I think they went by influence, media coverage and wealth not so much by looks or “sex appeal”.
By Isana on May 29th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
Maybe they could do another for Royal girlfriends and boyfriends.
Chelsy would come out well for career path — at least for the training part. Kate might lose some points on that one. Mike Tindall would zoom up the list for his world-renowned rugby career, while Beatrice’s Dave Clark, a space flight consultant for Richard Branson’s Virgin, would certainly earn brownie points for novelty.
By John on May 29th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
If we’re just talking about hotness, Princess Lalla Soukaïna Filali of Morocco easily takes top spot, although Charlotte Casiraghi is a good second.
By ClassyCanuck on May 29th, 2008 at 2:47 pm
What an odd subject for Forbes to weigh in on. They must be looking for a younger readership.
By Dan on May 29th, 2008 at 6:45 pm
John did we arleady discuss the fact that woolworths have shelved all of the merchandise that they created for a possible engagement announcement in 2006? If we haven’t I know they were awful but is this anything to worry about? I’m sure it is not but thought I would check
By Jackie Mccoy on May 29th, 2008 at 7:01 pm
Link http://tinyurl.com/5p72gd
By Jackie Mccoy on May 29th, 2008 at 7:04 pm
The photos they used were terribly out of date; made Kate look like she was robbing the cradle.
Have they landed at Heathrow yet?
By Dan on May 29th, 2008 at 7:06 pm
Haven’t seen anything on that front Dan. I’ve search the online newspapers this afternoon for news but nothing yet. Given that it is after 11:00PM in the UK it is doubtful that we will hear any news of them today, and If we don’t hear anything tomorrow then I doubt that we are going to hear anything for a couple of months. So December it is…. I think….
By Jackie Mccoy on May 29th, 2008 at 10:09 pm
At this point does it really matter? WE know it is going to happen the only ? I have is when and where the wedding will take place.
By Trudie on May 30th, 2008 at 2:10 am
I am the type of person that needs things to be verified. Even though I agree that they will get married, I’ll be glad when it is announced. Call me a romantic, but I think that it would be fantastic if Prince William asked for Kate to marry him on the island. To think of the two them walking on the beach enjoying each other’s company, the waves, it would make a perfect setting. However there is a point to make for them waiting for him to leave the navy. William would be around to help Kate make the adjustment to a very public life. I do wish that they would have the announcement sooner than later.
By kat on May 30th, 2008 at 2:21 am
I’m afraid that having Beatrice as the fourth hottest royal kind of diminishes the list to me. I don’t mean to be harsh but by what category could she be regarded as hot? If the criteria was career, she hasn’t even started college yet, if influence, hers is minimal and certainly no more than any other young royal, if family wealth means immediate family then they wouldn’t rank above any other royals. The media presence is tabloid so really my view on the article is it was a space filler without much research. They went for the easy option of the UK royals because they are known on America.
I’ve never heard of the Morocan princess but what about Queen Rania of Jordan, she might be thirty seven but she has influence, money and beauty now.
By Eliza on May 30th, 2008 at 10:11 am
Eliza, Beatrice’s presence did surprise me too, for the reasons you give. And Zara, who certainly deserves a high place for her very real achievements, is not Royal.
I think they just totted up the number of times they have appeared in the media, and may have Googled them and counted the hits.
If that had been done by a student, I’d have marked it “Very sloppy work — do it again!”
By John on May 30th, 2008 at 10:28 am
I think that the list contains only unmarried royals. I was surprised that they mentioned Chelsy and Mike in the articlle but left off Kate. That is according to what I read on line about the article summary. The full article in the magazine could have it though.
By kat on May 30th, 2008 at 10:39 am
John, I’m not up on the nuances of what makes a royal but surely the fact that Zara is twelfth in line for the throne and would be sixth in the line of succession if there wasn’t a bias against women must count for something!
If the Queen gave her title which she accepted would that suddenly make her royal?
To me Zara is every much an equal to Beatrice, princess or no princess.
By Eliza on May 30th, 2008 at 11:18 am
I agree, John. Also, perhaps the magazine also needed to define the term “Royal.” Charlotte Casiraghi, while attractive and single, is not at the same level as the British Royal Family since she is the scion of the ruling house of Monaco, which are styled Serene Highness, not Royal Highness due to morganatic marriages.
At any rate, I am pleased that Prince William heads the list and that Prince Harry is a close second.
I also question Forbes’ motivation for grazing in pastures heretofore unknown to that publication and suspect, like another RA reader commented, that the motivation is circulation and market share.
By Gigi on May 30th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
I hope we get a William sighting soon. My suspicion of a ruse is rising again. I wouldn’t be surprised if Kate has been tucked away on a secluded island while William is off being military somewhere.
By Dan on May 30th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
Wasn’t there some talk of William potentially working a drug intervention operation in the Caribbean as part of his military attachment? Of course, he hasn’t started his Navy attachment yet…
By Dan on May 30th, 2008 at 4:35 pm
Dan, I’ve been thinking of that possibility for several weeks now, since William disappeared before the wedding.
By Evelyn on May 30th, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Dan
I think John had said once before that the story which appeared about William working in the Caribbean was false. He could have been deployed already and Mustique could have been a ruse and a very good one!
By Jackie Mccoy on May 30th, 2008 at 4:48 pm
According to the Royal diary “Prince William, Commodore-in-Chief Submarines, will open the Area of Remembrance at The Royal Navy Submarine Museum, Gosport, Hampshire” on June 10.
He would have been gone for exactly a month then, right? Enough to qualifie for a campaign medal like Harry got if I understood correctly. Maybe that’s what was going on.
Does anybody know whether there’s a polo match scheduled for this weekend? If there is and he doesn’t participate I would believe that he’s on military duty. According to the articles (and I am aware that they are not very reliable anyways) him and Kate were expected back from Mustique on May 28 (Wednesday) yet so far there has been no mention of them returning let alone any picture.
By Isana on May 30th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
I see Charles hosted the winning Wales rugby team yesterday. The story makes a point of saying that William, as Vice Royal Patron of the team, had attended the winning game in March. I find it strange that a visit to Clarence House would be scheduled for a time when he’s allegedly “on holiday.”
First the wedding, now this, two events that he would surely have attended if he weren’t performing vital duties elsewhere. A holiday doesn’t fit the bill.
Is there any proof yet that he did in fact attend that wedding in Kenya?
By Dan on May 30th, 2008 at 6:23 pm
Yes John did we ever hear anything about Kenya. Where the Sun not sending one of their journalists over to Kenya? I do wonder whether there is again a news blackout on his current location.
By Jackie Mccoy on May 30th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
William is to join the Navy on Tuesday for two months – was it not meant to be till the end of the year?
http://tinyurl.com/62exzs
By Ash on May 30th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
Wow Ash if that article is correct that means he could be free as early as August unless there is another assignment which he needs to complete within the Navy!
By Jackie Mccoy on May 30th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
Maybe he plans on serving on a naval vessel for the other 4 months. As far as I know they said when he started with the RAF that he would first be with them for 4 months and then be with the navy till the end of the year, unless what happened with the helicopters changed the plan????
By Ash on May 30th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
I’ve never read that he would be in the Navy for more than two or three months. Some articles have said that he’ll go back to his army regiment for the rest of the year, some that his military life is over after the stint in the Navy. Who knows, maybe CH will inform us soon?
By dagga on May 30th, 2008 at 9:00 pm
Isana, what I remember on the Mustique trip was that the villa was rented Wed-to-Wed. I assume that means Wednesday night through Tuesday night, checking out Wednesday morning. Even if they spent the rest of the day on the island and flew back to the UK overnight, they should have returned by Thursday morning.
Thanks for the Royal Navy article link, Ash.
As I understand it, William’s Naval attachment is to be similar to the RAF attachment– a few months. I’ve heard 3, but that doesn’t mean that was correct.
As to his time after the Royal Navy, it’s assumed that Prince William will finish out the year with other military duties, which would give him a full three years military training. In April, the press mentioned that William would like to serve in the rescue squad, which military personnel can volunteer for. Rescues are done in the sea and in the mountains. My thought is that, if he’s allowed to do this, it might take place after his time with the Royal Navy, perhaps through the end of the year.
By Evelyn on May 30th, 2008 at 9:32 pm
Jackie, Duncan Larcombe of The Sun filed one story from Kenya, then silence. The Times (same newspaper group) then published a snippet saying that Hello! may have bought up the wedding-in-the-jungle too.
Since then, nothing. I haven’t seen last Wednesday’s Hello!, but I’m sure if William and Jecca had been in it, we’d have heard.
There’s a lot of closing down of stories going on at the moment. Must be an early Silly Season.
By John on May 31st, 2008 at 12:47 pm
Ash, thanks for pointing me towards one of our local papers. I missed that completely.
May get down to Dartmouth on Tuesday with my trusty cameras.
By John on May 31st, 2008 at 12:50 pm
John, do plan on heading to Dartmouth on Tuesday! Your photos would be a real highlight for all of us!
By Evelyn on May 31st, 2008 at 1:10 pm
Evelyn, I used to live in Dartmouth, which is just down the road from here. I’d been planning a visit for some time so, if I can carve out a time-niche, it would be a good opportunity.
By John on May 31st, 2008 at 1:19 pm
If Prince William doesn’t show up in Dartmouth on Tuesday, as the locals expect, then I will continue to suspect that he may be serving a four-week tour of active duty somewhere in the world.
By Evelyn on May 31st, 2008 at 1:50 pm
Isana is right. Prince William is Commodore-in-Chief, Scotland and
Commodore-in-Chief, Submarines.
Commodore-in-Chief is an honorary Royal Navy appointment . William was appointed by the Queen together with other members of the Royal Family on 8 August 2006.
By dagga on May 31st, 2008 at 2:07 pm
I stand corrected. No wonder he’s keen to get a couple of weeks in onboard a Trident submarine.
At least when he gets his Dolphin badge he can hold his head up among submariners.
By John on May 31st, 2008 at 2:38 pm
I think that would be extremely fascinating duty, John. The Trident submarines are supposed to be a technological marvel. Prince William would be as ‘deep in the heart of the state-of-the-art’ as a submariner can be. Do endeavor to get to Dartmouth if at all possible!
Ordinarily, I would be puzzled and annoyed that we do not know what is going on, actually, but instead I find myself quite intrigued and rather excited. I have a powerful feeling that something wonderful and momentous is about to occur!
By Gigi on May 31st, 2008 at 3:01 pm
This article goes into a little bit more detail on what William will be doing during his time in the Navy.
http://tinyurl.com/6lhlq9
By Ash on May 31st, 2008 at 5:48 pm
Thanks again, Ash.
By John on May 31st, 2008 at 6:01 pm
The naval attachment sounds shorter than had previously been reported. So Prince William will finish his stint in the Royal Navy in early August. I suppose he and Kate will have another holiday in August. Do you think they might spend time at Balmoral?
By Evelyn on May 31st, 2008 at 6:07 pm
You are very welcome John!
I think that I misunderstood the original announcement regarding Williams plans for this year because I though that he was going to be with the RAF and the to the Navy for the rest of the year bringing to an end his military career and he would then become a full time Royal. Has it changed or did I get it completely wrong?
By Ash on May 31st, 2008 at 7:26 pm
People are reporting the Caribbean deployment again. They are usually quite accurate?
By jackie mccoy on May 31st, 2008 at 10:37 pm
When Prince William’s plans for RAF and Royal Navy attachments were first announced, I don’t think they specified the time frames. In January, it became clear that the RAF was shorter than first thought (4 months). I still expected the Navy to be about the same length; then heard 3 months, now saying 2 months. So it has been confusing.
I expect that as things have gone along, the military and/or Prince William and advisors have had some other ideas, hence the changes in plans. I’d rather have them keep coming up with better ideas for how to best educate the Prince than feel they absolutely have to stick to the original plan.
By Evelyn on May 31st, 2008 at 11:19 pm
I’m seeing good articles on the Caribbean deployment on BBC.com, Telegraph, and the Mail on Sunday. All are giving about the same details, from Royal Navy named sources, so I would guess it’s very accurate. The Telegraph lists the dates as June 2 (Monday) through August 1.
As happened days before his RAF secondment began, a photo of Prince William in Royal Navy uniform is included. So this appears to be very official– not just gossip or conjecture.
He’ll be in training in the UK for at least 3 weeks, so William should be able to be at the Garter ceremony.
The Telegraph also says that he will be allowed to call Kate– if he can get a signal.
By Evelyn on May 31st, 2008 at 11:43 pm
Yes I’m sure he will make it to the Garter ceremony I just hope Kate/Catherine will attend. I hope to see the coverage on Tuesday. Good Luck William!!!
By Claudius on May 31st, 2008 at 11:51 pm
John, please note that while earlier sources expected Prince William in Dartmouth on Tuesday, the latest reports say he’ll begin on Monday. I’m not at all sure which is correct, or even if both could possibly be correct. I hope you’ll be able to get photos!!!
By Evelyn on June 1st, 2008 at 12:06 am
Sorry to double-post again. Here’s a snip from an article in the Telegraph:
“In a clear sign that a Royal wedding announcement may be just around the corner, Mandrake learns that courtiers are already discussing the most likely venue for Prince William’s expected marriage to Kate Middleton.
“‘William is thought to favour St George’s chapel, but it would simply not be big enough to accommodate all those who would expect to be invited,’ one courtier tells me.
“‘That leaves St Paul’s or Westminster Abbey, and Charles would be unlikely to want Westminster.’”
Sounds like the same discussions we’ve been having at RA. Maybe the courtiers have been listening in on us again.
By Evelyn on June 1st, 2008 at 12:21 am
There is also an article in the mail that talks about the Queen not wanting an announcement until Catherine is settled into a job. The article does go on to say that William is committed to Catherine. Right now she is photographing itmes from her parents and new business of her brother. Both the Mail and Telegraph articles talk about a wedding. Some interesting news tonight. Good luck to both of them!
By kat on June 1st, 2008 at 1:36 am
There is now an additional article on BBC.com, focusing on how the Royal Navy was disappointed that Prince William chose to take his commission through the Army. It’s being said that the Royal Navy wants to use these two months to prove to William that he made the wrong choice.
Sounds like sour grapes to me. William has always wanted to forge his own path. The article gives some good reasons why William would spend more time in the Army and the RAF.
Maybe another part of his reason to spend less time in the Royal Navy is knowing what a severe strain came to Prince Andrew’s marriage because of his time at sea. Perhaps Prince William didn’t want to jeopardize his relationship with Kate.
By Evelyn on June 1st, 2008 at 2:58 am
That sounds reasonable that he wouldn’t want to spend that much time away from Kate. Good point.
By kat on June 1st, 2008 at 3:20 am
Personally, I think it was a good decision for Prince William and Prince Harry to take their formal military training in the Army. The Navy is, of course, the Senior Service in their Island Kingdom, and for generations, the members of the Royal Family have trained with the Navy. Nevertheless, it is not a good idea for any one branch of the military to have all the cachet of Royal preference. It is time for the Army to get the chance to have senior members of the Royal Family among their officers. Now, as Prince William is doing, the Navy will get the opportunity to have the young Heir train with their branch and when Prince William comes to the throne, he will have a thorough preparation to be C-in-C of all his sailors, soldiers, marines and airmen.
By Gigi on June 1st, 2008 at 3:40 am
Gigi, what do think about the current DM article regarding the Queen and Kate? Is it for real?
By kat on June 1st, 2008 at 3:47 am
I have to say that artical cannot be real and I just the Queen would never say anything like that. Do you guys see a pattern here? They build Catherine up saying that she is the one and she got it all together and then they tear her down again. I don’t know how she put up with this and I don’t how William put up with people talking bad about her. We all know that a engagement is coming but why talk so bad about her and don’t care about her feeling? It’s just shocking.
By Claudius on June 1st, 2008 at 4:04 am
John usually puts some stock in articles by Katie Nicholls, but I, too, have trouble believing this one. I would hope that if the Queen confides these thoughts and feelings about Kate to anyone on her staff, they wouldn’t be passed along to the media.
John, I’ll be interested to hear your take on this.
By Evelyn on June 1st, 2008 at 4:13 am
Claudius, I copied what you just said on here to BRW. I truly apologize to you. I just agreed with what you said.
By Rman on June 1st, 2008 at 4:17 am
I hope this article is not to be believed. If it is then we have an awful long wait ahead of us before those two get engaged. It just baffles me as to why they would print a story like that. It is very damaging whether it is true or not.
I’m beginning to give up hope there just seems like there are so many obstacles in their path. Maybe John will have a less doom and gloom perspective.
By jackie Mccoy on June 1st, 2008 at 5:34 am
Slightly less doom and gloom article.
http://tinyurl.com/3o6hms
By jackie Mccoy on June 1st, 2008 at 5:36 am
That’s an artical that deserves to be worshiped. The Telegraph knows what’s going on and the Daily Mail need to catch up. We just don’t need them writing dumb things. I’m glad the Telegraph is reporting good things.
By Rman on June 1st, 2008 at 7:36 am
The Caribbean deployment is all over the press and was confirmed before. The submarine deployment is not talked about much, so may happen without our knowing.
Evelyn, William goes to Dartmouth tomorrow, Monday, but will make a public appearance before the press on Tuesday. It’s a bit late now to get a press pass, I’m afraid.
By John on June 1st, 2008 at 9:22 am
I cannot imagine that Katie Nicholls would have any idea of HM’s thoughts about William and Kate. Why could she not just have written that SHE thinks Kate should get a job? Why does she have to make it sound like this was what the Queen thinks? Even if HM would think so, I very much doubt that any of her aides would run to the DM and make this criticism public. Certainly Kate would be given advice behind the scenes and some sort of occupation be arranged for her. However this would have taken place much earlier and not now that she’s been out of employment for 7 months. If an engagement is as close by as we asume, it would be sort of futile for Kate to start any sort of job now. Who would employ her for roughly 6 months knowing that she’ll quit then?
The Telegraph sounds much more reasonable.
By Isana on June 1st, 2008 at 9:24 am
The Mail on Sunday piece is really a summary of where William and Kate are right now, including her photography work for her family’s businesses.
It leads, though, on a quote about the Queen’s attitude to Kate working, which rings a bit false to me. Would the Queen allow her thoughts to be broadcast this way? And what about the problems Sophie had when, every time she landed a plum contract, she was accused of abusing her Royal contacts.
To me, this smells of an anti-Kate faction in the Palace briefing against her.
I can imagine that the Queen has commented on all the talk about her not having a job, including the rants of love-torn teenage girls pining for William, but her views would be more nuanced than what we’re getting, I’m sure. A minor leak may have been over-embellished by a Kate-hater among the courtiers or functionaries.
Whatever doubts about Kate there may be in the Royal Family, I’m sure her not having a 9-5 job is the least of them. Maybe it’s being used as a shield for other worries.
By John on June 1st, 2008 at 9:32 am
The Telegraph piece doesn’t hold water either, except in an historical sense. All churches are used for both funerals and weddings. Do couples refuse to use the local church because their parents were buried there? No, it gives them a sense of continuity and depth.
I can imagine William preferring St. George’s Chapel, but it seems likely that public demand will make London the only sensible venue. In which case, St. Paul’s is too far to go and will bring back memories of Charles’s failed marriage, a very potent symbol still.
Westminster Abbey seems more likely after careful consideration, and will be traditional, so will be acceptable to the Queen.
By John on June 1st, 2008 at 9:45 am
After reading the paper version of the Katie Nicholl article, I think she’s picking up some of the unease in Palace circles that I wrote about recently in “The new narrative for Kate Middleton”.
The length of time she’s been hanging on with no apparent resolution is starting to fray her support, mainly because the prospect of a wedding is not so interesting as it once was. Her credibility is being stretched to breaking point.
Her parents could name her Creative Director of Party Pieces. It would at least give her a hook to hang her hat on — and it seems she’s doing the work already.
By John on June 1st, 2008 at 12:51 pm
Good suggestion, John. I hope the Middletons read RA!
By Evelyn on June 1st, 2008 at 1:34 pm
If the Queen wanted to give Kate some advice, she would have talked to Kate directly, wouldn’t she. Not through a royal aide talking to a newspaper. She can’t be that unkind ?
By dagga on June 1st, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Exactly!
By John on June 1st, 2008 at 2:24 pm
I’m with you all on this one. The Mail article smacks of Kate’s critics’ words being put in the Queen’s mouth. The Queen wants her to have a career first? Careers take years. I doubt the Queen wants Waity Willy sitting around while Kate makes a success of herself in the working world.
And why forge a career when she’ll only have to give it up? It doesn’t compute. I think it more likely that we’ll begin to hear more about her work in the family business.
Working in a family business is certainly better preparation for joining The Firm, don’t we think?
By Dan on June 1st, 2008 at 2:42 pm
I find the fact that the DM want people to believe that The Queen wants Kate to have a full time job before they can announce their engagement laughable. If they had just said that The Queen felt Kate should have a full time job it would be one thing but everyone knows that as soon as they are engaged she would have to give up any normal job. So if what the DM says is correct then Kate is to get a job, announce her engagement, quit her job! Oh I’m sure employers will line up to hire her.
I also love how quickly they forget what it was like when she did have a job. As was pointed out this morning on the Newspapers review on Sky News when Kate was working at Jig-Saw she opened her door most morning to a group of photographers. Perhaps if the press had left her alone in the beginning she would have been able to launch her own career.
By Ash on June 1st, 2008 at 3:16 pm
It’s unfortunate that such articles come out to attack Kate. It feels like she’s being bullied these days… and mainly because of that lack-of-job status.
I’m not sure I believe this article. But what I’m more surprised is that Katie Nicholl, who used to sing praises for Kate, wrote this piece. The ‘quotes’ (true or not) from the queen aren’t too demeaning, but it’s the quotes from the so-called ‘friend’ that make this article hard to believe. Firstly, Mario Testino already denied any connection with Kate. Second, it was already clarified that a gym was not installed in Clarence House for Kate. On a side note, it’s good to hear the Kate’s helping out with the family biz. Truth of the matter is we really don’t know what this girl’s doing…. so why can’t they just leave her alone?
By frands on June 1st, 2008 at 3:21 pm
I don’t believe for a minute that the Queen said what the DM claims, nor that she feels as if Catherine Middleton needs to have a career before marriage. Neither the Queen nor her sister, Princess Margaret, had careers, unless you count the mechanics corps stint Princess Elizabeth (as she was then) performed as part of the WWII effort. Princess Anne, now Princess Royal, did not have a career either, unless you count riding horses in the Olympics as a career. Catherine Middleton will have a very demanding career after she marries and that really ought to be enough! Where do these reporters get these outlandish stories that they file, with no support for their statements, and blind quotes?! It really is absurd and all that spurious stories like this one do is to further erode the credibility of the media, which is already in the mire and sinking swiftly.
By Gigi on June 1st, 2008 at 4:05 pm
Gigi you are very much right. Like I just said on BRW this is a time to celebrate knowing that William is about to make that long waited announcement soon. To see the press not reflecting that and putting his love down, putting false words in The Queen’s mouth is making the press look very bad at the moment.
By Claudius on June 1st, 2008 at 4:12 pm
Question: If William & Kate were engaged, would she start doing public engagements (with William or on her own) before the wedding? Or would any official charitable work need to wait until after the wedding?
By Evelyn on June 1st, 2008 at 4:36 pm
That is a good question, John, Gigi what do you think?
By Claudius on June 1st, 2008 at 5:03 pm
I’ve suspected for a while that there’s a growing anti-Kate faction in the Palace. Today’s article seems to be a definite attempt to brief against her. The Mail is only reporting what it’s been told.
The Queen may well have mentioned the “no job” situation in passing and commented on it. But, as others have said, Kate doesn’t have many options right now until her position is sorted out one way or the other.
One step that might partially ease the criticism would be to make her a director in the family business. The downside is that it could seem a rather provincial post and look very like a sinecure.
As we said in the recent piece, “The new narrative for Kate Middleton”, the obvious solution would be to announce an engagement now and stifle all the chatter.
Of course, if William doesn’t want to do that, he really should face his indecision and break off the romance completely. He’s really hanging Kate out to dry at the moment.
By John on June 1st, 2008 at 6:00 pm
I’m thinking the same thing John. I just don’t think the guy should be pressured. I don’t think he holds well under pressure. But I think he’s about to do something about this soon.
By Claudius on June 1st, 2008 at 6:32 pm
It really is too bad that people will not give these two individuals time and space to have their relationship grow and mature further. We are all pulling for them to get engaged. However, it just might be that they would like time to have their privacy.
Once an engagement is announced, they will not have any . It does seem that they do an awful lot together in private. However, it is sad that papers like the DM are trying to force his hand to reveal decisions that have already been made. I really do believe that they both know what their future holds. However, with things turning negative for Kate, it would be nice to have him come out and make a statement as to her status. In a real way, he already has. By sending Kate as his representative to the wedding and most recently the idea he wants to call her from the ship speaks to his feelings for her.
So right now, he is between privacy and defending Kate in public by moving up any announcement which has been agreed upon.
Unfortunately for them, I think that a public statement should be made. Without being told directly, people are making up the story. Right now, he needs to start directing the story. As always, I am pulling for them and hope for their happiness.
By kat on June 1st, 2008 at 7:56 pm
I believe that Charles and Princess Diana did perform a few events together prior to their wedding, but perhaps I am thinking of the events they did together in the very early days of their marriage. John, do you recall? The visit to Wales was during their marriage, and the visit during which a young man gave the Princess a daffodil and asked if he might “kiss the hand of my future queen,” was also.
John, I hope you are wrong about the anti-Catherine faction forming among the courtiers at the Palace, because that is what brought to ruin the marriages of Charles and Diana, Andrew and Sarah. If you are right, and you very nearly always are, then the Queen and Prince Philip (who has far more power and influence than is supposed by most onlookers) should put a stop to it at once, ruthlessly and decisively, before we have another ghastly catastrophe. If this cabal has as it’s genesis a sneering contempt for consorts who are not of Royal blood, the myopic courtiers at fault should remember that neither was the Queen Mother of Royal blood and in many ways she was far more regal and Royal than many of the queens before her. She certainly was a splendid wife, mother and support to the nation and to all during the dreadful days of WWII and is, in my mind, a model of what a queen should be. A queen of her caliber, kindness, gentility, sensitivity and compassion, a great and gracious lady with the common touch–this is what was needed then and is even more needed now. The idea of a courtier cabal seeking to undermine the choice of Prince William absolutely makes my blood boil!
It is said that shortly after the young Princes, Edward and Richard, disappeared from all view in the Tower during the reign of their uncle, King Richard III, the staff at the Tower–every single one–was turned out and discharged. The upheavel was so significant and disruptive that it was recorded at the time. In those days, whole families and generations of the same families were employed in and indeed lived in the Tower and its close. If this current undermining by palace courtiers continues, it may be time to turn over the entire staff at Buckingham Palace and replace them with persons loyal to the Crown who know how to behave appropriately. Now may be the highest time.
By Gigi on June 1st, 2008 at 8:07 pm
John, many of the comments here regarding the Daily Mail report including yours are skeptical. If the story is bogus or an embellishment or worse could there be a denial from some official royal source or would that denial become the bigger story? I have an older DVD series on which Katie Nichol pontificates about how PW would dump Kate after they graduate from college. That tells me something about her wisdom/ knowledge/ insight. How awful to have people from one’s own household talking to the press! UGH!!!
By Claudia on June 1st, 2008 at 8:51 pm
I think the Mail story is meant to draw the Family out in the open about what’s going on. William has been invisible for almost a month, Kate is out of the picture also, and the media is looking for some direction by showing their cards: If they don’t get some direction soon, this story is emblematic of where they’ll go on their own. Ms. Middleton will bear the brunt of it.
By the way, I’m with you Gigi. If she wants to be called Catherine, then that’s what we ought to call her. I’m on board.
By Dan on June 1st, 2008 at 11:40 pm
The whole article doesn’t make sense. If you look closely everything contradicts each other- First it said that she should get a job before proposal. Then it says that engagement should not be announced until Kate gets a job. Does that mean that they are engaged but can’t announce it? Later the Queen has told her to get a job. But if she is working for the family and brother’s business, isn’t she working and has a job. The point of the article is moot. This article goes against things that the Queen has kept sacred-BEING DISCRETE. If Kate were a problem would she have been at Peter and Autumn’s wedding?
Too many questions!
By kat on June 2nd, 2008 at 12:23 am
John I think you are right William is really putting Kate in a horrible position right now and this should be sorted out pronto. She doesn’t deserve this, and although I doubt she reads everything some of these articles must get back to Middleton home. ahhh it’s so frustrating. What advisors doing and what is William doing. If he really doesn’t have any intentions to move forward with Kate then yes I agree he should break it off. It would be very very sad but this is awful.
By jackie Mccoy on June 2nd, 2008 at 2:38 am
I have to disagree. I don’t think William should change the “plan” he undoubtedly has for his near future because of some baseless gossip report. He would make himself a target to “blackmail” from the papers if he did that.
Richard Kay says the exact opposite in his column, he writes: “Suggestions that the Queen believes Kate Middleton should follow the example of the Countess of Wessex and have a job before she marries Prince William amused courtiers.
They remember the apoplexy over the former Sophie Rhys-Jones’s public relations career, which heaped so much embarrassment on the Royal Family.
“The whole point of the monarchy’s strategy then was to disentangle the unfortunate Sophie from any commercial activity,” says one figure involved. “People do seem to have very short memories.”
Now I am no expert on Royal experts but the fact alone that two authors claim to have completely contradicting inside information leads me to believe that they have no serious access to the Palace at all.
Even if her reputation may suffer for now, Kate is a big girl and I’m sure she has learned over the last years not to take the tabloid articles personally. She knows what she’s doing and she can and will prove to the British public that she’s indeed an assett to the Royal Family once she’s married. No way would I advice William or her to lead their lives according to the tabloid gossip.
By Isana on June 2nd, 2008 at 7:37 am
I’m glad they scrapped those souvenirs; they were fugly. The design was awful. Unflattering photos were chosen, and odd ones at that. William looks about 15 in his photo and Kate looks 30 in hers. Nice. I really hope that *IF* they decide to do this again, they choose a better design and use up-to-date and good photos.
By leogirl on June 7th, 2008 at 12:18 am